The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
The data over the past five years that you refer to shows an upward trend.
2015 0.90 0.83
2016 1.01 0.87
2017 0.92 0.91
2018 0.85 0.95
2019 0.98 0.98
2020 1.02 1.01
It is not possible to draw any other conclusion from these figures.
Actualy Bootlegger, I have been an academic scientist all my life, now retired, and one of my close colleagues was a senior climate scientist.
I am not disputing climate change etc, anything but,, I am concerned about the lack of balance in media reporting, and the terrorism of fear being pushed onto us.
I was simply pointing out the data over the last five years, because no-one else does. I am very much aware of other data and long term nature of the field.
Cubane
Boboil: 100% correct
The truth of the matter is that there are too many people on the planet, that each use resources on a growing scale
In 1850 there were around 1 billion people
We are now pushing 8 Billion with a peak of 10 b expected by 2050
Burning oil, cows farting, deforestation, plastic consumption wouldn’t be an issue if there weren’t so many people
The fact is there are and until that goes into reverse we are screwed..
We are greedy by nature and all want more hence why most invested here … to get more money more stuff bigger cars, newer TVs etc.
If only we could have a pandemic ?????
CO2 is at it`s highest level for over 4million years.
The temp trend was up anyway. Humans have contributed to it, speeded it up imho, but it was an inevitability anyway. What cooled the Earth a couple of times were meteor hits. The Earth is actually at fairly low Co2 saturation compared to the past aswel. Water vapour and Methane are bigger contributors .
Climate is measured in centuries/millenia...not 5 year periods.
I really can't for the life of me understand why individuals with no background whatsoever in this field, dispute the facts (and rationale behind what has caused these facts) that world leading EXPERTS in the field are presenting.
Its illogical.
Is it people are just too spoilt to change their behaviour, so try and justify that decision by coming out with reasoning that doesn't stand up to any kind of basic scrutiny?
Who knows...what we do know is our children and grandchildren have got huge hurdles to deal with on a number of global issues, with the consequences of climate change almost certainly being the biggest one.
We will be using oil for decades to come...we just need to use it far more efficiently than we do at present and move over as much of our energy need to renewables ASAP.
The overall trend is up, there is no dispute about that, cherry picking does not alter the fact.
Good site, but look in more detail at the last six years, albeit after a large rise beforehand. Not that six years in climate terms is very long, but it is noteworthy yet ignored by the media.
I hope it is a harbinger of things to come not as pessimistic as the vested interests tell us..
2015 0.9 C above 1950-80 average
2016 1.01 C
2017 0.92
2018 0.85
2019 0.98
2020 1.02
Looked at in isolation....high but fairly flat.
Cubane
I would suggest you do a bit more research....
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
Took me two minutes to find that.
I agree Cubane but to be honest I am a total sceptic. I believe the planet has an incredible ability to adjust and cope with changing conditions and wouldn’t be in the least bit surprised if global warming corrected itself in time. How on earth are we going to generate all the electricity to power electric cars, trains, planes etc .. nuclear will take forever because of planning and objections, renewables are hugely costly and inefficient etc .. it will need oil! In30 years it will go full circle and everybody will realise they got it wrong with electric cars etc .. remember diesel, eggs etc etc these things just become conventional wisdom for a while then get turned on their heads.
I have a problem. Everytime I loom on Google for global warming charts, theyy show that since 2015-6, the warming has been flatt(ish).
Whilst we are at record high global temp, and CO2 continues to rise in a linear fashion, and of course we are seeing climatic events due to this past warming, we do not seem to be warming over the last few years.
The media completely avoid this.
I am not knowledgeable to know if there is a plausible explanation (solar flares, El Ninio etc), and cannot remember any scientist saying five years ago it would be flat for the next five years.
I am not a sceptic, but hate it when any scientific area is beyond challenge, and awkward observations are avoided.
Any model saying what T will be in 50 years...not worth thje paper it is written on, too many unknown variables.
Cubane
The graph of global warming for last 100 years virtually mirrors the graph of world population growth so the long term solution is to get a grip of population growth. Shorter term the only thing we can 100% influence in the U.K. is where we build and I believe all new building in the U.K. from today must be at least 20 foot above sea level. We build around 200,000 houses a year on average in U.K. so we could replace the whole housing stock over the next 100 years at a safe distance above sea level. Simple solution.
Nick: again...I agree in the main, but you've missed one rather important part of the equation ie. How much energy we use per capita. We are so spoilt and lazy - our waste of energy is scandalous. What we need to do is address the easy wins eg. Turn things off that aren't being used, smaller cars, less air travel etc etc
Phil: I agree with that, China need to be addressed, v hard when we have developed our economies to support our luxurious way of lives...to tell China/India etc they must do so in a restrained manner. Its all very complex...but the world HAS to do something.
The trouble is the world has bought into renewable energy (wind, solar) as the new power sources. These have severe limitations, producing only 3-4% of world's electricity supplies, in spite of massive investments. Further they are intermittent: the windmills produce little electricity at times, requiring back-up, or too much in windy spells, requiring payments for others to switch off. Solar produces nothing at night. Hydro produces 6% of the world's electricity. Nuclear is the long-term answer but is disliked by greens and for its costs. So I see a very messy 10-15 years while the world finds that renewables are only a part of the solution. Meanwhile oil and gas will continue to be the predominant energy sources and feedstock for chemicals/plastics with supply restricted by the greens. Peak oil is some way off!
Bootledodger, Im not arguing about climate change, Im arguing that we in the UK can have no effect on the outcome until china stops what it is doing.
by the way - the "weaning" process will take c.50 years...but it has to start asap. Why do you think the hard nosed CEOs of RDS/BP etc and virtually all the other super majors are moving away from oil?
No....the reality is the planet is warming - that is a scientific fact. Yes - it has always warmed and cooled....but NEVER has such a change happened so rapidly. The only thing up for debate is how much effect has man's use of the planet's resources had on this sudden rise.
This is basic stuff - there isn't ONE serious scientist on Earth who would dispute it.
We will need oil going forward - but need to wean ourselves off it asap.
Buzzthomas, I totally agree but the reality is the politicians and media have completely bought into the climate change activists agenda.
As long as China keep building new coal power plants (100 this year I heard !!!) the UK will look pretty stupid saying we cannot have more oil/gas projects approved.
I have to say I have been mulling this over for some time now. On the one hand we should have the arbitration result shortly which hopefully puts us in a better position going forward, then it's a short hop to September when Navitas either gets sent on their way or are told they can say (hopefully on less favourable terms that they currently have).
The thing is the recent negativity towards fossil fuels is just getting worse, we have a lawsuit again against UK Gov about North Sea exploration; Shell told they are not doing enough, the list goes on and gets longer by the day. My concern is will Harbour walk away from the Falklands due to environmental pressures and shortsightedness by those applying the pressure!
I suppose FIG and Harbour/RKH can get away with saying, "It's not NEW exploration, it's already been discovered and appraised ready to go!" but still will they bend to the pressure. This for me is now my biggest concern.
Of course Harbours remit is to supply the world with fossil fuels during the transition and with 50/50 gas they are well placed. There is going to be a supply crunch as the race to renewables will not easy. Just look a Germany, talking the talk but they are still taking gas from Nord Stream 2 to power their economy cheaply.
So will Harbour be scared off because if they are, there are unlikely to be other takers of the project whether we have $100m in the bank or not!
In a quandary.
LTT