Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumShell Oil Caught Planning for Deadly 4 to 6 Degree Rise in Global Temperature
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/17/1385496/-Shell-Oil-Caught-Planning-for-Deadly-4-to-6-Degree-Rise-in-Global-TemperatureWhoopsies. From The Guardian:
A paper used for guiding future business planning at the Anglo-Dutch multinational assumes that carbon dioxide emissions will fail to limit temperature increases to 2C, the internationally agreed threshold to prevent widespread flooding, famine and desertification.
Instead, the New Lens Scenarios document refers to a forecast by the independent International Energy Agency (IEA) that points to a temperature rise of up to 4C in the short term, rising later to 6C.
...
The Shell document says: Both our (oceans and mountains) scenarios and the IEA New Policies scenario (and our base case energy demand and outlook) do not limit emissions to be consistent with the back-calculated 450 parts per million (Co2 in the atmosphere) 2 degrees C.
It adds: We also do not see governments taking steps now that are consistent with 2 degrees C scenario.
delrem
(9,688 posts)dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)while apparently Governments do not.
At least on subjects that will help mankind.
That is pretty pathetic.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Big Oil & its bought and paid for political candidates publicly dismiss and deny global warming, but Shell is expecting and planning for it. RW media may not believe climate change is real.
But sure looks like Shell believes it. Smoking gun.
Nihil
(13,508 posts)The only thing "wrong" with the document is that it is completely right: governments don't give a shit
and so the temperature WILL go up.
Shell are refusing to play the "hide and pretend there is no problem" game.
Shame that a few so-called "progressive" world leaders aren't that honest.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)When we do discovery in a legal case, we sift through voluminous documents searching for a smoking gun, i.e., a piece of evidence which clearly proves a party guilty. For example, tobacco companies had financed medical research proving the link between tobacco and lung cancer, but kept research findings secret. The same for the link between asbestos and health issues.
When I described Shell's statements as a smoking gun, I in no way meant the long-range predictions were untrue. I meant that this proved Shell accepted the reality and inevitability of fast-approaching and life-altering climate change.
"Something that serves as conclusive evidence or proof (as of a crime or scientific theory)."
Nihil
(13,508 posts)> When I described Shell's statements as a smoking gun, I in no way meant the long-range predictions
> were untrue. I meant that this proved Shell accepted the reality and inevitability of fast-approaching
> and life-altering climate change.
I had viewed your previous post as implying that *Shell* were being proven guilty rather than
that *a party* (in this case the governments) were. My mistake - thanks!
>> We also do not see governments taking steps now that are consistent with 2 degrees C scenario.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom