By Hugh Holland
How much more proof do we need? After the ever-growing list of climate tragedies we have seen around the world in recent months and years, just last week, NYC was once again choked in smoke from wildfires in Pennsylvania and NY State, caused by very rare drought conditions this November. Beef prices are the highest on record because western cattle ranchers in the US and Canada had to downsize their herds. They can’t feed them due to drought from high temperatures. Still, some politicians want us to blame food inflation on “the government” and grocery stores. Dah.
Elections are often dominated by inflation and the economy, but the economy is increasingly dominated by the rapidly rising climate damage to food, shelter, and infrastructure.
With all due respect, nature (the global climate) will ultimately prevail over any amount of political, financial, or psychological excuses from anywhere. The atmosphere doesn’t know or care which country, race, religion or politics these heat trapping emissions come from.
After 40 years of uncertainty and denial about climate change, for monetary and political advantage rather than scientific reasons, it should be obvious that we must replace energy from fossil fuels with energy-efficient electricity from clean solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, biofuels, nuclear, and green hydrogen from electrolysis. It’s time to stop arguing about which source of electricity is best and go flat out on all of them. Global manufacturing and the fossil fuel industries themselves now admit they have seen the light. And yet we still have politicians spreading disinformation to discredit long-proven solutions just to satisfy their own selfish ambitions.
Due to its population, China makes 34% of total global emissions but only half as much as the US and Canada on a per capita basis. But while Western politicians flounder in confusion, Xi Jinping has declared China will be carbon neutral by 2060. Will they succeed? You can bet on it. China is first cutting the energy demand side for transportation and mobile equipment by 60% with energy-efficient electrified technologies. That means they can then cut the supply side for electrical energy by 60% slightly after.
China has already installed 46,000 km of high-speed electric rail vs 196 km in the US. That takes passengers directly to city cores, with no need for time and energy-wasting trips to an airport.
In 1985, China made 5,200 cars. In 2021, China made 26 million cars and 40% were energy-efficient EVs. In 2021, the US made 9 million cars with 3.2% electric, Japan made 8 million, Germany made 3 million. Norway doesn’t make cars but 90% of cars sold there are now electric, making them the world leader in EV sales.
Russia’s war in Ukraine has so far produced 175 million tonnes of carbon emissions. Those emissions alone are equivalent to $32 billion in damages. The recent war in the Middle East has so far produced an estimated 281,000 tonnes of CO2.
The only thing that can win the battle against climate change is international understanding, collaboration, and peace, under the guidance of the UN IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change). Can it be done in time to avoid total disaster? Only if the other 9 of the world’s ten biggest polluters, including the US and Canada, can match China’s determination. The UE can likely match China because they have never had significant oil reserves. Can North America match China?
The challenge now is to try to prevent China from gutting the Western industrial base while we catch up without destroying essential international collaboration. Diplomacy is the key.
Hopefully the COP 29 global Conference now underway in Baku, Azerbaijan, will be a tipping point.
Hugh Holland
Hugh Holland is a retired engineering and manufacturing executive now living in Huntsville, Ontario.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Click here to support local news
Mr. Holland, If China is so great why don’t you move there?
Wow, where should we start challenging this misinformation and these biases?
Opening paragraph ‘How much more proof do we need?’ What the article offers is not proof. It fails to mention, for example, that many of the forest fires that happened in Canada were deliberately set. It also fails to mention that the more recent ones in Alberta were a result of poor forestry management by the Federal Government. They were warned, but ignored the warnings. They were not due to climate change, much to Trudeau’s disappointment. They were avoidable.
The article goes on to say ‘Global manufacturing and the fossil fuel industries themselves now admit they have seen the light.’. Again, not entirely accurate. If we listen to Danielle Smith, the Premier of Alberta, her argument is valid. Canada can produce clean energy from our fossil fuels and can help the rest of the world eliminate the dirtier energy sources, like coal. Canada has a role to help climate change from a global perspective by utilizing the resources and expertise we already have.
The article also suggests that climate change is responsible for our extreme weather patterns. However, it fails to mention that governments, and globalists are modifying our weather patterns every day to create artificial weather occurrences. Technology like HAARP and cloud seeding are being used for this. Don’t be fooled.
The conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East are somewhat irrelevant to this argument. Both conflicts are being fueled by NATO and Western Countries. Canada, the US and the UK et.al all send money and equipment to these areas to prolong the conflict. They can’t preach climate change, and the same time be pursuing their own political agendas and arms revenues. That’s hypocritical and they shouldn’t be taking more tax money from us as a result.
Next, the reference he adds at the end, which I’m not sure is relevant to anything on climate change, but is very telling of the author’s mindset. He adds ‘Reference – Health spending takes up 10% of global GDP. Can tech reduce those costs – and improve lives? | World Economic Forum. The WEF (World Economic Forum) has been headed up by Klaus Schwab, the author of ‘The Great Reset’, in which he makes the statement about how he wants our society to be. He says, and I quote, ‘You will own nothing and be happy’. The WEF has an agenda. The pandemic is/was part of that agenda. It’s no secret. The pandemic was planned, the virus was man-made and resulted in the biggest transfer of wealth in history. The WEF is not a good organization, in my opinion, and I would recommend everyone do their research on this group. The pandemic was created to cause chaos and transfer wealth. Climate Change is another item on the WEF agenda. Check it out. I believe this is another vehicle for wealth transfer.
In that same reference, the author states that Health Spending takes up 10% of GDP. He’s probably right. But what does that really mean? It means we have an unhealthy population. But instead of making efforts to improve our health the government endorses products that make us sicker. We have toxins, like glyphosate and other pesticides being sprayed on our crops constantly and they’ve been approved by Health Canada, despite the WHO saying they are, in some cases, carcinogens. We have food additives, approved by Health Canada, that are contributing to poor health – obesity, diabetes, heart issues. Correcting this, and reducing our Health Care costs does not need new, or more, technology. It needs Health Canada to start caring about Canadians instead of endorsing products that make us sick and make pharmaceutical companies more profitable. Climate change is not the main cause of our health issues and it’s irresponsible of this author to imply it is. .