Hey , there seems to be some heated discussions and differing opinions on climate change.
Right now there is some big conference in Poland on climate change and how we are so screwed if we do not
stop using/charge expensive fees for use of green house gases form oil use. Trump pulled out of Paris accord and
is a climate change denier. I used to be a total denier, but have come around that we should do something- the problem is
do what?
I can't stop heating/ cooling my home or stop driving my car and do not want to pay some extra tax that
will have zero impact on the problem. Meanwhile the money pie can only be divided up so much- what with all the other world problems
on immigration/ starvation/genocide/needed infrastructure/healthcare/senior care etc. etc.
Lets' here your opinions please..................................Folken
(12-09-2018, 04:55 PM)folken Wrote: [ -> ]Hey , there seems to be some heated discussions and differing opinions on climate change.
Right now there is some big conference in Poland on climate change and how we are so screwed if we do not
stop using/charge expensive fees for use of green house gases form oil use. Trump pulled out of Paris accord and
is a climate change denier. I used to be a total denier, but have come around that we should do something- the problem is
do what?
I can't stop heating/ cooling my home or stop driving my car and do not want to pay some extra tax that
will have zero impact on the problem. Meanwhile the money pie can only be divided up so much- what with all the other world problems
on immigration/ starvation/genocide/needed infrastructure/healthcare/senior care etc. etc.
Lets' here your opinions please..................................Folken
Folken, dude, the climate has been changing, the globe warming, ice caps melting for several years now, all major scientific organizations including NASA and every other serious scientific research group have agreed on this.
And 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities, industrialization.
The only people arguing that this catastrophe isn't happening are the wealthy elites that make money, (You know, the one who control government?) huge money off of use of fossil fuels, their transport and related enterprises that benefit , they are the only ones arguing against it. Hey but everyone should make up there own minds on political issues. A lot depends on where your income comes from.
Should we be concerned about climate change? Yes, but with all of the facts... climate change has become a political cudgel where hypocrisy reigns supreme. I remember seeing all of the private jets landing and departing at a major climate change conference... sheesh, are they THAT concerned?
Since the Earth's formation 4.543 billion years ago, the planet has been in a constant state of climate change with repetitive extremes of heating and cooling. Mebbe giant lizard flatulence brought along the last ice age? Who knows?
What we do know is that despite leaving the <ridiculously expensive and even more ridiculously ineffective> Paris accords, the US has the lowest per capita rate of carbon emissions among all of the countries that remain in the pact.
Blame Trump for climate change? Politically convenient but not realistic.
Fact is, the major contributors to carbon and CO2 pollution are countries like China and many in the third world. Now there is a great place to start if meaningful global reductions are to be realized over the next several decades... I guess the politically inclined just haven't got around to that inconvenient truth yet.
Yeah, What if we got all countries to lower their carbon, through renewable not taxes, cleaned up the air we breath and made the rivers and oceans and whole world a cleaner better place... all for nothing.
I'll have to agree with FWD, the facts are in and all that is happening was predicted decades ago. Yes the climate does change over thousands of years, but not this quickly except for a major force like a meteor strike or dumping billions of tons of carbon, created over millions of years, into our atmosphere in a short period of time.
NO, we do not have the lowest per capita rate of carbon emissions, we have one of the highest. EPA chief Scott Pruitt trotted out the claim that "We are leading the nation — excuse me — the world with respect to our CO2 footprint in reductions." The key word here is reductions, which is true, but in no way do we have the lowest per capita rate of carbon emissions. Two simple facts are that China and India have way more people than us, 4-5 times, and they are emerging industrial countries that are increasing their carbon footprint in total. China does pollute twice as much as us (US) in total, but again they have 4-5 times as many people. They want what we've enjoyed for generations. Should the US, EU, China and India be held accountable, yes of course along with every nation on the planet.
Nobody is blaming Trump for climate change, only the fact that he is ignoring this problem and taking steps to make it worse.
Should leaders attending climate summits fly in private jets, no they should fly coach.
Want to have a meaningful discussion, then save the " Mebbe giant lizard flatulence brought along the last ice age?" comments for talk radio.
Back to the original post, what to do. All current options should be on the table, unless we can master fusion energy.............tomorrow.
maybe we should tell the volcanoes not to blow
Or the forest fires in CA not to burn too
All in for fusion energy, a perfect panacea for unlimited, cheap, non-polluting energy. Why wait for tomorrow... Lets deploy it today.
Then, with the total collapse of the oil, natural gas and coal industries would come complete failure of world financial markets.
In the chaos that followed we would see the collapse of world governments accompanied by riots, wars and mass starvation.
For a sneak preview, have a look at what's going on with Europe today... and fusion energy ain't even there yet!
With a decimated world population we could then advance our civilization on an idyllic green planet in a globalist state.
My point is that without a comprehensive plan put forth by inspired leadership, them pesky unintended consequences will bite you on yeer bum.
Linville, super volcanoes and massive meteor strikes are two things that have caused relatively fast climate change in the past. Most other climate events happen over thousands of years not 100. Increasing forest fires are the result of climate change, not the cause of it. It certainly is contributing to excess carbon though. Climate change is also melting frozen tundra, which in turn releases vast amounts of methane. Climate change causes more climate change. The super volcano in Yellowstone is something that scientists are keeping an eye on and it could blow in 10 years or 10,000 years. At that point the argument is over and there are no jobs on a dead planet.
Fusion energy has yet to be recreated in the lab on any level that would be useful and it can't be "deployed" today. MIT researchers claim they will have a power grid ready system in 15 years, but I'm not holding my breath. Fusion is the holy grail of clean energy. If we move to cleaner alternatives, I see fossil fuels as a bridge and part of a comprehensive plan, except for coal. The only thing clean about clean coal is the word clean. You can't fly airplanes or move heavy equipment with electricity. Fossil fuels are not going to collapse overnight. ANY energy sector requires people and jobs. It's quite a stretch to link clean air and water to crashing financial markets, riots, wars and mass starvation. The DOD issued a report warning of these same issues and the risk of national security due to climate change. The issues with France are an exception IMO especially considering that it's get 75% of it's energy from nuclear power. No one said it's going to be easy.
A comprehensive plan is needed and all options, except coal, should be considered. The Green Energy New Deal, being put forth is a start and something to be debated. Fossil fuel and conservatives will mock and deride it, but at least they're not sticking their heads in the sand. Reports coming from the Poland summit are that the US delegation are literally being laughed at, while they try to sell coal to the rest of the world. They are not their to debate, negotiate or offer any real solutions. They are like carnival barkers or used car sales people. How's that for inspired leadership! No offense to carnival barkers or used car sales people!! They are legitimate jobs.
Options should include renewable's, fossil as a bridge, fusion IF it comes to fruition and possibly the next generation of nuclear power. I'm well aware of the pesky unintended consequences of nuclear. Ten years ago a company named General Atomics, which a family member of mine works at, had a plan to use spent fuel rods for energy generation. The storage of these rods are a huge problem because only 5% of the uranium is used in the fission process. Now ten years later the idea has matured and you can judge for yourself with the Netflix doc The Nuclear Option or an article on Nat Geo. A company named Transatomic Power is developing a new type of compact, low-cost, safer molten salt nuclear reactor that can use nuclear waste as a fuel source. Btw, France get 15% of it's power from recycled nuclear waste. This would solve two problems, the inherent risk of radioactive spent fuel rods and cleaner energy. Fusion and new fission are big ifs and we'll see if these ideas ever materialize.
Now if you have any better ideas, please send them to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave Washington DC, because they have none.
What to do about climate change........
If you have sufficient means (re.$); then the government can impose carbon taxes on the various polluters- cars, gas, electricity etc. and it will have no impact on
those with the money because they can afford it. I see people with multiple homes and jetting to wherever as the biggest proponents
of eliminating all forms of carbon emissions.
It's the poor, the disenfranchised- the people with the least means to bear a carbon tax, most effected.
Look at the riots in France- ever increasing taxes to pay for carbon. What would happen if the US government imposed a 11cent carbon tax on gasoline for instance??
You know what would would happen.......the wealthy would shrug and carry one while the lower class would struggle to decide to pay for food vs gas to get to work.
If you live in a big city- you do not need a car but if you live like where i am- you can't get to work without one.- and you would be trapped because there is no bus service
to the town or out of the town.
I think the any form of tax on carbon can only hurt the most vulnerable. The solution must come from technology not tax.............IMHO ........Folken
(12-11-2018, 02:11 PM)Lechter Wrote: [ -> ]All in for fusion energy, a perfect panacea for unlimited, cheap, non-polluting energy. Why wait for tomorrow... Lets deploy it today.
Then, with the total collapse of the oil, natural gas and coal industries would come complete failure of world financial markets.
-
In the chaos that followed we would see the collapse of world governments accompanied by riots, wars and mass starvation.
For a sneak preview, have a look at what's going on with Europe today... and fusion energy ain't even there yet!
With a decimated world population we could then advance our civilization on an idyllic green planet in a globalist state.
My point is that without a comprehensive plan put forth by inspired leadership, them pesky unintended consequences will bite you on yeer bum.
Good point, well made. It will take a gradual transition and actually that is partially happening. But we won't make any progress at all with governments that are owned by big oil and against change.