Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Pakistan has noticed their share of the $100 billion per annum climate cash they were promised has not started appearing in their bank accounts.
Pakistan needs access to global funds to cope with climate change
By Awais Umar
Published: August 14, 2017
ISLAMABAD: The world’s geographical history shows that climate change is not a new phenomenon as scientists have tracked historical changes in the drivers of climate change such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and continental drift.
…
According to the Global Climate Risk Index, Pakistan is ranked number 7 in the list of most vulnerable countries, suffering economic losses of $3.823 billion in the last two decades due to climate change and climate extremes.
At the 2016 United Nations Climate Change Conference, Federal Minister for Climate Change Zahid Hamid said: “We emit less than 1% of total annual global greenhouse gases, yet we are ranked amongst top 10 countries most vulnerable to climate change. Millions of people are affected and colossal damage is caused on a recurring basis.”
…
At the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) under UNFCCC, the developed countries agreed to pay at least $100 billion every year to the developing countries as a climate adaptation fund till 2020.
…
We should look for funds to build capacity of the workforce, improve the technological resource base and strengthen institutions for renewable energy sources.
“It’s our need to consume coal to meet our development targets to fulfill needs of the growing population. We can cut out GHG emission if we are provided with sufficient resources, technology, capacity and finances to move for green energy and renewables,” said Mountain and Glacier Protection Organisation (MGPO) CEO Aisha Khan.
…
Read more: https://tribune.com.pk/story/1480833/pakistan-needs-access-global-funds-cope-climate-change/
In my opinion, Pakistan doesn’t need US climate cash to reduce emissions. They could run their economy with nuclear power.
Pakistan currently only produces around 3% of their power from nuclear reactors. But Pakistan could easily build more.
Pakistan has an advanced domestic nuclear programme; so advanced that according to top Pakistani nuclear physicist Abdul Qadeer Khan, Pakistan taught North Korea how to build the atomic bombs which are currently menacing US targets.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’ll tell you what, give Pakistan money and LESS THAN 10% WILL BE USED FOR cc. Then just try to tell them how they should spend the money and see what their response is. Liberals are sooo gullible!
Who in their right mind would trust Pakistan. It will go into nuclear arms, or someone’s pocket. THey are just looking to us to be stupid enough to feed their over populated country. They are a corrupt country who produces and hides terrorists and we promised them money? Well if the USA back out of Paris I doubt they intended to supply the whole $100M, where would the money come from? Europe thought they could get out of it as did other countries dumb enough to sign it. So – burn coal Pakistan!
This is priceless. Give us cash or we’ll flood the world with greenhouse gases. Talk about extortion.
How about we just SELL them the coal? Win/win.
My sentiments exactly! Or LPG.
Quick! Let’s sign a deal to sell them more US COAL!!!!
Pakistan housed the world’s biggest terrorist and now wants cash . F off .
Informative. Thank you stock.
For the ad-hominem morons, the facts presented were:
1.Highly risk handling of spent fuel, even in a technologically leading country such as Japan (Fukushima)
2.Superficial focus on safety, even in a technologically leading country such as Japan (Fukushima)
3.Inadequate boron shielding.
4.The enormous, incalculable costs of an “accident”.
5.Inadequate ICRP modelling .
6.Fraudulent background radiation reference.
7.The lay understanding that each running nuclear plant produces the equivalent of 3 nuclear bombs of radiation per day.
Have you assessed the “walk away safe” designs, such as the one described here:
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/12/first-walk-away-safe-molten-salt.html
Untrue. They cannot build their own reactors. Only China or South Korea are able to build reactors cheap enough for them. South Korea is thinking of giving up on nuclear power. Leaving China with a monopoly.
1savenergy has this to say
————————————————————————-
funny, you talk a string of nonsense about nuclear, of which I have several thousand hours of knowledge….but you fail to mention any specifics that we could debate.
Instead, you take a shot at my comment that in 1900 only 6% of us got cancer and I further stated that it was called consumption.
Then you go on to prove my point, which was the point, not the terminology, that very few people died or contracted cancer back in the day. You state 4% I state 6%.
Regarding “consumption” that term was used for centuries for any disease that consumed the body. In your defense, it did evolve into more usage to describe TB, but even in 1900 medical summaries were still using consumption to describe cancerous consumption. I know this because I am well read, but thanks for the refining information.
Now how about your specifics on that “string of non-sense on nuclear”
I’ll start a fresh thread for 1savenergy who said
Hilarious your argumentative technique, it’s like reduction to the non-relevant. I was making a joke about new Mexico because so many multi-million nuke guys live there…..and your response is a 7580km from New MExico, somehow proving me wrong, LOL. NM is big also, did you pick the epi-center in order to claim credibility with a specific number?
“new stuff” sure, they worked on it way back when, and are trying to again, so if it comes back in real form, it will be “new stuff”. The stress corrosion cracking that they had back then had no easy solution, and has no easy solution, although “industry experts” assure us they have a handle on it now. SHOW ME.
Combining carbon steels, high temp, corrosive materials, and radiation (Winger effect for one) ARE BAD IDEAS, and your refutation was none existent except to pot shot/ad hominem “ill informed”. Perchance the lady should head to Zerohedge where at least you can say bittcheees!.
And then how precious, to end with the old lie “if you don’t accept nuclear, you will be in the cold and dark”
If you can muster an actual argument, bring it on.
Stock,
How kind & thoughtful to open a thread just to debate with me;
You claim to be “well read” yet make howler after howler, you make bold statements but don’t provide any sensible refs; sadly
Your ref 1-
http://www.nukepro.net/2015/09/radiation-education-how-fission-works.html
appears to be a USA ‘Prepper site’ fixated on Nuclear Armageddon.
Your comment about ref 2-
“Gofman is a pHD,”
… & the significance is ???…Al Gore has a Nobel prize & he’s a prize pillock.
https://ratical.org/radiation/CNR/fission.html
Turns out John W. Gofman, started
“The Committee for Nuclear Responsibility was formed as a “political and educational organization to disseminate anti-nuclear views and information to the public”. The goals of the organization were a moratorium on nuclear power and the commercialization of alternative energy sources.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_for_Nuclear_Responsibility
Paul Ehrlich was involved…nuf said
I do hope you will open threads for others,
so you can prove your prowess as a mass debater.
Excuse me? I think you misspelled “mass debater”? Or is that how they say it in France, being all cosmopolitan and what not?
Stock stated –
“But if you want to DEBATE specifics, I still will.”
his wish to debate (presumably with more than just me ! ).
You are free to interpret my choice of words as you wish…that’s the beauty of language.
1SaveEnergy
I expected nothing less from you, simple adhominems. The nukepro site is a nuclear and radiation education site. Contrary to your simplistic summary, it does not focus on “Nuclear Armageddon” but rather civilian nuclear power plants. They also choose to not be against nuclear weapons (because it’s a losing battle, no government is going to give them up)
Your pot shot at Gorman is just that. If you had the ability or desire, you could counter with an argument on how his calculations or assumption are incorrect. But OF COURSE, nothing of the sort is coming from you.
I am documenting all your comments at another blog. It will be a curious record. And some embarrassment for WUWT, which is not my goal, but the low level and quality of discourse should be noted and corrected.
So, you are happy for –
1. governments to have control over the bad uses of the atom (weapons);
2. but will not allow the benefits of the atom to bring people out of poverty, so they will burn finite resources; That’s interesting thinking !
Or, do you think we should follow Paul Ehrlich’s ideas & reduce the population quickly & efficiently [see 1.] (though probably better than slowly starving to death).
I am exited that you are documenting all my comments at another blog…
does this mean I will become a celebrity & be seen on TV & get a private jet, mix with Al Gore & DeCaprio, walk on red carpets & everything !!!!
Bugger, I’ll have to get a spray tan & a comb over.
I agree with your comment – “the low level and quality of discourse should be noted and corrected”,
please let us know when you decide to improve.
“The nukepro site is a nuclear and radiation education site.”
More bollocks.
Yep. Still waiting for facts, still getting hysteria.
2hotel9 August 20, 2017 at 8:04 pm
“Yep. Still waiting for facts, still getting hysteria.”
To be fair, stock is trying (very) & did supply some alternative facts from his/her friend with a “pHD” & from the preppers site.
“alternative facts” Pretty much says all ya need to hear. I will stick to actual facts from people who actually know something about nuclear power systems. Such as Bechtel, Westinghouse, General Atomics, General Dynamics Electric Boat. Ya know? People who actually do it.
LOL “thats all I have to hear”, some label something as alternative, and no longer longer need anything more. Funny, in a sad way. Par for the course. WUWT might as well be ZeroHedge
Yep, nobody needs to hear or read idiotic crap from you, we go to the actual source, people who ACTUALLY know what they are talking about. That is how reality works.
LOL
Very poor comprehension, my quoting another “Thats all I have to hear” was in relation to another’s comment of “alternative facts” and once labelled as such, was all the proof that dunce number 2 needed.
Ahhh, you gonna cry now? When I want to know about nuclear power systems I ask people who know, which is certainly not you. Though you are entertaining, much like watching a monkey flinging its poop at people too stupid to back away from the bars, you have about run your comedic course. Toddle on back to hufpo and brag how you bested all us evil climate deeeniers! I’m sure they will believe you.
Real Data — Implies Down With Nuclear
I believe that I may have discovered the smoking gun describing how radiation can be killing off so many important parts of the food chain, and decay chain on land and in water.
http://www.nukepro.net/2016/02/a-scientific-basis-for-destruction-of.html
” radiation can be killing off so many important parts of the food chain ” And yet it is not. Grow out that scraggly beard, get yourself a hairshirt and a signboard painted with “The End Is Nigh” and stake out a busy corner, the easier for people to point and laugh at you.
Oh, and I will save some time. Climate changes, constantly, humans are not causing it and can not stop it. See, I am considerate. No, no need to thank me, just toddle along.
I’m bereft to see stock go,
it means the end of having all my comments “documented at another blog”…
this means I will NEVER become a celebrity & be seen on TV & get a private jet & mix with Al Gore & DeCaprio & walk on red carpets & everything !!!! (:-((
But, at least I wont have to get a spray tan & a comb over. (:-))
Doomcriers always say they are going to leave, but like the bumpersticker says”How can I miss you if you don’t go away?”.
And hey! Treat yourself! Spray tans are cheap and temporary and the combover is coming back, just look at all the TV news “reporters” sporting them.
@ur momisugly 2hotel9
took your advice –
http://iv1.lisimg.com/image/3996705/512full-the-baldy-man-screenshot.jpg
Wach ya think….ready for the cat-walk
Lookin’ good!
What would it cost to replace Pilgrim Nuclear Plant with Solar PV?
First we look at the average annual energy Pilgrim has generated
Then we look at how much solar PV would be need to exceed that
Then we look at what that PV would cost
Then we look at what the cost per kWH would be to the PV owner.
Finally, how much wildlife land or agricultural land would we have to take to achieve that (the answer is zero)
————————————————————————————-
Actually let me give you all the answers, and then you can review the calculations below.
First we look at the average annual energy Indian Point has generated 3,687,000,000 kWH/Yr
Then we look at how much solar PV would be need to exceed that 10 Million Panels, Exceeding Pilgrim Production at 3,850,000,000 kWH/Yr
Then we look at what that PV would cost $2,034,000,000
Then we look at what the cost per kWH would be to the PV owner. 1.79 cents per kWH
http://www.nukepro.net/2015/06/replacing-indian-point-nuclear-plant.html
You may like to read this – http://euanmearns.com/uk-electricity-2050-part-4-nuclear-and-renewables-cost-comparisons/ – before going into flights of fancy.
1save, so you point me to summary tables that pander to the nuke “industry”, ignoring clear cut calculations from an expert in design and build of solar, using all very conservative numbers. Did you actually review it, takes maybe 5 minutes max.