Is Jean-Marc Jancovici a c ...?

[izentrop]

there are in Rennes boiler houses that burn household waste (more fuel I imagine). The boiler I am talking about is new and came into being thanks to the electricity purchase price (under Borlo?). It's a deadweight effect, not the rational satisfaction of a need.
I have heard that household waste incinerators are confronted by the selective sorting to a lowering of the calorific value of the waste, so you need more fuel?

Is the filtering of pollutants effective because there is danger in burning household waste. https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/ ... _3244.html

Mrs. Duflocq, who then had no idea of ​​its harmfulness. His fourth child was born in 1990 with a kidney malformation "for no particular reason", then the youngest, in 1994, full of allergies. Today, she almost blames herself for breastfeeding her five children. There were also those neighbors with cancer. Earlier and more than elsewhere, she estimates: "In the street of my mom, only two houses were not affected. "

Despite 1999 and 2001 prefectural injunction orders and 2002 test results showing more than 2 000 releases of dioxin over the standard - particularly in farmyard chicken eggs - the Vaux-le-Penil incinerator, which was no longer up to standard, ran until June 2002.

Some misinformed people put this on the back of pesticides used by farmers, while it is beyond measure.

[phil53]

Good evening,

I admit that I do not know anything about the Rennes heat network, but I imagine that it was fueled before the commissioning of this biomass installation by fossil installations (fuel oil, gas?) Which now must essentially serve in addition to the winter and back up summer.

not exactly, there are in Rennes boiler rooms that burn household waste (more fuel I guess). The boiler I am talking about is new and came into being thanks to the electricity purchase price (under Borlo?). It's a deadweight effect, not the rational satisfaction of a need.
I have heard that household waste incinerators are confronted by selective sorting with a reduction in the calorific value of waste, so more fuel is needed?

yves

It is an aberration not to sort the compostable waste on one side and the rest on the other. The compostable part even if it is poorly valued would not take at least the energy that is burnt.Even if it would take a little to stir all that in order to compost or better to gasify.
The second part would be easy to sort by machines to ultimately burn only what is considered non-reusable. This is according to market trends, because as each community of municipalities has particularities it is doubtful that what we take the trouble to sort finally found a significant share in an incinerator.

[sen-no-sen]

Debate or understand?

It was time he arrived! Here comes the Great National Debate, which will finally help to understand how to take action on the ecological transition in a way that will not put people on the street.

What will it bring more than debates and commissions on the issue since the early 2000 years? There was the National Energy Debate in 2003, the Grenelle of the Environment in 2007, the 2050 Energies Commission in 2011, the National Energy Transition Debate in 2012, not forgetting some parliamentary committees here and there ...

The most likely answer is unfortunately not much. For a debate, be it small or large, to advance on the good (or least bad) public policy to address a problem, it is necessary that it is properly understood by the sponsor of the debate.

For now, this is still not the case: the political world continues to think that the ecological transition is only a variant of perpetual growth. Unfortunately, the facts tell us the opposite. Producing goods and services means transforming - thus destroying in their original form - natural resources extracted from the environment!

In this context, the "ecological transition" is the equivalent of a regime that allows us to live longer: we choose a lower consumption - so a contraction of the economy - in return for a minimum material comfort that lasts the longest time possible. Since this vision has its internal coherence, we can decide on measures to better manage it.

On the other hand, if we refute any idea of ​​a decline in consumption, the ecological transition will remain a discourse. There will be no perpetual growth so far: the world is over, we will simply hit the wall of resources a little later, with a fall to follow much more painful, since the depreciation capacity requires a minimum of residual resources .

With a little over 7 billion earthlings on a planet that has not grown in size, the fundamental question has become simple: go on a diet to last, or not. Asking how to organize an ecological transition if it is not understood for what it is, is wasting time.

https://jancovici.com/publications-et-co/articles-de-presse/debattre-ou-comprendre/

[sen-no-sen]

Jean-Marc Jancovici and Philippe Bihouix: Growth and Collapse

[Christophe]

I randomly clicked to 40 minutes where Jancovici explains in a few minutes that the crises of Portugal and Greece were related to oil and not to banks (or taxes or corruption ...), that is to say the opposite of the soup we have been selling since!

Obviously, blaming oil (or rather our dependence on ...) is not possible in our system ... so we manipulate people and we find "scapegoats" ...

Chance does things well as they say!

Not so stupid Janco finally ...

[sen-no-sen]

Yes we have sold us the idea that the Greeks cheated on their taxes which facilitated the trusteeship of their countries by foreign financial entities ...
I remember that at the time two or three reports had tied the opinion on this country. "Oh yes my Greeks also gorged themselves well (...) what happens to them is their faults "blah blah.
In fact, could as well find so many malpractices side French or Switzerland!
The high dependence on fossil fuels largely explains the instability that reigns in many countries (Venezuela, Iran, Egypt but also closer to us Italy, Greece etc ...), and it is of course our turn!
As long as the energy is available it is possible to inflate speculative bubbles and bubble in the bubbles by praying that the promises of future hypothetical growth can solve the problems present ... but the least energy crash, all his fictions They break their mouths and it's the economic and social crash.

[Ahmed]

I've watched the entire video, which is rather abundant, but overall the energy factor, important as it is, must not forget the financial factor and, in the case of Greece (evoked by Christophe), the drain made by Germany by the debt should not be neglected ...

One of the aspects mentioned concerns the demography and the impact that a collapse would have on the latter. I would like to make two comments on this question:
1- It must first be remembered that because of the extreme inequality in the allocation of resources, it is not so much the number that plays as the capacity to dissipate mass energy monopolized by a relatively small number. some object that the activity of the poor for their survival is much less respectful of nature than the better off: it is to forget that this destruction is done precisely by the pressure of inequality and on behalf of the richest ( eg poaching of ivory).
2- Another argument of the unrepentant optimists is that the expansion of the European economic model and of what goes with it, would have as effect what is usually called the demographic transition (it is notably and unsurprisingly the thesis defended by Exnihiloest). To this it is simple to point out, on the one hand, that this expansion of the model is a mere supposition that nothing supports it (extractivism supposes two poles with a directed flow from the poorest to the richest), on the other hand Assuming that the physical constraint is not exercised, the demographic evolutions have, by nature, a very strong inertia and that this reflux would be very offset in time.

That being said, this in no way belies the drastically negative impact of a rapid change in the functioning of societies, because of the lessening of what constitutes its current foundation: energy.

[sen-no-sen]

1- It must first be remembered that because of the extreme inequality in the allocation of resources, it is not so much the number that plays as the capacity to dissipate mass energy monopolized by a relatively small number.

Yes and it would be necessary to remind Yves Cochet https://www.marianne.net/politique/pour-proteger-l-environnement-l-ex-ministre-yves-cochet-prone-la-suppression-des , which advocates the reduction of births to limit the ecological impact ...

Another argument of the unrepentant optimists is that the expansion of the European economic model and what goes with it, would have as effect what is usually called the demographic transition (...)

The demographic transition is a result of industrialization, but the latter promises no improvement in ecological terms in the sense that, if families produce fewer children, the offspring of the techno-industrial society will have a fierce appetite for raw material ...

To this it is simple to point out, on the one hand, that this expansion of the model is a mere supposition that nothing supports it (extractivism supposes two poles with a directed flow from the poorest to the richest), on the other hand Assuming that the physical constraint is not exercised, the demographic evolutions have, by nature, a very strong inertia and that this reflux would be very offset in time.

This is what worries demographers.The African continent is in the process of industrialization, however the high inequalities that prevail there has maintained a high level of fertility combined with an increase (albeit timid) standards of living.
This results in a very large increase in populations, the African continent (essentially sub-Saharan) will be the only one that will not be aging (+ 1,25billion more individuals on the horizon 2050 according to the UN).
Fertility / industrialization equilibrium will take several decades and may be the cause of an acceleration of ecocides.

[Ahmed]

The industrialization of Africa, which is supposed to lead to a balancing of fertility will necessarily lead (it is not a "risk") to such an aggravation of ecocide that it will also impact human populations, not to mention the fact that the model, as already mentioned, cannot be generalized due to economic saturation: if China, India and a few others (+ Africa!) continue to "progress", where the put in cut settled (and, additional question, but not least, where are the solvent customers * to complete the system)?

* Industrialization implies a decrease in the medium term of the employed labor force, therefore of unemployment ...
A friend explained to me that during a technical (and financial) assistance mission to India, the drinking water pumping station had been "simplified" by dismantling the automatic monitoring devices by the person who performed this function and whose it was the livelihood ...

[PVresistif]

the energy is available in abundance: we find every day more and more oil and gas! it is a big pb because it lowers prices, which causes the bankruptcies of producing countries and it lowers taxes (which depend on the sales price, VAT among others)
The whole point is therefore to replace oil with a much more controllable and much more expensive energy: nuclear (produced in "advanced" countries so to speak ...
Janco is therefore very useful in this scenario, the ecologists Bobo too, all is well and goes almost for the best except the grain of sand of the "pigeons" at the end of the chain who are reluctant to pay more (provincial yellow vests for example ).
The more nuclear there is, the less democracy there is ..... but who cares?