Slashdot Mirror
Sweden Passes Bill To Become Carbon Neutral By 2045 (newscientist.com)
Sweden is the first country to significantly upgrade its carbon ambitions since the Paris accord in 2015. The country has passed a new bill committing to cut its net carbon emissions to zero by 2045. New Scientist reports: The law was drawn up by a cross-party committee and passed with an overwhelming majority in parliament by 254 votes to 41. The legislation establishes an independent Climate Policy Council and requires an action plan to be updated every four years. Sweden had previously committed to becoming carbon neutral by 2050. It already gets 83 per cent of its electricity from nuclear energy and hydropower, having met its 2020 target of 50 per cent renewable energy eight years ahead of schedule. To achieve carbon-neutral status, the country will focus on reducing emissions from transport by increasing the use of biofuels and electric vehicles. It plans to cut domestic emissions by at least 85 per cent, and offset remaining emissions by planting trees or investing in projects abroad.
Aaaand in the meantime, my country is trying it's darndest (under the current administration and GOP leadership) to move back to coal.
Woohoo!
You mean Norway. We produce no oil.
Is this passing the buck unfairly to some future politicians or are they actually gaining ground and on track already?
Twinstiq, game news
Actually, a great deal of that coal was sold to other nations, who actually have an industrial base. These nations are where all the products that you so enjoy are manufactured, with minimal environmental standards and abhorrent labor laws. But, this is all done out of sight, so that makes it ok in your book.
Why? because unlike the people who lost their jobs, you are truly stupid because you clearly don't understand this.
"Liberalism is a very noble idea, currently controlled by some very bad people. Be sure you do not get the two confused.
It's more like California, if you removed every large town and every city except for LA. 90% of Sweden's population is in the southern third of the state, and the rest has small community and farms in the northern area, mostly along the coast.
https://www.researchgate.net/p...
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
You mean the election in a district where the GOP is down 60,000 votes from November? I'd take that swing nationwide any day of the week. That kind of hit would be crippling even if the Supreme Court does nothing about the partisan gerrymandering and voter suppression.
Wait till Trumpcare fails. There's a reason they won't even tell their own Senators what is in it.
Sweden produces no oil, but does "make crap tons of money with fossil fuels".
Sweden is a net exporter of refined oil products to the tune of 378,000 barrels every day. The oil comes in, is refined, some stays and the rest is sold for quite high profits.
s/New York/New York City/. City is 1,213.37 sq.km, Sweden is 450,000 sq.km. So that's actually in the order of 375x.
It's not an "either-or" proposition. Sweden has eschewed alliances--and war--for better than 200 years.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
How does that make it easier?
We don't export oil--that'd be the Norwegians. We do export refined petroleum products, but the oil comes from elsewhere.
But that doesn't fear-monger nearly as well, does it?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
I don't see you submitting any "proper" tech stories...
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
They said "planting trees"? - wow, that actually makes sense. If only all the money we blow on reducing emissions could be spent on planting trees, cleaning water, and irrigation.
What? Sweden is not and has never been part of NATO, you can't just make up facts.
Sweden has military cooperation with many countries and has participated in many UN mission together with NATO countries, and occasionally has been under NATO command as well.
But before relations deteriorated with Russia there were cooperation with them as well. Joint exercises etc.
Data used to generate that page looks wrong. In addition to refined petroleum it also claims a large export of raw unrefined petroleum, but Sweden has no oil deposits. Looks like the database behind the site has some incorrect facts.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
Bit of a stretch for you to call it thinking. Racism is more of a reflex.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
Bzzzzzzzzzt--WRONG.
Sweden is most definitely NOT a member of NATO. It is, however, an EU member state:
After the end of the Cold War, Sweden joined the European Union on 1 January 1995, but declined NATO membership, as well as Eurozone membership following a referendum. It is also a member of the United Nations, the Nordic Council, Council of Europe, the World Trade Organization and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
Perhaps you're thinking of Norway, which is a member of NATO but isn't part of the EU?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
It would help relations considerably if they were better about not letting their subs get spotted nosing around Stockholm Harbour.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
You should come up here and check out the quality of the environment. Then we can talk about what's "green".
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
results from all the oil that we export, which is our number one source of revenue for our economy
What makes you say that? Your own link puts imports of refined petroleum at $4.83B, with exports at $7.22B, for total net exports of $2.84B.
2% of the economy is serious, but that figure is dwarfed by Packaged Medicaments ($6.22B), Cars ($5.85B), Vehicle Parts ($4.76B) and Telephones ($3.99B) - hardly the number one source of revenue.
Frankly, I'm surprised armaments isn't on the list. (perhaps hidden in vehicle parts?) I always the Swedish Socialist Utopia was pay for by profits from selling guns for poor people to kill each other with.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
This page is created by the company that runs the swedish powergrid
http://www.svk.se/drift-av-stamnatet/kontrollrummet/
At the botton you can se live data on the types of energy produced in sweden
Kärnkraft = Nuclear
Värmekraft = Heat power (burning wood and the like)
Ospecificerat = Undefined, for instance oil or electricity pushed back to the grid when trains uses the breaks.
Vindkraft = wind
Vattenkraft = Hydro
The map above (of the entire nordics and baltic area) show how electicity is transported and what the price are in different regions.
The Swedish green and liberal think tank Fores described the law as the most ambitious of its kind in the world, adding that the "concrete", long-term goals will give the market the certainty it needs to kickstart a transformation.
http://williamreview.com/
Well, this significantly beats the previous plan.
Carbon Neutral means they still plan to emit it.
So the won't have to get rid of all their animals, and people, who breathe out the stuff.
And their forests and other plant life gets to live, since they breathe in the stuff.
Some enterprising soul must have taught them biology since their last announcement...
Fighting against fascist cults is not racism.
The population density varies significantly in different Swedish regions. Perhaps the NY State is more similar than you initially thought.
Sweden is part of NATO (...) They are considered a bulwark against Russian aggression.
That's just plain wrong, they're not. After the Cold War countries they've concentrated on small professional elite units for international missions, the general army has been greatly reduced in manpower and equipment. Only recently with the Russian saber rattling in Ukraine have they started to take home defense seriously again. Maybe you have them confused with Finland? They're right on the Russian border and given their history from the Winter War in WWII never let their guard down the same way. Still not a NATO member though, that would only be us here in Norway. But here they're questioning if we could hold out a Russian onslaught long enough for the US to help or not, hardly a bulwark of anything.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I would have thought that the environment was the point.
Only -20 this winter, what disaster...
If I were a Swede, I would be pumping as much carbon in to the air as I could!
"For a pay of 100, the employee first pays 32 in income tax (direct, 32%)"
So income tax is 32%.
Payroll fees are not income taxes, moron.
STDs ?
After all - 0 is "not even half" of "gotta-catchem-all" right ?
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Tighter !
Do I win ?
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
To be fair - the Swedish Empire was, at the time the largest empire in Europe.
Then again that was during the thirty-years war some 300-odd years ago. It's not been anything like that size since the end of the reformation wars. And even at the height of the Swedish Empire - it ruled only about half of Europe - which is a far cry from all of Eurasia, and it never depopulated the place (at least, not any more than the wars did anyway).
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Indeed there are layers and many variables. This is a commitment to a future goal to be revised every four years. Those revisions will address issues as you point out.
As electric cars surpass ICE the demand for that oil will decrease for instance.
Exporting "green" electricity is a way to offset other nations CO2.
ETC
Sure, we are not 100% green now. But the nation and people of Sweden are committed to the environment. To a fault possibly.
Even if you count it twice it is a reduction in CO2. We will not stop there though.
We do it better then anyone else though.
"Preem has long pursued committed and systematic environmental efforts. Compared with the average refinery in Western Europe, our refineries emit:
17 percent less carbon dioxide
72 percent less nitrogen oxides
94 percent less sulfur oxides"
Perhaps hype but probably mostly true.
If you are choosing where to produce something you must produce, and sadly we still must, then Sweden is a great place. We do it the best we can, and as you say. Still make a ton of money. BUT we are also willing to give that money up for the environment.
What really needs to happen is that countries need to begin extracting carbon from the atmosphere and not just with trees but rather chemical machinery that actually generates piles of soot. Mandate that they be maintained and expanded year-after-year until atmospheric CO2 begins to decline. It's then a matter of funding which will come from taxes. To make it palatable to the greatest contributors of CO2, the tax will be distributed evenly among taxpayers. Later the evergrowing tax burden can be shifted to industries that are putting out CO2 or make/sell/import things that do. When the tax burden has caused these industries to based on unsustainable CO2 emission to implode, the tax burden will then be reapplied to the taxpayers. However, by the time it gets back to the taxpayers that it will be far less expensive than before and levels should actually be decreasing.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Animals and people are already carbon neutral.
You can't breath our more CO2 than the carbon you've consumed, from plants can not have more carbon than they have previously removed from the atmosphere.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
No, the coal jobs are being lost to cheap gas - which right now is reducing US carbon output, Paris or no Paris.
"Reducing"? Not really. Slowing the growth would be more accurate. Natural gas is still a fossil fuel and overall demand is still growing. Emissions remain far higher than is likely to be a good idea. The US will have to do a LOT more than simply swap coal for gas. We are the per-capita biggest polluters in the world and only China exceeds us in total emissions.
Hmm..."We'll have to pass it to find out what's in it"...where HAVE I heard that before?
IOW, so what else is new, other than which Party is trying to pass some sort of health-insurance reform without telling anyone what they're actually voting for?
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
http://www.nato.int/cps/nl/nat...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Somebody better tell NATO.
http://www.nato.int/cps/nl/nat...
You are welcome on my lawn.
http://www.nato.int/cps/nl/nat...
You are welcome on my lawn.
From the NATO website:
Are you saying that Swedish forces were NOT part of Operation Iraqi Freedom and the War in Afghanistan? That they did NOT fight in Kosovo and the wider Balkans alongside NATO?
You are welcome on my lawn.
Must be nice to be in Sweden... Here in California, neither source is considered 'renewable' or green, and many don't consider them carbon neutral either.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
And is it not men problem? A question for you: what is the common element in all US shootings, recent terrorist attacks in UK (including Finsbury Park) and almost all rapes? Here is a small hint: it is not religion.
Perhaps you should read the links you are posting.
Sweden is clearly not a member of the NATO, and never was and has no ambitions to be.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Apples are not oranges.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
Nothing is causing the downfall of Swedish culture. Are you stupid enough to believe an article on the daily wire, or are you cynical enough to use any old bullshit to try to justify your claims?
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
You should ask a Serb about those "peacekeeping" forces.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I didn't say it was a member of NATO. I said it was part of NATO. It has participated in most (if not all) of the NATO military missions since 2000.
While Sweden tries to have it both ways, it has clearly not eschewn alliances and military action.
You are welcome on my lawn.
If Sweden is serious about this, then that means that they expect nothing but zero-emission vehicles on their roads by 2045. Sounds to me like Musk should talk to them about building a Tesla Motors factory there, and maybe another Gigafactory to make batteries, he'd make a killing.
Part an member are synonyms.
Sweden is a partner not a part of NATO.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
If you have the time to read back old posts of someone called DontBeAMoran, you have time to waste. Not everything I say is true.
#DeleteFacebook
When you exhale CO2, it consists of the CO2 you breathed in plus carbon from foods you ate. So you're creating more CO2 than you consumed.
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
Erm... no.
Everything you just said is wrong. Dead wrong.
And no - you do not produce more CO2 than the plants you ate have removed. It's physically impossible for these numbers to ever NOT be identical - because for that to happen, because the laws of physics say you cannot create or destroy matter.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Ok, I see your point now.
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
"Partner"? I thought they eschewed alliances.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Hello. Why do you think people care about your opinion?
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
Arms and armaments was 11B Swedish, i.e. $1B in 2016.
So its large, but not huge.
And ostensibly we're not selling weapons to people who will actually use them, that wouldn't do... (Don't get me started...) But when it comes to larger systems, i.e. JAS Gripen fighter bombers, they're not really "used" in that respect.
It actually all started with the observation that being neutral during WWII no-one would sell us any arms when push came to shove. So in order to defend ourselves we needed our own arms industry. But in order to make that industry large enough to be viable, we had to also export... And that's where we're stuck to this day.
Stefan Axelsson
No really, why do you think people care about your opinions? You seem like an only child.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
You can reduce carbon emissions, for example the carbon emissions required to create a nuclear power plant can be less than that required to create the power a Nuclear plant would produce over its lifetime, but you are still producing tons upon tons of carbon, An Electric vehicle can prevent a little carbon over its lifespan (biofuel supposedly adds far more carbon than normal gas), but it is still within an order of magnitude. Every lettuce leaf you eat, every steak, every mown front lawn is linked to carbon emissions. Hell from what I understand every fart is greenhouse gasses, Empty African planes filled with buffalo produce more greenhouse gasses than highways and heavy industry, in many countries flatulence is the single highest source of the stuff.
It does not matter how much more carbon efficient you make your society. Even if you reduce emissions by 99%, we are probably still talking billions of tons of carbon emissions. And if history teaches us anything it is that efficiency breeds more use far faster than it saves the resource.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
By this logic internal combustion engines are carbon neutral
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
No, because fossil fuels don't come from plants that were recently alive, and thus the carbon from them was not recently removed from the atmosphere.
In fact, fossil fuels mostly date from the carboniferous period - when the first woody plants evolved, but nothing had yet evolved that could digest wood - so they never rotted, never decomposed and ended up becoming oil and coal instead. At the time, these plants all turning CO2 into oxygen but never decomposing raised the atmospheric oxygen level to around 40% (almost twice what it is now), and created a world where insects and arachnids could grow much bigger than before or since. There was a dragonfly with a 1m wingspan !
It was a very different world. Burning those things now, is inverting that process - from over 300 million years ago.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *