Human contribution to the current megadrought in the SW U.S. is 46%

Once upon a time there was a bacteria. It developed a way to turn CO2 and water into food. The byproduct was oxygen. That is why we can breathe today. And bacteria is smaller than ants. So, in this case size doesn't matter. But people still argue that man is too small to affect climate. How preposterous.

 

It would make more sense to argue it is mans job to change the environment.

 

I don't argue man has no impact. I argue that the minute bacteria sized amount he does is not relevant. Man is not harming the climate.

 

We could try to change it using nuclear bombs I suppose.

 

You told me you want to rely on geothermal. Showed a map of Africa to prove it.

 

The U.S. burns a billion tons of coal a year. And that is not relevant? Okay then.

 

Lols! I am communicating via a message board on the internet -that has to be about as ineffective as it comes in relation to leadership or influence

 

No I said Kenya was going that route

 

Geothermal and coal.
The role of geothermal and coal in Kenya's electricity sector ...
https://newclimate.org › Publications

Nov 12, 2019 — While Kenya has a long history of developing geothermal resources, coal has not yet been exploited. Kenya has a high geothermal resource ..

 

Yet it only matches 1935 and other mega droughts happened before that so nothing unusual. Caused by weather patterns.

 

and the potential to sell it not only to the rest of the continent but also to the gulf etc. China is the one talking them into coal by subsidising the plant as part of the “belt and road” initiative however if we, the more affluent part of the world, made a counteroffer to help subsidise geothermal or even bankroll with low slow repayment plan they can afford I am sure they would jump at it then, instead of Kenya being indebted to the Chinese Government……….

 

The Kenyans have no obligation to subsidize Western climate ideology by slowing their own development. And the thing about Third World countries being "indebted" to foreign infrastructure donors is that they can nationalize the asset at will.

 

You have that back to front.
It's the polluters in the industrialised nations who should be subsidising undeveloped nations in order to help them avoid making the same mistakes that they did.
No one should be encouraged to mine coal.
Coal needs to be consigned to history where it belongs.

 

China and India both have massive coal-power investments under way, and China, in particular, is exporting coal power generating capacity as an integral part of their foreign policy. Coal will be with us for a very long time.

 

Did you READ the article you linked to? Geothermal. Like nuclear has big upfront costs but from then on it takes very little to maintain. They are a good return on investment

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210303-geothermal-the-immense-volcanic-power-beneath-our-feet

 

Yes, I read it. The article does not challenge what I posted at all. The Kenyans are perfectly capable of pursuing multiple investment tracks.

 

Unless we can pull Chinas teeth - and THAT is important because at present they are doing to “buy favours”. They want countries indebted to them and they want to open up third world countries to exploitation. China owns massive amounts of African farmland,
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2020/04/29/commentary/world-commentary/china-africa-land-grab/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative

Why not help developing countries with energy infrastructure?

 

The Chinese will pursue their interests as they see fit, as will the Kenyans. The weakness of foreign infrastructure investments is that they can be nationalized at will.

 

So you're saying the Medieval Warm Period was NOT confined to the North Atlantic region???

 

Everything at the right end of the chart is mere modeling, not actual empirical data.