News Forum - Thailand creates new department to tackle climate change

[Thaiger]

Thailand has created a new department to tackle climate change. The new department, named the Department of Climate Change and Environment, aims to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions by 2065.  The new department is responsible for proposing and developing strategies, plans, and programmes on climate change and greenhouse gas reduction as agreed at the COP26 meeting. The ministry of Natural Resources and Environment is overseeing the new climate change department. Other departments involved include the Office of the Secretary, the Strategic and International Cooperation Division, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Division, and others. The department’s staff include 219 civil servants, 309 government […]

The story Thailand creates new department to tackle climate change as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[Ramanathan.P]

Yes, something has to start from somewhere. Hope the goal post is not shifted in the future as we can see that in many countries around the globe. 

[palooka]

9 minutes ago, Ramanathan.P said:

Yes, something has to start from somewhere. Hope the goal post is not shifted in the future as we can see that in many countries around the globe. 

TIT --- those goal posts, and any others, are in constant motion

[Soidog]

18 minutes ago, Ramanathan.P said:

Yes, something has to start from somewhere. Hope the goal post is not shifted in the future as we can see that in many countries around the globe. 

Rest assured the goal posts will be moved. The same in every country. I wish I could live for another 50-100 years to laugh at the idiots spreading this man made climate change nonsense. 
 

The planet and life on it has always changed. For the vast majority of people, life in 2122 will be just as it is now. Those on low lying land should make plans to protect the land or relocate. 

[Chatogaster]

 

Just over a year and a bit ago (in late August) the NEP 2022 was approved to (aim to) achieve carbon neutrality (CN) by 2070 (with no ambition/hope to reach CN before 2065). Fast forward to now (or take is slow, it's up to you), and the CN-ambition seemingly has been upgraded to be reached by 2050 according to this article. 

I'm really curious about what that claim is based on, because it's an amazing jump. What happened in the mean-time to seemingly warrant being almost twice as ambitious and still having a hope to fulfill those ambitions? I'm not complaining, just being skeptical. Introducing solar farms sounds great (and it probably is), but it amounts to no more than an anecdote (and it could be a distraction) of the overall plan.

I'd like to ignore the red herrings, but I know of no plan that can manage to reduce its deadline by 2 decades after a bit of contemplation. Either 1) something major happened (e.g. budget-wise) or 2) it's a just a load of PR (aka BS), or 3) concepts like CN and net-zero greenhouse emissions were confused in this article/by its source. 

I hope it's just the latter (i.e. somebody making a silly claim that isn't recognized as such which then got spread via "news").
 

 

[Chatogaster]

1 hour ago, Soidog said:

Rest assured the goal posts will be moved. The same in every country. I wish I could live for another 50-100 years to laugh at the idiots spreading this man made climate change nonsense. 
 

The planet and life on it has always changed. For the vast majority of people, life in 2122 will be just as it is now. Those on low lying land should make plans to protect the land or relocate. 

Without denying man-made climate change, I agree to a large extent (after all, a balance is achieved everywhere and everwhen, and even if it happens fast enough for many casualties, humankind will survive).

But what about the reserves of stuff that can be dug up and be made into energy? Those resources are finite and dwindle fast (and not in terms of epochs, or even millennia, but actually in terms of a few decades).

Hoping that a quick solution arrives by e.g. commercial fission reactors or harvesting comets seems a long way of. It's better to put a brake on burning the "free" stuff picked up locally.

[Soidog]

20 hours ago, Chatogaster said:

But what about the reserves of stuff that can be dug up and be made into energy? Those resources are finite and dwindle fast (and not in terms of epochs, or even millennia, but actually in terms of a few decades).

I agree alternatives need to be found, and we are getting there slowly. I think governments would have a far better chance of moving the agenda forward if they were more truthful about the situation rather than trying to scare people with apocalyptic images of climate change. I also think there are far more oil and gas reserves available, but in environmentally sensitive places. The whole of Antarctica for example. 
 

Just to be clear. I 100% believe the climate is changing. I also believe human activity is adding to this change and we should be looking to stop burning fossil fuels for a whole host of reasons; not least of which is clean air. I just think that trying to get everyone to switch to electric vehicles or tax them off the road is the worst of options. 

[Issanbear]

23 hours ago, Soidog said:

Rest assured the goal posts will be moved. The same in every country. I wish I could live for another 50-100 years to laugh at the idiots spreading this man made climate change nonsense. 
 

The planet and life on it has always changed. For the vast majority of people, life in 2122 will be just as it is now. Those on low lying land should make plans to protect the land or relocate. 

Me,....

I believe what the late David Bellamy said is the truth.

Also, likes of China, Russia, Turkey going full on re coal etc.

Who's kidding who.

 

[KaptainRob]

Greed, self interest and corruption will be humans undoing and it flows from the top, down. Those who talk the talk do nothing but line their pockets for the short term.

War, revolution and/or mother nature's intervention may alter the course ... carbon taxes and solar power do SFA.

[Guest KingRama27]

On 12/22/2022 at 2:33 PM, Soidog said:

Rest assured the goal posts will be moved. The same in every country. I wish I could live for another 50-100 years to laugh at the idiots spreading this man made climate change nonsense. 
 

The planet and life on it has always changed. For the vast majority of people, life in 2122 will be just as it is now. Those on low lying land should make plans to protect the land or relocate. 

Me too. It’s all rubbish.. the climate has been changing for billions of years

[Manu]

26 minutes ago, KingRama27 said:

Me too. It’s all rubbish.. the climate has been changing for billions of years

The climate has been changing but so have human beings. As far as I know, human beings have not had cars and bikes, planes, mobile phones, computers, plastic and more plastic, white goods, etc... for billions of years. Also the production of energy (coal, oil, gas), the industry that pollutes the most, has not been happening for billions of years. And all the other industries that produce stuff we do not even need. All seas and rivers are highly polluted all over the world, killing the ecosystem, same with fields and nature due to the heavy use of pesticides (pesticides that we also have not had for billions of years). All this and more is having a huge impact on nature so on climate. I would believe that self preservation will save humanity if it was not human's tendancy to destroy themselves with wars, genocides and other mad stuff. The thing is, I am not a expert, but then as usual, experts do not agree with each other, one says this the other that. The thing is, we can have our own opinion on the matter but it is just pointless speculation. One thing is sure though: if we carry on the next 100 years as we have been doing the last 100, humanity will not get away with at least huge damages... if we get there. That is if there will not be at some point a mad Putin or another pushing the red button: it has been really close to it in the past, let's not forget that.

[Soidog]

11 minutes ago, Manu said:

One thing is sure though: if we carry on the next 100 years as we have been doing the last 100, humanity will not get away with at least huge damages...

I wouldn’t disagree with that statement. 
 

One thing the climate doomsayers need to do, is to stop conflating the two issues of Climate change and Environmental damage. There will inevitably be an area of overlap. Damaging forests and upsetting marine life can upset the CO2 absorption needed to help with climate change. I would also like to have a better explanations of the “models” they are using to predict the cataclysm. I know they are complex models and are difficult to understand. Simply showing “hockey-stick” graphs and saying London and New York will be under two metres of water by the year 2000, no make that 2020, no 2050 doesn’t help either. 

[KaptainRob]

Nature plays a major role in climate change and the Tongan eruption in January may be partly responsible for many of this years devastating floods > https://www.space.com/tonga-eruption-water-vapor-warm-earth

[Soidog]

Water vapour is by far the largest greenhouse gas on earth. Greenhouse gases are vital for life in earth. Without them the planet would be uninhabitable. Funny how the word has such negative contrarians 

[Marble-eye]

Well there's one thing, this won't be the only thing that they try and con us with. We have got to the stage now where we believe a young Scandinavian school girl over prominent scientists. Every ten years years there seems to be another scare they throw at us, they previous ones all die a natural death.