We are in a global recession

by **sjn** » Sat 19 Nov 2016, 05:34:40

Any ideas how they actually measure CO2 emissions ? Do they just subtract known direct non-anthrogenic sources from the global total from satellite sensors? Or is it the output from a model of industrial/economic consumption patterns and efficiency gains? I ask because actual atmospheric CO2 has risen at the highest historical rate (accounting for seasonal variation) during the "stall".

by **dissident** » Sat 19 Nov 2016, 09:24:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sjn', 'A')ny ideas how they actually measure CO2 emissions ? Do they just subtract known direct non-anthrogenic sources from the global total from satellite sensors? Or is it the output from a model of industrial/economic consumption patterns and efficiency gains? I ask because actual atmospheric CO2 has risen at the highest historical rate (accounting for seasonal variation) during the "stall".

by **dohboi** » Sat 19 Nov 2016, 16:33:01

In principle, it's easy to measure emissions--just measure output of all ff mines and wells.

It is a fairly safe assumption that nearly all of that gets burned, most within a few months of it coming out of the ground.

The problem with dis's statement that you can measure emissions by concentrations is that the two graphs look quite different, in fact. CO2 concentrations continue to rise at an increasing rate, even as there are claims, such as the graph presented, being made that emissions have not increased markedly over the last couple years.

Whether or not we are currently in a global recession, more and more smart people do seem to be seeing clouds on the horizon, and perhaps much closer: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/ ... ?CMP=fb_us

is the next financial crisis on its way?

Steve Eisman saw the last crash coming and was portrayed in an Oscar-winning film. Now he believes Europe’s banks, especially Italy’s, are at risk

by **onlooker** » Sat 19 Nov 2016, 18:29:29

don't look now but : The Peak & Decline Of International Reserves Warns Of Massive Asset Deflation Ahead'
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-1 ... tion-ahead

by **dissident** » Sat 19 Nov 2016, 18:49:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dohboi', 'I')n principle, it's easy to measure emissions--just measure output of all ff mines and wells.

It is a fairly safe assumption that nearly all of that gets burned, most within a few months of it coming out of the ground.

The problem with dis's statement that you can measure emissions by concentrations is that the two graphs look quite different, in fact. CO2 concentrations continue to rise at an increasing rate, even as there are claims, such as the graph presented, being made that emissions have not increased markedly over the last couple years.

by **sjn** » Sat 19 Nov 2016, 21:16:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'S')o GW has caused the upcoming final recession?

by **kublikhan** » Sat 19 Nov 2016, 21:28:25

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dissident', 'P')eople always appeal to efficiency to fob off CO2 as a metric of the economy. It reminds me of fusion power, it is always a couple of decades away. So were the 1990s so technologically backward compared to the present? How about most of the 2000s when the CO2 emissions were ramping up from year to year? CO2 emissions grow together with the GDP for obvious reasons. The modern GDP paradigm requires annual growth and no steady state economics regime is being advocated or established.

by **dissident** » Sat 19 Nov 2016, 22:31:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sjn', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'S')o GW has caused the upcoming final recession?

by **sjn** » Sun 20 Nov 2016, 06:56:46

Dis, I agree with you, but I am curious about their methodology.

Kub, it's myth that alternatives to fossil fuels do not generate greenhouse gases. Hydro, for example has high CO2 emissions during construction (concrete and heavy equipment), and in most regions very high lifetime CH4 emissions. Nuclear has high emissions during construction, decommissioning and refinement. Solar through the manufacturing process. Wind - manufacture maintenance and especially concrete again.

It's not always clear cut, although almost certainly it's true that typical alt energy sources are better on emissions than the typical fossil fuel plant.

by **kublikhan** » Sun 20 Nov 2016, 14:54:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sjn', 'K')ub, it's myth that alternatives to fossil fuels do not generate greenhouse gases. Hydro, for example has high CO2 emissions during construction (concrete and heavy equipment), and in most regions very high lifetime CH4 emissions. Nuclear has high emissions during construction, decommissioning and refinement. Solar through the manufacturing process. Wind - manufacture maintenance and especially concrete again.

by **eugene** » Sun 20 Nov 2016, 15:35:14

Is the glass half full or half empty? This disparity of perceptions will be argued until there's no one left to argue. I figure it depends on agenda, personal fear levels, sheer orneriness and many other factors. All I know is when I look out there, things are getting worse rapidly and for many of the world's poor, who don't have the luxury of arguing, things are going to hell in a hand basket. Personally, I find it scary and if I were younger, terrifying.

by **onlooker** » Fri 21 Apr 2017, 16:08:20

https://www.peakprosperity.com/insider/ ... m=facebook

Off The Cuff: The Era Of Easy Money Is Over
Debt-funded stimulus no longer yields an increase of GDP

by **Plantagenet** » Fri 21 Apr 2017, 16:16:13

We are NOT in a global recession. Not right now.

The IMF just raised their economic projection for next year to 3.5% GDP growth.

No doubt sometime in the future there will be another global recession. But we're not in a global recession right now, and IMF projections shows the global economy will be better next year then this year.