Jump to content

How to create climate change skeptics


TitanTiger

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

He really does have a point.  Whether you believe in AGW or not, what is any government going to do about it?  How did prohibition, the war on drugs and the war on poverty work out under government control?

I believe science will come up with an answer, but it won’t be because any government decided to mandate how we live. 

I compare it to how we've managed to control the issue with the hole in the ozone by phasing out R22, among other things. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





11 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Yeah, how could an organized approach possibly help. :-\

An organized approach would require a global government. The biggest polluters are developing nations which you have no control over, and more so than that, they are nations which REQUIRE fossil fuels to grow their economies and thus raise their standard of living. India, a country that still lacks basic sanitation, pollutes exponentially more than all of Scandinavia combined, so what exactly is taxing the s*** out of lowly Sweden going to accomplish if we are supposedly past the "point of no return" as you all like to claim? Its a nice thought, but with no real global answer ready, all you can do is live your life and let things run their course as they will regardless. You will get your global initiative wherein you will be taxed out the ass while China doesn't do anything, but in the meantime can we drop the BS theatrics and stop pretending like this isn't an obvious political ploy, even if its a legitimately real issue? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I trust the science I just don't trust the solutions. California is a great example they believe in the impact of Climate change so one of the things they did was to force the power companies into spend a large amount on money in green energy.  Power companies have finite resources money that was allocated to green energy was taken away from maintenance and upkeep. In California maintenance and up keep include remove brush and tree branches near Power lines. In addition in California at one time Forest management included allowing managed burns to clear brush.  Because of population home were built in desert type areas and in area where they used to have planned burns.  Every time a small fire started in these areas it was being put out instead of allowing it to clear the area. This led to larger amounts of brush building up till it reaches a break point and you have multiple major fires.

Lowering carbon emissions is a practical goal and the US has made great strides by slowly switching from coal to natural gas which is a much cleaner burn and more economical. We have made strides in green energy but there are limitations.  Green energy requires  backup non-green energy, or storage, or a National Grid as sometimes the sun does not shine or the wind does not blow this requirement makes green energy more expensive. A National Grid is probably the best long term solution and would also allow us to build an energy Infrastructure that is more resistant to sabotage but is extremely expensive and would require the American people to buy into it. 

Nuclear Energy is clean but has issues with what to do with Nuclear waste and how to prevent a meltdown as seen in Russia and Japan. Most Americans would like cleaner energy but are limited in what they can afford to pay for the clean energy.  Per Capita the US is the biggest Carbon footprint but we are slowly bring it down the bad news is countries like China and India who have much larger populations then the US the per Capita Carbon footprint is going up.  

I constantly follow energy storage breakthrough's as I believe that is the key to change the direction of the per Capita Carbon footprint.  When Energy storage becomes efficient and cheap we can see a real changing of the guard when it comes to energy in the world.  More and more homes using Solar or even Wind in more rural areas with correct conditions, batteries that would make electric cars the preferred transportation solution.  Mass produced an Electric vehicle would be cheaper, more reliable (less moving parts), better acceleration, less polluting.  Lighter cheaper batteries with extended ranges, quick recharge times and long life cycles would see car manufactures get away from the internal combustion engine. Initially it would be new vehicles but I could easily see an industry that updates older vehicles to electric. change the way we do energy in this country and the world.  As  technology (Energy Storage) improves and we are able to move to more green energy we have to look at other things how do we pay for infrastructure Road and bridges as more people are using electric transportation so gas tax income goes down, how do we upgrade gas stations to also be charging stations, how do you pay for utility lines as more homes are self sufficient with green energy,  how do we enable people living from check to check to be in a position to take advantage of the new technology.  

I expect to see energy storage solutions that  will allow this in the next 10 years and I hope the US will take advantage of it. I think we will because of the economic benefits.  My problem with things that I am hearing from the people pushing green solutions is the total ignoring of the economic impact to every day people and also the fact that what they are pushing is US Centric and does not do anything about China who while less of a per Capita polluter is a much worse total polluter and India is adding to there per Capita carbon footprint and none of the plans address these countries and other developing countries like Brazil and Mexico. 

There are things we can do in this country now that I could see  where government can help.  New building standards new homes use Michigan walls (2x6 Studs on 2 foot center) with foam insulation instead of bat insulation initial home price would be higher but energy savings would pay the difference in a short period of time. Similar type standards in new commercial buildings.  Building efficiency standards is a place for the Government trying to decide which new technology will win out is the place for the market to determine. We can also subsidize research at Universities like Auburn to find the breakthrough energy storage technologies that will make green energy a true alternative to Carbon based energy. We need to be on the bleeding edge of research and we need to protect the companies and universities that Patent new technologies from Countries like China that one steal the technology then also undercut our industries to gain market share and put us out of business. Like Trump or not his use of Tarrifs against China is something we will need to do to remain competitive with certain countries that don't follow the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AUDub said:

I compare it to how we've managed to control the issue with the hole in the ozone by phasing out R22, among other things. 

This is a great example of how a government and private industry can come together and find a solution that is beneficial to both parties.  I’m not sure it will work when the plan is to eliminate an industry such as the fossil fuel industry and all of the industries that rely on the principle industry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

This is a great example of how a government and private industry can come together and find a solution that is beneficial to both parties.  I’m not sure it will work when the plan is to eliminate an industry such as the fossil fuel industry and all of the industries that rely on the principle industry.

Yeah, having a reliable system that could take the place of fossil fuels (that also doesn't bankrupt its population) before moving full scale away from fossil fuels might be a good start. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

This is a great example of how a government and private industry can come together and find a solution that is beneficial to both parties.  I’m not sure it will work when the plan is to eliminate an industry such as the fossil fuel industry and all of the industries that rely on the principle industry.

It's a good example of how nations can set a common goal and meet it. A one world government isn't necessary, as Metafour seems to think.

And the goal isn't necessarily complete elimination, but increases in efficiency. Natural gas powered peaker plants and the like still have their place, but we're making amazing strides in renewables and carbon neutral energy production. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone remember the Grey Market Cars? 

What were Grey Market Cars? European Cars did not have to meet any emissions standards until 1992. The US started back in the 60s with EGR and Positive Crank Case Ventilation and Evaporative Emissions. For decades, the well heeled would buy Euro Spec cars and import them. That way they would bypass the loss of power due to emissions. They also didnt have to have safety bumpers, etc. Folks like to think of America as always the bad guy. It is just in some folk's DNA. We started the emissions revolution however. The Euros fought it.

Now, we have other issues. Emerging Economies. China and India are 2.5BN people. They have zero or near zero emissions standards and they will overwhelm us soon. Plastics in the oceans, my own pet peeve. Most of the plastics there come from (not the US) Asia. 

In our myopic way we almost always assume that the "the rest of the world is more intelligent and more enlightened." In reality they often are not any better if not criminally worse. . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, AUDub said:

It's a good example of how nations can set a common goal and meet it. A one world government isn't necessary, as Metafour seems to think.

And the goal isn't necessarily complete elimination, but increases in efficiency. Natural gas powered peaker plants and the like still have their place, but we're making amazing strides in renewables and carbon neutral energy production. 

Which is all good.  Why would the authors of the “Green New Deal” mention the turning to electric cars and the elimination of air travel in ten years if it didn’t want to eliminate (or severely downgrade) the industry?  Joe Biden, in a campaign stop in New Hampshire, told the crowd that miners need to learn how to program.  Seems like a total upheaval of our economic system within 10 years if Joe is elected (or any other Dem that is a backer of the GND).  I realize it’s just a campaign promise, but....

The strides in renewables and carbon neutral energy are great, but it’s not what the politicians are talking about.  If the fossil fuel industry is on its way out, let it happen at it’s own pace.   European’s will only allow electric cars to be bought new in 2030 or 2040, depending on the country, coupled with the strides you mentioned, the problem will take care of itself.  To my knowledge we haven’t developed an electric airplane (that can carry a pay load larger than two pilots), so we will still need that industry and it will depend on fossil fuel for sometime to come.

I just don’t see the urgency and most people don’t. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...