If anybody, anywhere thinks Panama’s contributions in any way are going to fix the world’s climate, dream on. Nobody is going to fix the world’s climate. It will do what it wants without us fiddling.
2 Likes
Nobody in their right mind thinks that Panama, or any other nation alone, is going to fix the climate crisis that the world is facing, nor has anybody suggested anything like that
Anybody who have lived a while have been observing the changes in their lifetime
That the climate crisis is real is well documented and the reasons for the changes is well understood. People who has any kind of common sense are accepting that fact.
1 Like
For a dive into where some of these people get their bat shit crazy ideas go to the gab social media site. There millions of them. Look at some of their crazy ideas and you’ll see there is no reasoning with them as they ignore facts, science and history. Eventually they’ll die off. 
Neither facts, nor science, nor history are your strongest points but BS surely is.
The fact that the Ozon layer in the arctic regions has recovered since the ban on ozon depleting CFC gases was implemented prove that;
- Human activity affects the atmospere
- It helps to change the way we treat our planet and it’s atmosphere
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Overview, by Type of Gas: 2022:
Total U.S. Emissions in 2022 = 6,343 Million Metric Tons of CO₂ equivalent (excludes land sector). Percentages may not add up to 100% due to independent rounding. Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry in the United States is a net sink and offsets 13% of these greenhouse gas emissions. This net sink is not shown in the above diagram. All emission estimates are sourced from:
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2022.
If we could reduce emission of the other GHGs, such as Carbon dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous oxide (N2O), which is more plentiful in human caused emission, we MAY manage to “limit Global Warming well below 2% above pre-industrial level”. (The Paris Agreement goal of below 1.5% is already out of reach)
Stop ignoring the primary GHG.
And that the warming affect of CO2 decreases logarithmically as concentrations rise.
Watch the whole series … if you dare. That’s just the first two videos of a series of 60 explaining why believers in anthropogenic global boiling are simply wrong.
1 Like
USA tired of funding everyone else’s prosperity at the expense of their own.
In Germanys case their green cult has reduced their prosperity.
Norways prosperity is because they are selling the cause of global warming some might say.
You say that but anyone watching the media ( and thats leftie yet still shows it) or even congress and Karens in the street can see and by a recent shooting, its the left that are demented, no contest.
Lots of people leaving the loonie left party and publicly saying they cant stand them any more so are joining the Republicans.
Always good to have 2 sides of an argument, every country should have 2 main political parties but its clear for the world to see if you are a loonie the left is for you so have destroyed the dems.
Antifa, george floyd protests, blm destruction, protesting to prevent reduction in crime in crime ridden cities all how the left operate.
lqbtq is aligned with the left, only logical place for it.
Unfortunately for those regular people that vote dem you are now part of a self demonizing cult who have learnt the only way to stay in power is flood your country with illegals and get them to vote.
Its a bit commie, we dont care about you just that we stay in power.
The most corrupt President the USA has and probably will ever see obama started all that.
Sanctuary cities are proof of that, all nice places to live, NOT.
Trump is not part of the Co2 cult so thats been joined onto the left as well.
Have you worked out yet if your a traditional long term Dem voter your party couldnt care less about you?
1 Like
The long knifes are out:
Predictably the big tanker and bulker owners/operators are against any changes that could affect their bottom line.;
Equally as predictably is that large Container shipping companies, like Maersk, Evergreen, Yang Ming etc. support decarbonization: https://www.zerocarbonshipping.com/
The reason MAY be that their customers demands it:
10 Additional Freight Buyers Join Collaborations to Decarbonize Maritime Shipping through Cargo Owners for Zero Emission Vessels (coZEV) - ZEMBA
The fight is on before he International Maritime Organization’s Net Zero Framework, due for a vote next month:
2 Likes
So that means it’s more expensive because more people have to be employed to get the one ship built and kept running. Until we actually compare full life cycle costs for the ship we won’t know whether anything has been saved.
1 Like
Source: Shipping Gazette
PS> More tariffs = more pain for US consumers who pay the tariffs in the end.
There is an old Norwegian saying for that; “Ris til egen bak”
Freely translated to; “spanking your own backside”. (AI says; “to make trouble for oneself”, which is probably a more polite translation)
Not EVERYTHING is measured in money.
How do you measure the climate benefit (which, after all, is why you do it) of this ship’s sails reducing CO2?
I already know the answer. Zero.
1 Like
As for how you measure benefits of installing modern sail, or other means of reducing bunker consumption, thus GHG emission, the answer is simple:
- Reduced bunker consumption x cost of bunker supplied (in tonnes) = monetary savings.
- Reduced bunker consumption = less GHG emission to atmosphere (in tonnes) to meet IMO and port state requirements.
That is what counts for the shipping companies.
How to calculate the benefit in terms of climate change, is a problem for climate scientist, not simple seafarers.
A simple seafarer, a normal one with common sense, would ask, “Why should I bother? I can’t change the climate anyway.”
I didn’t ask about the other blather you spouted.
Somebody need to do a reality check here, If the US put all kinds of restrictions on shipping and seafarers, who is going to carry import and export to/from US ports?
It takes decades to build ships at US shipyards that will be able to replace the foreign ships that cover that need now.
PS> Why is it that every article about GHG emission from ships appears to be illustrated with pictures like this?:
The black smoke is particle pollution, not GHG per se.
The two main GHGs, CO2 and Methane, is invisible and affect the whole world, while particle pollution affect air quality in local areas.
SOX emission cause acid rain etc. which affects a wider area.
BTW: Both can be removed by “scrubbers”. (which cause other problems)
Update:
Looks like somebody HAS realized that building ships isn’t done in a few days:
1 Like
I totally agree. That photo sits atop every article here on the topic.
That was a surprise!!! That is not like you. I hope you feel well??
The latest: