Climate change and global cities

Climate change and global cities

There are 265 comments on the The New Zealand Herald story from Oct 8, 2013, titled Climate change and global cities. In it, The New Zealand Herald reports that:

Element takes a look at what authorities in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch are expecting, how they are trying to minimise the damage, and how their plans shape up against those elsewhere.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The New Zealand Herald.

Elmer Fudd

North Shore, New Zealand

#107 Oct 11, 2013
White Cnuts wrote:
Theres too many white people. Even in NZ theres 3 million of these magotts. Each of them do 5 farts a day that equates to 3million x 5farts = 15million gases x 365 (year)= 5475,000,000 gases a year!(that could be used as a nuclear bomb!)
So in NZ alone we've had a climate change because of their farts! Can't tell me that's not contributing to global warming worldwide either!
To all you people from different parts of the world who are participating on this thread the last poster is typical of the maoris we real kiwis have to put up with.
We cannot get on with our everyday lives and have reasonable discussions about anything without one or more of these primitives behaving like this.
Muslim Mom

Sydney, Australia

#108 Oct 11, 2013
I think Allah in All Knowing Wisdom knowing Earth climate better after warm up, this reason for global warming.

Why Whites people want cold weather? If weather cold, can stay inside bed? This not good reason for slowing warm weather!

I think if Whites really unhappy at warm weather, then can go to outside for more blond hair and pigskin exposed in open space - these blond hair and pigskin can be reflecting of sunlight back into space so Earth not needing for absorbing of more heat.

But I still thinking Whites adapt to warm climate this better way!
lowprofile

Adelaide, Australia

#109 Oct 11, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
I state the questions and answers clearly. You mangle them (I assume that this is another alias for Cut 'n Paste).
<quoted text>
I deny that there is ever a static climate. But there are TWO factors here. One is the movement WITHIN a climate. The other is the movement of climate itself. To understand this point, you need to stop making stupid claims and start understanding what climate IS.
<quoted text>
NO we don't, since you will not define what YOU mean by 'climate changes'. This sort of intellectual dishonesty characterizes your posts.
<quoted text>
I can deny that what YOU mean by 'climate changes' is the same as what I mean by 'climate changes'. That is the point. You don't understand the subject and made stupid statements that need 'interpretation' so I must ask what you mean before I can tell if we are talking about the same thing.
<quoted text>
I find peace by finding agreement. I will probably never have peace with someone as slippery as you. Who knows if we agree on anything. And I never deny the science. The problem is that I UNDERSTAND the science and I cannot claim that for you. Your sort of confused mumblings are worse than denial. They are misleading and often wrong in substance.
Hey 'no hope more crap'
Before you have a seizure, go and get a couple of doses of your meds because I think you have been forgetting to take them with all this excitement and sit down for 15 minutes or so until you regain your composure.

Now comes the best part, why don't you become our new great leader by being the first one to do this and go outside open your electrical meter box and select OFF on the main switch. This will be a bigger contribution [according to your theories] than all your quotes and rantings. It will be interesting to see how long your main switch remains in the OFF position. There is more you can do as well, don't ever drive your car again, don't use any form of public transport, don't ever buy any manufactured item ever again, the list goes on and on.

Please let us know how you go with all that, you idiot!
No Warming

Waverly, OH

#110 Oct 11, 2013
lowprofile wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey 'no hope more crap'
Before you have a seizure, go and get a couple of doses of your meds because I think you have been forgetting to take them with all this excitement and sit down for 15 minutes or so until you regain your composure.
Now comes the best part, why don't you become our new great leader by being the first one to do this and go outside open your electrical meter box and select OFF on the main switch. This will be a bigger contribution [according to your theories] than all your quotes and rantings. It will be interesting to see how long your main switch remains in the OFF position. There is more you can do as well, don't ever drive your car again, don't use any form of public transport, don't ever buy any manufactured item ever again, the list goes on and on.
Please let us know how you go with all that, you idiot!
He doesn't have a car, never gets out of the basement, no need for one.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#111 Oct 11, 2013
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
Do it How?
Solutions are engineering and the sun provides more energy to the earth in one day than the entire world uses in a year. There is no limit on green energy source, despite the lies from fossil fuel companies.
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
When you sit at your computer or devise that allows you to post, it must be powered by some means.
In my case, it is about 50% nuclear, 25% hydro and the rest is a mix of green energy and natural gas. Ontario had a liability of not having a lot of local fossil fuels but in the current instance, it has turned into a step into the future.
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
All of this would have to stop and we would need to go back to the Dark ages.
You are delusional if you think that it is fossil fuels or nothing. What is your plan as they become 7% more expensive year by year? Or run out? Plan on going back to the caves, just not quite yet? You are very stupid.
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
Try telling this to the masses. There is no practical solution to bring about the changes that would be required to change back or to stop this climate change syndrome. So we need to look at reality. Try population growth,food, water and technology as factors that are the issues that will present itself before climate change.Do you honestly believe that we will give up the way that we live and voluntarily go back?
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
Try telling this to the masses. There is no practical solution to bring about the changes that would be required to change back or to stop this climate change syndrome.
Nonsense. A $50/ton surcharge on carbon based fuels (and an end to fossil fuel subsidies) would make a radical change almost overnight. The problem is to recognise the problem, not the solution which is fairly simple. And with the moneys collected going back to the economy (on an 'average use' basis, there is no impact to the economy itself. It just adds 'incremental costs' to fossil fuels and provides economic incentive to use more clean energy. You are pathetic, you know that? Underneath your whining you are just scared of the future.
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
So we need to look at reality. Try population growth,food, water and technology as factors that are the issues that will present itself before climate change.
'Look at reality'. You should. But you are like the addict. You focus on your next fix, no matter who you must destroy to get it.
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you honestly believe that we will give up the way that we live and voluntarily go back?
The problem is that we will NOT be able to continue 'the way we live' without effective action to address GHG emissoins and the havoc that they are and will continue to create. To maintain a civilization over the future we HAVE to give up our fossil fuels before they ruin us. But there are alternatives and the alternatives are getting progressively cheaper while the 'conventional' ways are getting progressively more expensive as quality and access diminish. YOU are the one wearing blinders. Denial of the problem will NOT solve it.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#112 Oct 11, 2013
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
Do it How?
Oh, and "Energy efficiency has more potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than any other single current option, the World Bank's former chief economist Lord Nicholas Stern said Friday in co-launching a global panel to find cost-effective solutions to climate change."

But it will take both serious investment in green power and work to drive energy efficiency and the only PRACTICAL way to do that is though a carbon surcharge to put the market to work.
lowprofile

Adelaide, Australia

#113 Oct 11, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and "Energy efficiency has more potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions than any other single current option, the World Bank's former chief economist Lord Nicholas Stern said Friday in co-launching a global panel to find cost-effective solutions to climate change."
But it will take both serious investment in green power and work to drive energy efficiency and the only PRACTICAL way to do that is though a carbon surcharge to put the market to work.
This is no doubt why China brings a new coal fired power station on line every couple of months, LOL. I see you haven't taken my advice about your meds!
sid

Brisbane, Australia

#114 Oct 11, 2013
I suggest that none of us laymen are in a position to know the truth of climate change/global warming because of the vested interests involved. Superficially it appears to me that CC/GW is just another corporate venture to maintain the industrial status quo at the expense of the working classes. All too easy to buy the desired predetermined result of research if you have enough bucks.
Planting trees in Tasmania [creating another environmental disaster] so some company can continue pumping out hundreds of tons of pollutants in Tokyo doesn't fix the problem [assuming there was a problem in the first place].
Beware of any pollution reduction scheme involving large amounts of money, we hear lots about the cost of clean power at our expense, we hear very little about profit reduction of the polluters that have been out of control for the last 100 years and now want to pass the cost of cleaning up their act onto us.
Micky

Adelaide, Australia

#115 Oct 11, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
Solutions are engineering and the sun provides more energy to the earth in one day than the entire world uses in a year. There is no limit on green energy source, despite the lies from fossil fuel companies.
Yes ,yes ,yes.The sun provides the energy but we haven't invented the boxes to catch it in and hold it in, so when night comes things will still work! Define Green energy ,please!
<quoted text>
In my case, it is about 50% nuclear, 25% hydro and the rest is a mix of green energy and natural gas. Ontario had a liability of not having a lot of local fossil fuels but in the current instance, it has turned into a step into the future.

50% nuclear, What do you do with the waste products. Dump them in the back yard I suppose?The natural Gas, well do you know how they extract this from the earth, not exactly environmentally friendly.
<quoted text>
You are delusional if you think that it is fossil fuels or nothing. What is your plan as they become 7% more expensive year by year? Or run out? Plan on going back to the caves, just not quite yet? You are very stupid.
No real answers so revert to name calling very useful. i never said that it was fossil fuel or nothing. Why am I very stupid to suggest that the return to the dark ages is what it would take. Don't you want to give up everything to combat this problem?
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Nonsense. A $50/ton surcharge on carbon based fuels (and an end to fossil fuel subsidies) would make a radical change almost overnight. The problem is to recognise the problem, not the solution which is fairly simple. And with the moneys collected going back to the economy (on an 'average use' basis, there is no impact to the economy itself. It just adds 'incremental costs' to fossil fuels and provides economic incentive to use more clean energy. You are pathetic, you know that? Underneath your whining you are just scared of the future.
To deal with this problem it requires, World effort to REDUCE everything that we use. To recognize a problem is one thing to find a solution is another. The consummer in developed countries pay more for things to keep the global economy afloat and the third world countries expand production and increase emissions, That is what you are advocating. I can do the sums and it does not add up.
<quoted text>
'Look at reality'. You should. But you are like the addict. You focus on your next fix, no matter who you must destroy to get it.

The extraction of your natural gas is very destructive.
<quoted text>
The problem is that we will NOT be able to continue 'the way we live' without effective action to address GHG emissoins and the havoc that they are and will continue to create. To maintain a civilization over the future we HAVE to give up our fossil fuels before they ruin us. But there are alternatives and the alternatives are getting progressively cheaper while the 'conventional' ways are getting progressively more expensive as quality and access diminish. YOU are the one wearing blinders. Denial of the problem will NOT solve it.
You are the type of person that will promote the use of Nuclear power and not understand the impact of the disposal issue that will cause us more problems than the planet warming up. Unless we can send it to another planet,that should be cost effective.
lowprofile

Adelaide, Australia

#116 Oct 11, 2013
sid wrote:
I suggest that none of us laymen are in a position to know the truth of climate change/global warming because of the vested interests involved. Superficially it appears to me that CC/GW is just another corporate venture to maintain the industrial status quo at the expense of the working classes. All too easy to buy the desired predetermined result of research if you have enough bucks.
Planting trees in Tasmania [creating another environmental disaster] so some company can continue pumping out hundreds of tons of pollutants in Tokyo doesn't fix the problem [assuming there was a problem in the first place].
Beware of any pollution reduction scheme involving large amounts of money, we hear lots about the cost of clean power at our expense, we hear very little about profit reduction of the polluters that have been out of control for the last 100 years and now want to pass the cost of cleaning up their act onto us.
A very practical and concise synopsis of the situation.
Muslim Mom

Penshurst, Australia

#117 Oct 11, 2013
Wind turbines these very bad to health.
Micky

Adelaide, Australia

#120 Oct 11, 2013
Muslim Mom wrote:
Wind turbines these very bad to health.
Like a lot of newly developed technology,invent something and use it and later find out that it has bad side effects. But still tell us it's OK. Another suppression of the truth. If they had to pull down all of the wind farms, and admit that they got it wrong (again)it would cost the governments, as we might start to question a few more things. I stress the word might!
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#121 Oct 11, 2013
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the type of person that will promote the use of Nuclear power and not understand the impact of the disposal issue that will cause us more problems than the planet warming up.
The waste is a very small volume and the 'hot' fission fragments that produce most of the radioactivity are also short lived.

Frankly, I have looked into the issue quite a bit. The problem has also been 'Not in my Back Yard' rather than any technical challenge.

The most logical thing to do is separating the fissile elements from the fission fragment and creating new fuel. This should NOT be done by the 'PUREX' process which is optimized to extract bomb grade PU238 (the reason it was developed) but the much simpler and less hazardous pyroprocessing. This would produce new fuel as well as the radioisotopes to run thermogenerators for remote locations.

It is YOU that is ignorant of the issue. As shown by your post.
Micky wrote:
<quoted text>
Unless we can send it to another planet,that should be cost effective.
I rest my case.
White Cnuts

Red Beach, New Zealand

#122 Oct 11, 2013
fk u all maoris are no 1
drink piss
smoke hooch
root and rob
mean maori mean
litesong

Monroe, WA

#123 Oct 11, 2013
Muslim Mom wrote:
I think man too much pride if think can warm up climate as this up to Allah.
For a religious Muslim, you sure do sound like a toxic topix AGW denier tea party re-pubic-lick-un.
litesong

Monroe, WA

#124 Oct 11, 2013
White Cnuts wrote:
Theres too many white people. Even in NZ......
I've been saying there's to many euros & transplanted euros in the western hemisphere, too.
lowprofile

Adelaide, Australia

#125 Oct 11, 2013
Hey,'No hope more crap'

If indeed you hold in your hands the holy grail of unlimited cheap green energy for all, why are you relentlessly beating a few posters on an internet forum over the head with it?

Instead you should be packing up all your 'science' journals and other associated bullshit and winging your way to China, once there you can try bludgeoning the Chinese government into submission with it all.

Please let us know how you go with that once you are released from jail, which is where I'm starting to believe you belong. Either that or a mental institution.
lowprofile

Adelaide, Australia

#126 Oct 11, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
For a religious Muslim, you sure do sound like a toxic topix AGW denier tea party re-pubic-lick-un.
Open your eyes moron, HE'S posting from australia
litesong

Monroe, WA

#127 Oct 11, 2013
Correction:
"to" should be "too".
lowprofile

Adelaide, Australia

#128 Oct 11, 2013
litesong wrote:
<quoted text>
I've been saying there's to many euros & transplanted euros in the western hemisphere, too.
With a username like litesong you really do sound like you'd have your feet on the ground. Give us another pearl of wisdom about green energy. LOL!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weather Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Remnants of Erika: South Florida remains under ... 3 hr Go Blue Forever 1
News Cars get stuck in water after rain in Cape 13 hr Raylin Sutter 2
News August: silly season or a time for the challeng... Sun Elise Gingerich 1
News Michelle Grossman - About NBC 10 News Story - W... (Mar '08) Sun Mike M 675
News City officials making preparations for incoming... Sat Joe Balls 6
News HMS Prince of Wales Bridge Sets Sail Aug 29 night rider 4
News Sewage surfing and other weird news from around... Aug 29 Parden Pard 4
More from around the web