RUPERTKBD Posted October 1, 2019 Share Posted October 1, 2019 Just now, UnkNuk said: Do you have a source for that 90% figure? The reason I ask is that it's also my impression that the number is that high but I'd like a reliable source to back up that impression. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ I've posted this link several times on CDC. Usually the local CC deniers try and refute it by posting a link to a video, or a blog written by a "scientist" who turns out to be a political scientist, or a psychologist.... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted October 1, 2019 Share Posted October 1, 2019 (edited) On 9/30/2019 at 9:23 PM, RUPERTKBD said: https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ I've posted this link several times on CDC. Usually the local CC deniers try and refute it by posting a link to a video, or a blog written by a "scientist" who turns out to be a political scientist, or a psychologist.... The real question is - what exactly is causing the warming? CO2 only? SF6 says hi!https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49567197 Climate change: Electrical industry's 'dirty secret' boosts warming By Matt McGrathEnvironment correspondent 13 September 2019 Share this with Facebook Share this with Messenger Share this with Twitter Share this with Email Share Related Topics Climate change Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES Image captionThe expansion of electrical grid connections has increased use of SF6 It's the most powerful greenhouse gas known to humanity, and emissions have risen rapidly in recent years, the BBC has learned. Sulphur hexafluoride, or SF6, is widely used in the electrical industry to prevent short circuits and accidents. But leaks of the little-known gas in the UK and the rest of the EU in 2017 were the equivalent of putting an extra 1.3 million cars on the road. Levels are rising as an unintended consequence of the green energy boom. Greenland's ice faces melting 'death sentence' China confirmed as source of rise in CFCs Manx public 'backs onshore wind turbines' Big lifestyle changes 'needed to cut emissions' Cheap and non-flammable, SF6 is a colourless, odourless, synthetic gas. It makes a hugely effective insulating material for medium and high-voltage electrical installations. It is widely used across the industry, from large power stations to wind turbines to electrical sub-stations in towns and cities. It prevents electrical accidents and fires. Media caption Technicians display the importance of preventing electrical overloads However, the significant downside to using the gas is that it has the highest global warming potential of any known substance. It is 23,500 times more warming than carbon dioxide (CO2). Just one kilogram of SF6 warms the Earth to the same extent as 24 people flying London to New York return. It also persists in the atmosphere for a long time, warming the Earth for at least 1,000 years. So why are we using more of this powerful warming gas? The way we make electricity around the world is changing rapidly. Where once large coal-fired power stations brought energy to millions, the drive to combat climate change means they are now being replaced by mixed sources of power including wind, solar and gas. This has resulted in many more connections to the electricity grid, and a rise in the number of electrical switches and circuit breakers that are needed to prevent serious accidents. Collectively, these safety devices are called switchgear. The vast majority use SF6 gas to quench arcs and stop short circuits.Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES Image caption "As renewable projects are getting bigger and bigger, we have had to use it within wind turbines specifically," said Costa Pirgousis, an engineer with Scottish Power Renewables on its new East Anglia wind farm, which doesn't use SF6 in turbines. "As we are putting in more and more turbines, we need more and more switchgear and, as a result, more SF6 is being introduced into big turbines off shore. "It's been proven for years and we know how it works, and as a result it is very reliable and very low maintenance for us offshore." How do we know that SF6 is increasing? Across the entire UK network of power lines and substations, there are around one million kilograms of SF6 installed. A study from the University of Cardiff found that across all transmission and distribution networks, the amount used was increasing by 30-40 tonnes per year. This rise was also reflected across Europe with total emissions from the 28 member states in 2017 equivalent to 6.73 million tonnes of CO2. That's the same as the emissions from 1.3 million extra cars on the road for a year. Researchers at the University of Bristol who monitor concentrations of warming gases in the atmosphere say they have seen significant rises in the last 20 years. "We make measurements of SF6 in the background atmosphere," said Dr Matt Rigby, reader in atmospheric chemistry at Bristol. "What we've seen is that the levels have increased substantially, and we've seen almost a doubling of the atmospheric concentration in the last two decades." How does SF6 get into the atmosphere? The most important means by which SF6 gets into the atmosphere is from leaks in the electricity industry. Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES Image captionElectrical switchgear the world over often uses SF6 to prevent fires Electrical company Eaton, which manufactures switchgear without SF6, says its research indicates that for the full life-cycle of the product, leaks could be as high as 15% - much higher than many other estimates. Louis Shaffer, electrical business manager at Eaton, said: "The newer gear has very low leak rates but the key question is do you have newer gear? "We looked at all equipment and looked at the average of all those leak rates, and we didn't see people taking into account the filling of the gas. Plus, we looked at how you recycle it and return it and also included the catastrophic leaks." How damaging to the climate is this gas? Concentrations in the atmosphere are very small right now, just a fraction of the amount of CO2 in the air. However, the global installed base of SF6 is expected to grow by 75% by 2030. Another concern is that SF6 is a synthetic gas and isn't absorbed or destroyed naturally. It will all have to be replaced and destroyed to limit the impact on the climate. Developed countries are expected to report every year to the UN on how much SF6 they use, but developing countries do not face any restrictions on use. Right now, scientists are detecting concentrations in the atmosphere that are 10 times the amount declared by countries in their reports. Scientists say this is not all coming from countries like India, China and South Korea. One study found that the methods used to calculate emissions in richer countries "severely under-reported" emissions over the past two decades. Why hasn't this been banned? SF6 comes under a group of human-produced substances known as F-gases. The European Commission tried to prohibit a number of these environmentally harmful substances, including gases in refrigeration and air conditioning, back in 2014. But they faced strong opposition from industries across Europe. Media captionFarmer Adam Twine is concerned about SF6 "In the end, the electrical industry lobby was too strong and we had to give in to them," said Dutch Green MEP Bas Eickhout, who was responsible for the attempt to regulate F-gases. "The electric sector was very strong in arguing that if you want an energy transition, and you have to shift more to electricity, you will need more electric devices. And then you also will need more SF6. "They used the argument that otherwise the energy transition would be slowed down." What do regulator and electrical companies say about the gas? Everyone is trying to reduce their dependence on the gas, as it is universally recognised as harmful to the climate. In the UK, energy regulator Ofgem says it is working with utilities to try to limit leaks of the gas. "We are using a range of tools to make sure that companies limit their use of SF6, a potent greenhouse gas, where this is in the interest of energy consumers," an Ofgem spokesperson told BBC News. "This includes funding innovation trials and rewarding companies to research and find alternatives, setting emissions targets, rewarding companies that beat those targets, and penalising those that miss them." Are there alternatives - and are they very expensive? The question of alternatives to SF6 has been contentious over recent years. For high-voltage applications, experts say there are very few solutions that have been rigorously tested. "There is no real alternative that is proven," said Prof Manu Haddad from the school of engineering at Cardiff University. "There are some that are being proposed now but to prove their operation over a long period of time is a risk that many companies don't want to take." However, for medium voltage operations there are several tried-and-tested materials. Some in the industry say that the conservative nature of the electrical industry is the key reason that few want to change to a less harmful alternative. "I will tell you, everyone in this industry knows you can do this; there is not a technical reason not to do it," said Louis Shaffer from Eaton. "It's not really economic; it's more a question that change takes effort and if you don't have to, you won't do it." Some companies are feeling the winds of change Sitting in the North Sea some 43km from the Suffolk coast, Scottish Power Renewables has installed one of world's biggest wind farms where the turbines will be free of SF6 gas. East Anglia One will see 102 of these towering generators erected, with the capacity to produce up to 714MW (megawatts) of power by 2020, enough to supply half a million homes.IThe turbines at East Anglia One are taller than the Elizabeth Tower at the Houses of Parliament which houses Big Ben Previously, an installation like this would have used switchgear supplied with SF6, to prevent the electrical accidents that can lead to fires. Each turbine would normally have contained around 5kg of SF6, which, if it leaked into the atmosphere, would add the equivalent of around 117 tonnes of carbon dioxide. This is roughly the same as the annual emissions from 25 cars. "In this case we are using a combination of clean air and vacuum technology within the turbine. It allows us to still have a very efficient, reliable, high-voltage network but to also be environmentally friendly," said Costa Pirgousis from Scottish Power Renewables. "Once there are viable alternatives on the market, there is no reason not to use them. In this case, we've got a viable alternative and that's why we are using it." But even for companies that are trying to limit the use of SF6, there are still limitations. At the heart of East Anglia One sits a giant offshore substation to which all 102 turbines will connect. It still uses significant quantities of the highly warming gas. What happens next ? The EU will review the use of SF6 next year and will examine whether alternatives are available. However, even the most optimistic experts don't think that any ban is likely to be put in place before 2025. Edited October 2, 2019 by Heretic 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.Am.Ironman Posted October 1, 2019 Share Posted October 1, 2019 I think there will be a few new harmful pollutants discovered as we transition toward 'green' energy. But if the SF6 gas is that harmful they should look for alternative solutions and get it banned. The article said that may not happen until 2025! That process is way too long. I think we are at the point where if we discover something is increasing CO2 levels significantly, that substance needs to be replaced ASAP. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucklehead Posted October 1, 2019 Share Posted October 1, 2019 (edited) On 9/29/2019 at 6:48 PM, 189lb enforcers? said: you left out the hole in the ozone, that killed like....no one Edited October 1, 2019 by nucklehead 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted October 1, 2019 Share Posted October 1, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, nucklehead said: you left out the hole in the ozone, that killed like....no one I remember the entire world came together and ban CFC's. It worked. I had to look it up but it was called The Montreal Protocol . https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/09/ozone-action-worked-environmental-progress/ Edited October 1, 2019 by bishopshodan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnkNuk Posted October 1, 2019 Share Posted October 1, 2019 On 9/29/2019 at 9:48 PM, ForsbergTheGreat said: Who’s in position to do something? That’s what I'm getting at. People don’t have the slightest clue on what the solution is. They think they know the problem (co2 levels rising) but what about the solution? If the problem is co2 levels rising, wouldn't the solution be to reduce co2 emissions? Having said that, my hunch is that the world will be unable to prevent global average temperatures from exceeding the 1.5 & 2.0 degree threshholds by banding together and somehow dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Short of some "climate 9/11" - a disaster of some sort directly attributable to greenhouse gases that shocks and grabs the world's attention - I don't think world leaders (and a large part of the world's population) will go for the dramatic changes in our comfortable way of life that may be required to lower emissions. It's too politically risky. My further guess is that if we do reduce co2 emissions it will be through technology. Someone (hopefully) will develop a workable technology that will extract greenhouse gases from the atmosphere on a very large scale. And, if that extracted gas can be put to some profitable use and people can make money from extracting and reducing greenhouse gases, we're sure to see some results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted October 1, 2019 Share Posted October 1, 2019 @Heretic: Thanks for that info, but could you maybe edit that post a bit? At my age, I don't have the extra time it takes to scroll past all of that blank space.... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 The Iowa teacher who lamented not having his "sniper rifle" for Greta's visit to Iowa City on Oct 4th: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/iowa-teacher-resigns-following-sniper-rifle-comment-about-greta-thunberg/ar-AAIKd5I?li=AAggNb9 Quote An Iowa high school teacher who lamented in a Facebook post that he did not have his "sniper rifle" for a visit by Swedish teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg has resigned, according to the Des Moines Register. Matt Baish, a science teacher at Waterloo West High School in Iowa, was previously placed on leave after the comment he made earlier this month on an article shared on Facebook detailing Thunberg's climate activism. "The Waterloo Schools employee put on administrative leave due to a social media post has resigned effective immediately," read an emailed statement from a Waterloo Community School District spokeswoman, according to the news outlet. "West High School and the District are working to ensure classroom instruction continues for courses impacted by the departure." The Hill has reached out to the school district for comment. Baish's comment and personal Facebook page have since been deleted. He reportedly worked for the school district for more than 25 years before his resignation. The teacher's comment came a day before Thunberg joined thousands of activists in Iowa City on Oct. 4 for a climate strike. "We teenagers and children shouldn't have to take the responsibility but right now the world leaders keep acting like children and someone needs to be the adult in the room," Thunberg said at the rally, the Register reported. "The world is waking up. We are the change and change is coming whether they like it or not." The teenage climate activist has gained international attention for her role in raising awareness of climate change and organizing rallies across the globe. She has been the target of attacks from some conservative commentators and was even mocked by President Trump for her outspokenness on climate change. All I can say to this is "good". The fact that he joked about murdering a 16 year old girl because he disagrees with her stance on Climate Change is extremely disturbing, but to make it even worse, a science teacher who doesn't support action on Climate Change has no business teaching the subject. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 ...and apparently, after spending time in American cowboy country, Greta is heading for Alberta... https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/greta-thunberg-is-being-told-on-twitter-shes-not-welcome-in-alberta/ar-AAIIJ6l?li=AAggFp5 Quote Greta Thunberg will visit Alberta, according to a tweet from the teenage climate activist. Thunberg has visited Canada already, having attended the Climate March in Montreal on September 27. By heading to Alberta, Thunberg will be stepping foot into the heart of Canada's oil industry. "Heading north again. Now follows a few days of well needed rest while enjoying the spectacular nature of Wyoming, Idaho and Montana. Then on to Alberta, Canada! #slowtravel" Thunberg wrote in her tweet. Thunberg made the announcement just one day after giving a speech in Denver, Colorado. Thunberg travelled to North America on a zero-emissions sailboat in August in order to attend the U.N. climate summit. No specific timeframe or locations have been brought up, so there is no telling which cities Thunberg will visit while she is in Alberta. Thunberg had previously told Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that Canada was not doing enough to fight the effects of climate change. Thunberg's tweet was met with mixed reactions on Twitter. There were a number of replies implying that Thunberg would have a difficult time in Alberta, and even some that said she was not welcome. "Don’t bother coming to Alberta. We got take advice from 16 year old UN shills. Have a nice trip though!!" wrote @Muddog2626. "Stay out of Alberta. Nothing there for you. It's snowed already though," wrote @BarbieBee63. Twitter user @LynnRahn1 said very plainly, "You will not be welcome in Alberta." As expected, Albertans are reacting with their usual good grace..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curmudgeon Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 On 10/14/2019 at 10:57 AM, RUPERTKBD said: ...and apparently, after spending time in American cowboy country, Greta is heading for Alberta... https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/greta-thunberg-is-being-told-on-twitter-shes-not-welcome-in-alberta/ar-AAIIJ6l?li=AAggFp5 As expected, Albertans are reacting with their usual good grace..... And today (Friday, October 18), as Thunberg addressed an Edmonton crowd said to number in the thousands, a convoy of trucks honked their horns but apparently nobody could hear them. Imagine this scene: Child: Daddy, where are you going? Dad: I'm taking the day off work to drive my rig to the legislature. Child: Why, Daddy? Dad: There is a 16 year-old foreigner coming here to tell Albertans they have to take better care of the environment. Child: Is that bad? Dad: Sure is. Nobody has the right to tell Albertans what to do, since we have all the oil and it all belongs to us and screw Canada and especially those easterners and bad BCers. Child: Is this 16 year-old foreigner big and mean and powerful? Dad: No, but her ideas are. And we have to show the world we are like Texas toilet paper? Child: Texas toilet paper? Dad: Yeah, we don't take s*** off nobody. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishopshodan Posted October 18, 2019 Share Posted October 18, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Curmudgeon said: And today (Friday, October 18), as Thunberg addressed an Edmonton crowd said to number in the thousands, a convoy of trucks honked their horns but apparently nobody could hear them. Imagine this scene: Really? That is embarrassing. In Canada ( I think Alberta is still with us) this should not happen. You can have a few nerds yell Nazi at an old woman and people go bonkers, which is understandable. The hate being spewed on a 16 yr old by many is a debatable because she's obviously a puppet? and on the that, a puppet? why because she has a team of people? ...like every single politician, business leader, grown up that tries to get anything done? etc.. I don't really know Greta, at all. Haven't really followed but I am defensive over ageism. At 16 ,my band was opening for SNFU, at the New York Theatre, our parents would already let us go on the road. I met Rob Wright (No means No) performing as Mr Wrong ( he inspired Flea to be a great bass player) and Bif Naked when she was punker in Chrome Dog that same night. We did more shows with some of our influential peers and being a punk, I generated some alternative and open views. I then left for a trip to Enumclaw Washington to go to the first Lollapalooza. This punk still graduated and at 18 moved out on my own. I tell that story because in those years I figured out some thoughts, some ideals, a way for myself. I'm 45 now, though I'm still that 16 year old inside just with more wisdom. My opinions have evolved. But still , I would listen to my 16 year old self. He was smart, strong, independent and caring. Edited October 18, 2019 by bishopshodan 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmo Kramer Posted October 19, 2019 Share Posted October 19, 2019 11 hours ago, Curmudgeon said: And today (Friday, October 18), as Thunberg addressed an Edmonton crowd said to number in the thousands, a convoy of trucks honked their horns but apparently nobody could hear them. Imagine this scene: Child: Daddy, where are you going? Dad: I'm taking the day off work to drive my rig to the legislature. Child: Why, Daddy? Dad: There is a 16 year-old foreigner coming here to tell Albertans they have to take better care of the environment. Child: Is that bad? Dad: Sure is. Nobody has the right to tell Albertans what to do, since we have all the oil and it all belongs to us and screw Canada and especially those easterners and bad BCers. Child: Is this 16 year-old foreigner big and mean and powerful? Dad: No, but her ideas are. And we have to show the world we are like Texas toilet paper? Child: Texas toilet paper? Dad: Yeah, we don't take s*** off nobody. As a BC boy now living in Alberta and working in the oil field, there is a minority that may act how you quoted, but that is pretty extreme. I would say 90% of the people here don't disagree that a change needs to be made into clean energy. But where is the solution? Is there anything we can do overnight to immediately change the way the world is run and the way things are manufactured? People rushing to their computers and smart phones made in part by petroleum products to protest petroleum is as crazy as the people who think no harm will come of climate change. We should be using our energy industry's profits into researching and implementing said clean energy ( they are ) and a way to remove emissions from there atmosphere, but change takes time, a long time sadly when it comes down to how cities are powered and our infrastructure as a whole. Unless we all agree to power everything down and go back to living outdoors and being one with nature, which there is too many of us for, it is going to take time and a lot of money. We have the resources to be a self sufficient country and refuse to do it because of how concerned we are about our environmental impact. Are we not concerned that we are buying the product from sources that care 100 times less about the environment and emissions than we do in Canada? Instead of supplying ourselves with the product, reducing incoming tanker traffic that delivers us the gas we have in our own backyard? Greta sailed over to NA on an emission free sailboat, that's neat, how was the boat made though? Unless she cut down the tree's and handcrafted the boards and built the ship herself, it was manufactured and that created emissions. The hypocrisy is unbelievable. Your reading this right now, just look down at what your wearing. Natural fibres? Maybe, how was that shirt made? Did you sew it yourself? Did you buy it in a store that has thousands of manufacture made clothing? Most likely. The conversation isn't wrong, but the finger pointing isn't helpful. We need someone to invent a new way to power our cities, manufacture our goods, and clean the atmosphere of existing emissions. Why not embrace the cleanest oil and gas sector in the world ( canada ) to boost our economy and find a new way to do things. Even once a new way is found, it would take decades to replace all the old with the new and we will need oil and gas to do it. There are loudmouth idiot Albertans, I get it, they're in every province, but 90% of them care about the environment, they like camping and fishing and want a world for their kids too. Alot of the work I do is in northern BC as well, fort st.john area, your all invested in this too. Man I could go on and on and this is why I usually stay out of this conversation. My main point is that the war between provinces and the war on our own countries economy and the oil and gas sector needs to end. We need to embrace it, do it better than anyone else, and find a new way for the future. All while still manufacturing the things humanity needs for every day life. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted October 19, 2019 Share Posted October 19, 2019 It seems this is starting to really become a big thing, where people are protesting everywhere, heck even schools are doing it. So I ask this with the Canada election coming up, people who are in favor of supporting this climate protest or helping with climate change, are you in favor of Andrew Scheer then? Why I ask because Scheer plans to scrap the Carbon Tax completely if elected, so wouldn't people be against him if they're supporting climate change. I believe this is why Ex President Barack Obama has endorsed Trudeau, because he feels Trudeau and the Liberals are actually fighting climate change right, and I believe Obama would know first hand, being he actually would of had conversations or even worked with Trudeau in some of these areas in the past. Personally Obama imo is a very respectful man and knows a little more of what's really going on out there, so when he literally comes out and believes in Trudeau due to climate, it's kind of hard to disagree with him imo, I have to take his word on it. Here's the Obama tweet regarding Trudeau. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted October 19, 2019 Share Posted October 19, 2019 I think people here understand that stuff are made from petroleum products. But we can also be mindful of polluting less and becoming emission free (if that's at all possible). Rome wasn't built in a day. And you can't wean people off oil so quickly. It will take time. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted October 19, 2019 Share Posted October 19, 2019 1 hour ago, BPA said: I think people here understand that stuff are made from petroleum products. But we can also be mindful of polluting less and becoming emission free (if that's at all possible). Rome wasn't built in a day. And you can't wean people off oil so quickly. It will take time. Agreed. Honestly, the first step is for the people in power to admit there is a problem and begin to take steps. What makes people nervous (and in part gives rise to these protests) is the attitude espoused by so many in power, that they're "over reacting". The Carbon tax is a good example. People like Scheer call it a tax grab, or whatever. Who cares? We need tax revenue and we need to curb emissions. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 It's pretty funny when people claim that a 16 year old "doesn't have the maturity" to become a voice for Climate change, yet we see so-called adults acting like children: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/this-is-oil-country-newly-painted-greta-thunberg-mural-gets-defaced-covered-in-slurs/ar-AAJ4RUe?li=AAggFp5 Quote A newly painted portrait of Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg was quickly defaced — first with a pro-oil message, and later with a slur against the teen. The mural was painted on a section of a downtown "free wall" along a bike path that runs parallel to 109 Street near the Alberta Legislature. Local artist AJA Louden has confirmed he painted Thunberg Friday. A CBC journalist was shooting footage of the mural on Sunday morning when James Bagnell walked up with spray paint and began painting "Stop the Lies. This is Oil Country!!!" over the teen's face. "This is Alberta. This is oil country. My father has worked in the oil industry. We don't need foreigners comin' in and telling us how to run our business, support our families, put food on our tables," he said. Bagnell said as soon as he saw photos of the mural on social media, he decided to go down and "deal with it." He said his father, who recently died, would have been "disgusted" to see the portrait of Thunberg. He said Canada shouldn't change its energy industry because other countries are worse offenders. "I think it's absolutely intolerant of them to tell us how to change our lives and our people. She should go back to her country and try to make her country better." He said Thunberg is a child who is "doing what she's told," and doesn't know better. He said he's not against becoming more eco-friendly, but said Thunberg offers no solutions. "Just shut up until you have solutions," he said. Later, when CBC returned to shoot more footage, a different man was further defacing the mural — this time calling the teen a derogatory term, and telling her to get out of the country. The man declined to be interviewed. Reached by email Sunday after the initial pro-oil message was painted, Louden said it's normal for artists to paint over each other's work as it's a free wall. "Nothing lasts forever — one of my favourite things about that wall is that anyone is allowed to express themselves there, so I'm not upset at all. I haven't seen what went over it, but if anyone is upset about what was painted over the portrait, they can just paint back over it, it's not a big deal at all," Louden wrote. Mary Bjorgum, a passerby who watched the artwork go up on the wall, was also not surprised, but disappointed, she said. "Incredibly disappointed because it was a beautiful piece of artwork, time and effort went into making it," Bjorgum said. "I appreciate that they want to express there but to actually deface it is quite another thing." Thunberg was in Edmonton Friday to attend a climate march and rally at the Alberta Legislature that was attended by thousands of people. Her visit attracted a smaller, counter protest presence. Thunberg then travelled to Fort McMurray, where she met with leaders of the Mikisew Cree First Nation and the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, as well as to participate in a BBC documentary about the region. Before Greta left the US for Alberta, I predicted that Albertans would handle the visit with "class", but I didn't need to be the Amazing Kreskin..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inane Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 7 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said: Bagnell said as soon as he saw photos of the mural on social media, he decided to go down and "deal with it." Honestly, I can't imagine this guy, sitting around his mom's basement and seeing this. 'I'm gunna deal with this!' and having the time and hate to go down to this wall and proudly spray paint it like an angsty teenager. 9 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said: He said he's not against becoming more eco-friendly, but said Thunberg offers no solutions. LOL I'm not against this, but until you have a fool proof solution that I support, I'm going to mock and hate you for suggesting anything. Classic ignorant response to climate change we see on this board all the time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, inane said: Honestly, I can't imagine this guy, sitting around his mom's basement and seeing this. 'I'm gunna deal with this!' and having the time and hate to go down to this wall and proudly spray paint it like an angsty teenager. LOL I'm not against this, but until you have a fool proof solution that I support, I'm going to mock and hate you for suggesting anything. Classic ignorant response to climate change we see on this board all the time. Honestly, these two clowns sound exactly like some of the regulars on this board.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 15 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said: Honestly, these two clowns sound exactly like some of the regulars on this board.... But China! But India! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottish⑦Canuck Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 20 hours ago, Toews said: But China! But India! But Hillary! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now