Leo has witnessed climate change first hand

[Apple Juice]

15 minutes ago, Fateless said:

While his original stance was wrong - climate change does lend itself to stronger and more frequent Chinooks and El Nino. So in a sense, he wasn't really all that far off the mark. 

I mean, I'm typing this in Edmonton while sitting on my patio in shorts and a t-shirt. There is no snow on the ground and its December 9th. Again, is this DIRECTLY related to climate change? Of course not. But climate change does increase the strength and frequency of warm weather patterns like Chinooks.

Didn't Calgary and Edmonton started having snowfall in November and lasted until February?

[Nuxfanabroad]

Alberta has some mighty wacky weather. I was stuck there in Aug '92 when there was a bloody blizzard for a day. Meanwhile, I'd already been preoccupied with my fingers covering leaks of a relationship that was damwell set to burst.

Funny, someone had said it'd be a "cold day in Hell" when the two of you split..how prophetic!

As for Leo, he's the greatest of all us hypocrites. Professes to be environmentally-aware(& mighty concerned), yet carries the carbon(& romantic) footprint of a thousand sultans. Must be scary for elites like him to see the shrivelling 'Garden Of Eden' subject to desertification...

[ForsbergTheGreat]

3 hours ago, drummer4now said:

Well whether one wants to acknowledge it or not the oil and gas produced in the Alberta oil sands has to be one of the worst for the environment second to maybe offshore drilling or Russian exploration. Not to mention the quality sucks and only countries like China are willing to buy the junk oil at face value... It also happens to very expensive and time consuming to extract. 

Obama of all people even called it dirty oil..

There's a reason why Saudi or middle eastern oil is top notch because even if there was an environmental disaster it's in the middle of the desert.. far away from people and other things.

Wow how misguided could one be?  Sounds like someone had been listening to too much of the hypocrite David Susiki

 

First I’ll talk about how you state Alberta is the worst for the environment your myth.

 

First yes, it does require more resources to extract our bitumen compared to conventional oil. But we’ve have taken great strides at improving this.

 

He points out that Suncor has halved its greenhouse gas emissions per barrel since 1990, and reduced its water use by half in the past five years. He also notes that even after all current planned sites are developed, the oil sands will still only use 2% of the flow of the Athabasca river.

 

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=ed54cc78-027b-41cc-8308-f88c8fa12efe

 

or

 

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/calgary/story/1.3355724

 

 

But even though it’s hard to extract we still are one of the only top 10 oil reserves that actually has carbon and environmental regulations.  Even at our current extraction we still produce The oil companies could care less how they drill our spill it.  I guess as you put it, as long as no one see’s the negative effect it doesn’t count right?

 

And let’s talk about what’s going on outside Alberta

 

There are 13 oil fields in California, plus crude oil blends originating in at least six other countries, that generate a higher level of upstream greenhouse gas emissions than Canadian dilbit blends;

 

Crude oil from Alaska’s North Slope, which makes up about 12 per cent of California’s total crude slate, is actually “dirtier” than the Canadian dilbit known as “Access Western Blend”;

 

 The “dirtiest oil in North America” is not produced in Canada, but just outside Los Angeles, where the Placerita oil field generates about twice the level of upstream emissions as Canadian oilsands production; and

 

 

This is unfortunate, since opposing the Keystone pipeline is actually a giant “green herring”. About 80 per cent of the emissions attributable to a barrel of oil occur during the downstream combustion of refined fuel in a vehicle – not during the upstream production of crude oil. These downstream emissions occur in equal amounts whether the fuel was made from light or heavy oil, or the crude oil was produced by conventional or unconventional methods. So concentrating on killing a single pipeline merely distracts from the real challenge – to develop the low-carbon fuels, technologies and ubiquitous systems that will be key to moving the world off oil.

 

http://ipolitics.ca/2014/07/18/how-clean-is-our-dirty-oil-youd-be-surprised/

 

Second, the fact that you think the oil sands are a major contributor to climate changes.

The state of Wyoming emits as much CO2 through electricity as the entire Alberta oils sands does.

Canada’s oil sands contribute less than .1% of global emissions.  With the growth in world population each year. Even if you completely shut down Alberta, is literally has next to no effect on improving climate changes

You want to know why Obama says it’s dirty, you have to look at who’s pockets Obama has his hands in.  Why or why would Warren Buffet not want a new pipeline being built.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

Wow how misguided could one be?  Sounds like someone had been listening to too much of the hypocrite David Susiki

 

First I’ll talk about how you state Alberta is the worst for the environment your myth.

 

First yes, it does require more resources to extract our bitumen compared to conventional oil. But we’ve have taken great strides at improving this.

 

He points out that Suncor has halved its greenhouse gas emissions per barrel since 1990, and reduced its water use by half in the past five years. He also notes that even after all current planned sites are developed, the oil sands will still only use 2% of the flow of the Athabasca river.

 

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=ed54cc78-027b-41cc-8308-f88c8fa12efe

 

or

 

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/calgary/story/1.3355724

 

 

But even though it’s hard to extract we still are one of the only top 10 oil reserves that actually has carbon and environmental regulations.  Even at our current extraction we still produce The oil companies could care less how they drill our spill it.  I guess as you put it, as long as no one see’s the negative effect it doesn’t count right?

 

And let’s talk about what’s going on outside Alberta

 

There are 13 oil fields in California, plus crude oil blends originating in at least six other countries, that generate a higher level of upstream greenhouse gas emissions than Canadian dilbit blends;

 

Crude oil from Alaska’s North Slope, which makes up about 12 per cent of California’s total crude slate, is actually “dirtier” than the Canadian dilbit known as “Access Western Blend”;

 

 The “dirtiest oil in North America” is not produced in Canada, but just outside Los Angeles, where the Placerita oil field generates about twice the level of upstream emissions as Canadian oilsands production; and

 

 

This is unfortunate, since opposing the Keystone pipeline is actually a giant “green herring”. About 80 per cent of the emissions attributable to a barrel of oil occur during the downstream combustion of refined fuel in a vehicle – not during the upstream production of crude oil. These downstream emissions occur in equal amounts whether the fuel was made from light or heavy oil, or the crude oil was produced by conventional or unconventional methods. So concentrating on killing a single pipeline merely distracts from the real challenge – to develop the low-carbon fuels, technologies and ubiquitous systems that will be key to moving the world off oil.

 

http://ipolitics.ca/2014/07/18/how-clean-is-our-dirty-oil-youd-be-surprised/

 

Second, the fact that you think the oil sands are a major contributor to climate changes.

The state of Wyoming emits as much CO2 through electricity as the entire Alberta oils sands does.

Canada’s oil sands contribute less than .1% of global emissions.  With the growth in world population each year. Even if you completely shut down Alberta, is literally has next to no effect on improving climate changes

You want to know why Obama says it’s dirty, you have to look at who’s pockets Obama has his hands in.  Why or why would Warren Buffet not want a new pipeline being built.

Was this entire thread just bait waiting for someone to make a post for you to get up on your oily soap box and rant on about? Because it sure seems like it.

[WHL rocks]

Locals in Calgary told Leo DiCaprio that they've never had Chinooks before?

Good one Leo. Straight out lie.

Calgarians love telling people about the Chinook. That's one of the first things they tell you when you say it's cold in Calgary. Been there many, many , many times. Never heard this before, ever. 

[etsen3]

2 hours ago, Offensive Threat said:

Its pretty standard for any foreigner when they come to Canada. When they go back to wherever they came from they blow everything that happened to them wildly out of proportion.

 

I met some crew members from a certain European airline that had come to Vancouver in the middle of June with their snowboards and were disppointed when the slopes were close.

Celebrities' political opinions are overrated.   I'm not saying this to discredit climate change, as the consensus among scientists (people we should actually be listening to) is that climate change is indeed a threat.  But if Leo is so afraid of it, maybe he should stop flying around in private jets.

[Xbox]

Interesting read. Im doing a giant school project on climate change right now so this what relevant to me lol.

[Nuxfanabroad]

23 minutes ago, Xbox said:

Interesting read. Im doing a giant school project on climate change right now so this what relevant to me lol.

Recommend Dr Guy McPherson(U of Ariz, Prof Emeritus) & his site, NatureBatsLast. Best comments section in this universe!

[Fateless]

3 hours ago, Apple Juice said:

Didn't Calgary and Edmonton started having snowfall in November and lasted until February?

When, last year? We had a snowfall in November that lasted pretty much until March, but it didn't snow frequently last year. I think we had 3-4 real snowfalls over a 5 month period. It wasn't even really that cold last year either though. Typical weak was around -10 for most of the winter and we only had one week where it dipped to -30. 

This winter has been ridiculously mild so far. One snowfall and the snow is gone, its still positive outside (although tends to dip below zero overnight). It was warmer in Edmonton last week than it was in Vancouver.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

29 minutes ago, Fateless said:

When, last year? We had a snowfall in November that lasted pretty much until March, but it didn't snow frequently last year. I think we had 3-4 real snowfalls over a 5 month period. It wasn't even really that cold last year either though. Typical weak was around -10 for most of the winter and we only had one week where it dipped to -30. 

This winter has been ridiculously mild so far. One snowfall and the snow is gone, its still positive outside (although tends to dip below zero overnight). It was warmer in Edmonton last week than it was in Vancouver.

It's funny that you say you were out wearing shorts today.  I just got off the phone with my mother inlaw who lives in terwillegar (edmonton) and she said it was cold and chilly today in Edmonton.  Cold enough that she had to wear her winter jacket when she took the dog to the park.  

In Calgary today it was -2 and we got 2 inches of snow.

As long as I can remember we've  never really had snow that last all winter,  Usually halloween we get some and it goes away in a couple of days, then in the next two months we get the odd dump but it never last.  Late jan/ feb we get a good dump and that last till march.  

In fact.  in 1990 december 8th, calgary the weather was a high +11 and a low of -2

Yesterday in Calgary we had a high of +8 and a low of +1.    Maybe Calgary just doesn't get the effect of climate change like the rest of the world.

[aGENT]

13 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

In fact.  in 1990 december 8th, calgary the weather was a high +11 and a low of -2

Yesterday in Calgary we had a high of +8 and a low of +1.    Maybe Calgary just doesn't get the effect of climate change like the rest of the world.

Or perhaps that's an EXTREMELY simplistic view (not to mention ridiculous sample size) of climate change.

[thejazz97]

While we're on the subject of "humorous" and "climate change"...