Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by detourdog on Saturday August 05, 2023 @06:24AM
(#37010666)
I’m sure Canada is driven by heating load.
Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by jacquesm on Saturday August 05, 2023 @07:30AM
(#37010987)
What drives it doesn't matter. Some areas may simply not be habitable sustainably.
Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by pclmulqdq on Saturday August 05, 2023 @07:48AM
(#37011088)
We do seem to be working hard on making sure Canada is nice and temperate, though.
Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by jacquesm on Saturday August 05, 2023 @07:58AM
(#37011154)
It beats -45 I guess... (that's the lowest I ever saw on my outside thermometer on St. Josephs Island).
You make a good point though: what is and what isn't habitable will change and as a result there will be substantial movement of people, displaced either by choice or by need.
Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by detourdog on Saturday August 05, 2023 @08:32AM
(#37011387)
I understand I was just trying to explain to myself how they were #1 in usage. I was surprised. I was also trying to define the problem since they were outpacing the USA.
Looks like Niagara falls only produces about 16 billion BTUs or 4.9 Million kWs.
Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by jacquesm on Saturday August 05, 2023 @01:05PM
(#37014108)
Up North there are stacks of firewood everywhere and prepping for winter is an exercise in logistics. Also still many oil furnaces in active use.
Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by detourdog on Saturday August 05, 2023 @04:40PM
(#37016090)
Makes me wonder if the offshoring of manufacturing from the USA ended up looking like efficiency gains. If we are indeed now anchoring manufacturing it will have a much smaller energy footprint than the manufacturing we lost. Which finally brings us back to the original topic delivery of goods.
Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by fasterik on Saturday August 05, 2023 @06:58AM
(#37010837)
Yes, and when you multiply per capita by population, you end up with China and India emitting over double what the United States emits.
There is also the delta to take into account. Industrialized countries are decarbonizing and switching to renewables, while industrializing countries are building new coal plants.
Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by Contusion3532 on Saturday August 05, 2023 @10:19AM
(#37012255)
It's not exactly fair for industrialized nations to have taken advantage of the externality of their historic carbon emissions, but then prevent developing nations from doing the same.
The ethical solution would be for industrialized nations to subsidize the development and decarbonization of developing nations.
Re:Reduction of Sulfur Emissions from Ships May Be Causing R...
by kjkjadksj on Saturday August 05, 2023 @12:29PM
(#37013652)
Too bad the atomic energy commission is so tight lipped about proliferating reactor designs. The third world could have been powered with atomic energy by the 1980s if we didnt subscribe to cold war us vs them thinking (which our top brass continues to subscribe to even if the general populace hasn’t given a shit about the cold war since before Vietnam).
Canada 18.72
United States 15.32
China 7.44
Brazil 2.24
Indonesia 2.02
India 1.89