Global warming....etc. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Griswold -> Global warming....etc. (4/4/2007 6:42:58 PM)

Ya'll been talking about it...the Supreme Court recently weighed in on it....Alvin (the former VP) has been discussing it (a tad), everyone has an opinion....

Here's what I know....

We ain't helping...the sun spots aren't helping either (in that their in a bit of a "solar max" period currently...being bigger and all that kind of shit), the magnetic field is doing a bit of a dance lately and is, according to experts, in a bit of a converse as to switching its' poles (which apparently, due to it's lack, is allowing MORE of the whole solar thing in...it being at a smidge of a high lately), Mars ice caps are spending a bit of time in decline....and they say even Pluto is getting a bit warmer (going from minus 875 degrees to a smidge over minus 742 degrees).

That's fucked up....Pluto is getting warmer.  (I'm selling my ski's).

And the net result is....we're probably in a global (historic) decline (currently).

It happens.

So my question is....

Do we spend the next 30 years debating who's at fault....or...do we accept the fact that this is a global and historical anomoly...and buck up, drive a bit better, electrify a bit better....or....

Do we just say..."fuck those pricks who think we're the cause..."...and keep fucking around, spending our petrological inheritence and pursue a world of global indulgence?

I'm just curious.

Is it time to quit passing the blame....or is this all just a bunch of hookum?

(Hokum?)

Where's my pipe?



FirmhandKY -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/4/2007 7:16:45 PM)

Griswold,

Arguing about causes is important.

It certainly would be a kicker, if the nations of the earth ended up spending trillions and trillons of dollars to reduce CO2 emissions, in order to reduce the temperature change .... if the change isn't really related to the increase of CO2 levels due to man's activities.

If, indeed oil is "running out", and we will have to change one of our sources of energy anyway, and it has little or nothing to do with "global warming", then think of the uses those wasted trillions could have been put to instead:

1.  Bringing new energy technologies online as our knowledge increases, therefore doing so more effectively, and with smaller disruptions to the lives of billions.

2.  Use the money to move soon-to-be-flooded city populations onto higher ground.

3.  ...  add your own better use of the cream of mankinds brainpower, lives and financial resources ...

I'd also say, that I've yet to see ANY detailed "plan" on how to reduce mankind's carbon footprint.  Hell, I'd like to see a not-so-detailed plan, even.

What if we completely change our way of life ... revert to feudalism, without air travel, where everyone lives and dies within a 20 miles radius of their homes ... and the temperatures continue to rise?

Seems like a high price for not much.

So .... the argument about causes is important.  Deathly important.

FirmKY



Griswold -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/4/2007 7:45:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

Griswold,

Arguing about causes is important.

It certainly would be a kicker, if the nations of the earth ended up spending trillions and trillons of dollars to reduce CO2 emissions, in order to reduce the temperature change .... if the change isn't really related to the increase of CO2 levels due to man's activities.

If, indeed oil is "running out", and we will have to change one of our sources of energy anyway, and it has little or nothing to do with "global warming", then think of the uses those wasted trillions could have been put to instead:

1.  Bringing new energy technologies online as our knowledge increases, therefore doing so more effectively, and with smaller disruptions to the lives of billions.

2.  Use the money to move soon-to-be-flooded city populations onto higher ground.

3.  ...  add your own better use of the cream of mankinds brainpower, lives and financial resources ...

I'd also say, that I've yet to see ANY detailed "plan" on how to reduce mankind's carbon footprint.  Hell, I'd like to see a not-so-detailed plan, even.

What if we completely change our way of life ... revert to feudalism, without air travel, where everyone lives and dies within a 20 miles radius of their homes ... and the temperatures continue to rise?

Seems like a high price for not much.

So .... the argument about causes is important.  Deathly important.

FirmKY



No debate...you made some great points but...

So we did or didn't cause it...so it is or isn't a period of change as to standard operating procedure ("it's gonna happen no matter what")...history is replete with those that didn't make it to the next crustacean period.

Here we are...

I suspect we're smart enough to end up being an historic anomoly, in that we'll probably make it through the next period unlike most others in the recent millenial past...whatever that may foretell (and however long it might last)...and end up when it's all over (somewhere between the next 30 years....and 4079) being on top of the sand pile once again....

But...what is our obligation?

It's no different than our land....whatever we might own in our short duration...we can let our lawnmowers rust in the yard, leave our trash out, negating our neighbors real estate values...or, we can say "ya know...I affect everyone, even in the smallest of ways....can I contribute to a solution/better way?"

It's a fair question.



HydroMaster -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/4/2007 8:54:43 PM)

I'm going to stick by my usual global warming arguement.  The temperature of his planet has veried widley from sweltering heat to ice ages for billions of years.  I don't recal ever hearing about SUV's in the fossil record to explain the cause.  I'm not saying we don't have at least a part in the cause but honestly how big of a influence has our industrial presence really made.  I'm all for reducing CO's.  Even if it doesn't improve global warming it's bound to make us a little healthier not sucking car fumes all day...but some people are getting nuts about this...*coughing*Al Gore...oh and on the opposite side of the coin we have the republican that is completely dismissing that it even exists at all....a hoax he calls it.



rskenderian -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/4/2007 10:52:47 PM)

A/all;

USA military in Mid-East for the past dozen years. i think opium and oil are the two most profitable re-usable consumer goods, and the powers behind the USA now control those goods with a deft move to use the USA military to simply "take" it.

But the move does indicate that oil is known to be at a critical level, and who-ever owns the last of the oil has all-mighty military might. Those who dictate the USA military now own all the remaining oil, and are therefore now all-mighty. It is already done.

So, it looks like we'll be switching to some other form of energy anyway .... at soon as the oil reserves drop low enough to only fuel the USA military indefinitely; in the meantime, it's still enormously profitable.

There is nothing that anyone can do about this - unless your military is bigger and better than the USA military.

Blame:
not blame, but Human.

The concept of the Public Commons; the first duty of the government is to protect the Public Commons ... not only for the public, but from the public.

If We are to be more than animals called "homo-sapiens" and rise to be "Human", then that pretty much dictates our responsibility.

The choice is up to the individual: What kind of world do you really want to live in?

However, in being Human, we HAVE to understand that our activity is not good for the planet, and be responsible. Therefore, your choice of "What kind of world do you wish to live in?" is no longer valid, and is to be removed as a right or even option. If you are Human, you will say "A Human world", and do accordingly, and if you are an animal you will say "A selfish world," and do accordingly.

The Human Race can't afford animal mentality any longer; it is obviously critical, regardless of blame. Accepting responsibility is Human. Blame - so that you can continue to be selfish and irresponsible - is animal. The only thing that matters is that all courses of action should be taken, and that requires all our resources. So, the individual (democracy) doesn't get to decide (vote) any more. In Gor (no, not Al Gore), it should be noted that the author sees people as completely incompetent to govern themselves, so in order to create the world he did, the author did us 'humans' a very dirty prick; He made 'insects' govern us, instead.
Yes, Goreans, You have been unwittingly snided to the max by Your Own Creator. You are so incompetent and selfish, that you require insects to govern you. The entire world takes place within that context. But, i do think the Author was thinking about all people, and this world.

So, if you still believe in democracy, i don't, nor do i think it exists.  Everything is out of your hands now. It's pointless to even debate, since Someone In Charge has decided to take matters into their own hands, as is evidenced by the usage of the entire USA military in the Mid-East for over a decade. Oil and Opiates. That really isn't an accident.

Capitalism ensures that eventually all power will end up in the hands of one will.  Somehow, the anti-trust and trade laws protecting against this have been circumnavigated behind closed doors, as is obviously going to happen, every time, inevitably.

When you look at what real freedoms we have, they mean nothing in regards to the decision-making regarding the running of this world. The fact that it has to be pointed out that there have been the lamest excuses for the past dozen years fed to the global public about why the USA military "is not" taking over the Mid-East, is indicative that the success of that will to do so is conclusive, that Stage One is complete, and that Stage Two is already underway - whatever that might be, it doesn't matter.

So, the best each person can do is opt to be Human in all respects, and as responsible in all respects; this way everyone will suffer less the changes that need to - and will - be done ... and are being done right now. Decisions are already being made as to who and what to sacrifice. Note New Orleans. i don't believe in accidents and coincidences made by this Government; i do believe in utter and absolute competence, and the appearance of accidents and coincidences for the public to believe.
Obviously, the New Orleans horror at such human sacrifice is exactly that. The decision to sacrifice undesirable people, so that desirable people can survive. You, nor i, have anything to do with these choices and decisions any longer.

Accept this, become Human and responsible, and you won't need to be sacrificed as undesirable. Not everyone gets to make it - if We are, in fact, going to be that anomaly in history; the 'dead weight' needs to be dumped so we can make the progress necessary. Yes, by every means, the Human Race is absolutely smart enough to survive.
It is painful that not everyone is Human enough to come along, but have to be left behind; but, ultimately, that is - after all - their choice about what kind of world they want to live in. Your own actions state that choice, nobody makes that choice for you. If you are selected for sacrifice because of your choice, well, i can only say "Goodbye". Because i can't stand this world, and i would like a much better one - and that means people who have insufficient Human traits simply can't be allowed their freedoms anymore, and they are always the first to be sacrificed; since really, in order for Humanity to survive, they have to be the ones who don't make it to the 'next Crustacean' period. Humans have to be that smart, and understand the truth, and not let those who will prevent our survival, survive to prevent our survival. They just gotta go.

Now, that's all anyone needs to know about contemporary events. If you can't believe what's going on, that's what's going on.

Outright selection cannot be made at this time, so 'accidents' and 'incompetence' will have to do for now - "What a shameful loss."
But "loss" it must be.

As an artist, you spend your entire life trying to clarify yourself so you can see what is really there in front of your eyes - without yourself getting in the way. Prior to the ability to do that, the artist is engaged in "art therapy", so they can identify what is themselves getting in the way, so that portion of themselves can be known, isolated, and removed. Those monolithic achievements are by those artists who succeeded in doing this, and who's works draw forth, from the noise of life, the truth to stun us silent with.

CM has too many extraordinary people in this community, and it really is my honor and privilege to be here - i've never come across a community anywhere like this; it would really be a shame for those here to be sacrificed unwittingly in the wheels of evolution and survival. The level of personal actualization of the people in this community should already be very familiar with 'blame', and just how far that doesn't get you.

- richard "puppy"



Sinergy -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/4/2007 11:09:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rskenderian

So, it looks like we'll be switching to some other form of energy anyway .... at soon as the oil reserves drop low enough to only fuel the USA military indefinitely; in the meantime, it's still enormously profitable.



You might be interested in reading the book "American Theocracy."  While the primary point of the book was a scholar who decided to study the Republican party and was completely disillusioned by what he say, the backing information is fascinating.

Spain controlled the world while the gold and silver flowed from the new world.

The Dutch controlled the world by harnessing wind and water.

The British economy ruled when they discovered the use of coal.

The United States is the primary world power based on an oil economy.

But oil is running out, and China is becoming the lead country on the planet figuring out coal gasification, hydroelectric, geothermal, energy storage, etc., technologies.  More importantly, China is modifying their military to use alternate forms of energy to oil.

When the US runs out of oil and are caught with our pants down, guess who takes over as the dominant world power?  In the 1960s, starting with Kennedy (a Democrat, for those playing the home game) the government put a lot of money into education, research, technology, and made the United States the major player in those fields.

Every Republican administration since then has systematically dismantled our commitment to education and science.

Sinergy



rskenderian -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/5/2007 12:29:54 AM)

Hi Sinergy,

Things do get more complicated, i agree. But it ends up being very difficult to second-guess what goes on behind closed doors.

It is quite possible that the USA is being sacrificed as a democracy, in favor of China, which is already nicely set up with the appropriate individualism controls and  appropriate government.

The entire USA is certainly a nuisance - except for its current value as a consumerism - regarding the future. A lot of work has to be done to overcome this 'disillusionment' of freedom and rights Americans have. But, there is, in place right now, a series of programs designed to reduce and eliminate American Rights. These programs are extremely successful.

There's another thread here about the loss of Constitutional Rights - which i've experienced first-hand, and which is undeniably an extroverted program put in  motion by this government. Those in power are so enormously confident, they aren't even bothering to hide this objective or those actions. Rights - men's rights - are being stomped on and tossed out the window with total impunity at this time by the police and by the courts. In Germany there is an uprising of men to 'reclaim' mens' rights. There is an actual movement there. In the USA, that's not happening, nor can i see it ever happening. i don't think i'm under-estimating the general public on this one, somehow. Further, women love it, and are taking the fullest advantage of it, so men are blaming women on the situation, instead of fingering the government which is fueling it.
The fact that what is happening to men is extremely personal and is often personally devastating only works better to serve the government's purpose. i know too many men going through divorces and those divorces are more brutal than ever, with, in every case, every woman trying to take everything and to simply legally stomp the man with everything and every law available which allows them to. The men i know all know too many men going through this now, too.

The purpose of the infringement of Rights by Western Governments, is to create a simple 'divide-and-conquer' scenario, pitting empowered women against dis-empowered men using the judicial branch - police, law, courts. There is extremely powerful 'marketing' going on in media advertising to this effect as well, and TV shows are produced exactly for this purpose of furthering the schism between women and men - which is evident to me, having began my publishing and advertising career at 13 years old.

So, You're saying that the Republican regime is anti-USA, and its interests lie in infrastructural sabotage? That would make sense, since American Republicanism tends to be fascist, and would naturally pact with China's fascism (fascism/socialism = no individual rights,which is all that matters).

Certainly democracy is in the way, and certainly the powers-that-be are using very effective means to destroy democracy and personal rights in the USA. But, whether there is an alliance with China or whether China is a separate, vying power, i don't know for certain.

It is too difficult to second-guess what's going on behind those deep, closed doors; and even those behind those doors may not be privy to what's going on behind other, deeper closed doors ...

We do see what's happening, but i cannot discern the full plan - there's too many variables i can never know about - and there's no real reason to, because, as i mentioned;
it's too late anyways. It's already done.

That much, at least, is evident to me. It's possible the the USA military is being used to secure oil for China's ascent. It's difficult to know exactly, but easy to know it's something.

So, yes, we see the "somethings" that are going on, but exactly what is going to be the outcome... well ... do You know?

- richard "wolf-puppy"



Real0ne -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/5/2007 9:18:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rskenderian

So, yes, we see the "somethings" that are going on, but exactly what is going to be the outcome... well ... do You know?

- richard "wolf-puppy"


People today just listen to the wrong music, here is one of many:

There's something happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware

I think it's time we stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

There's battle lines being drawn
Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people speaking their minds
Getting so much resistance from behind

I think it's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

What a field-day for the heat
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly say, hooray for our side

It's time we stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away

We better stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, now, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
Stop, children, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
--- Buffalo Springfield

That question has been answered in these threads many times:
search for Hegelian Dialectic.  (as applied to mass medai control.)

The problem of course is that this whole country is rolling along full speed ahead damn the torpedoes, they are all intrinsically tied into to the news media via tv where and "expect" the news media to put things into perspective for them rather than think for themselves.  The more a person depends on scholars to develope an opinion "for them" the less they use their own minds to ascertain any given situation and trees always manage to get in the ways of the forest.

Unfortunately it takes one of a couple things to break this cycle.  Pain, in that someone close gets hurt by an oppressor, or cut ones self off from the news media study and derive your own opinions as you obvioulsy have. BRAVO!!!

i totally agree with your views on government incompetance.  The american people have such big egos that we cannot admit our gov fucked us and continue to fuck us to our own demise.  Head in the sand ignorance is bliss.  Americans, headstrong are incapable of waking up till things get really sore back there.

We let teh government get away with it.  The whole world can see this and see it for what it is.  except us.   We are hostages of our own government.

You might want to take a peek at alex jones sight prison planet.  he is fighting like hell to wake people up, but this country has been so dumbed down that people are simply to ignorant to know and to busy to care.



Griswold -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/5/2007 4:10:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HydroMaster

I'm going to stick by my usual global warming arguement.  The temperature of his planet has veried widley from sweltering heat to ice ages for billions of years.  I don't recall ever hearing about SUV's in the fossil record to explain the cause (that would be because, the fossil record doesn't generally include GM or FORD AND THAT WOULD BE ... BECAUSE THE FOSSIL RECORD GENERALLY IS ASSUMED TO COVER THOSE EVENTS THAT OCCURED WHEN THERE WERE FOSSILS!!!!!). 

I'm not saying we don't have at least a part in the cause but honestly how big of a influence has our industrial presence really made.  (A lot).  I'm all for reducing CO's.  Even if it doesn't improve global warming it's bound to make us a little healthier not sucking car fumes all day (agreed) ...but some people are getting nuts about this...*coughing*Al Gore...oh and on the opposite side of the coin we have the republican that is completely dismissing that it even exists at all....a hoax he calls it.


The "Republican" is wrong....the Republicans are wrong.

Your premise is weak.

Of course the temperature has varied widely.

Are you a weak knee'd sissy boy?

Do you have no concept of reality?

The world is changing.  It's currently growing hotter.  A smidge.  That whole tornado thing...and that snow shit where it didn't belong...just a bunch of weird shit...crazy motherfucking weather.

It's really immaterial as to why...could be sunspots (they've been growing a smidge stronger lately).

It could be our magnetic field.  Some say it's growing stronger.  Some say it's growing weaker...all I can tell you is...a pack of Marlboros is $6.25 where I live...and I swear to GOD!!!! When they get to $300,000.00 a pack...I'm gonna fucking QUIT!!!!

Fuck those bastards.

But in the meantime...we're fucking up the dance.

We really are.

It doesn't make a motherfucking bit of difference how you play this tune....we gave it a shot (but we kind of fucked up a few things along the way)..

And we can change our input.

We can change how we participate.

We can make a difference.  It may not end up being enough....but we can contribute.

The time is over to debate whether or not this is happening....moreover...who's at fault.

It's happening.

That decision has been made.  We voted...with our carbons....

How do we contribute from this point forward?

That's the more important question.



Real0ne -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/5/2007 7:21:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Griswold
How do we contribute from this point forward?

That's the more important question.


So have you bought a pedal bike or a horse yet or are you doing the reverend al thing?



Sinergy -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/5/2007 7:49:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rskenderian

So, You're saying that the Republican regime is anti-USA, and its interests lie in infrastructural sabotage? That would make sense, since American Republicanism tends to be fascist, and would naturally pact with China's fascism (fascism/socialism = no individual rights,which is all that matters).



I am not really saying that, rskenderian.

I tend to live by the idea that it is important not to ascribe evil intention to something that blithering idiocy can explain.

In this case, evidence of a lack of cerebral fortitude on the part of those in charge is so rife, that I am not sure I can call these people evil.

Sinergy



rskenderian -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/6/2007 8:48:17 AM)

lol, Sinergy

"richard" is fine, as "rskenderian" is just my name - "Richard Skenderian".

But, isn't there something about never underestimating the enemy?
OF course, if You do that, there really is no end to the paranoia.
Maybe You've hit upon a good subscription.

CSN&Y is where i've heard that song.
Tremendous band. Time for a revival.

"Almost...
Cut my hair
Happened just the other day
[like it always does]
It was like i had the flu for Christmas
[aaaallll aloooone agaaiin]
and I wasn't feeling up to par...
[gets to you and weakens you]"
-CSN&Y

i almost cut my hair. It happened just the other day. But, it only increases my paranoia - like looking in the mirror and seeing a Police car.
But i won't ...
give an inch ...
of Freedom.
And i do feel like letting my 'Freak Flag' fly...
'Cause
I feel
Like i owe it
To Someone
and
I feel
Like i owe it
To Something.

That happened to me, just the other day. Again.
- richard "puppy"



samboct -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/6/2007 10:19:27 AM)

May I throw out an alternate viewpoint (and respectfully disagree with FirmKY)?

The debate over global warming is now effectively irrelevant.  It doesn't matter whether it's real or not- but the economic consequences of not doing anything about are becoming abundantly clear (from the US perspective anyway.)  Most of the argument around global warming is political- based on a faulty economic premise to whit: that by not signing the Kyoto protocol and largely ignoring any real attempt to displace existing power generating/fuel providing companies, the US would be in a better economic position than the countries that are spending money to combat a non-existant threat.  This was a fallacious argument when it was first advanced decades ago although the costs are still not yet apparent to most people.  Often the argument takes the form that the US economy is tied to energy consumption- that growth in the economy requires an increase in energy consumption.  While there is a relationship between energy consumption and economic growth, it certainly isn't causal.  Western Europe and Japan have shown that it is possible to have increased GDP along with either neutral or declining energy consumption, thus this relationship should be examined more closely.  As a guess, I suspect that increased GDP in the US led to a migration to the suburbs which has fueled increased energy consumption, not increased industrial output.  Consider that a chunk of our industrial output is based on the production of silicon chips which in contrast to steel making or automotive production, require far less energy.  As more people work in offices rather than in factories, industrial energy requirements declined.  Thus, the link between energy production and GDP in the US is NOT causal, but rather incidental.

I've been following developments in non-fossil fuels and power storage for over a decade, and there is no disagreement here that our leadership (if you can call it that) has either been abysmal or deliberately counterproductive.

A few points-

1)  The hydrogen economy- lots of hoopla- no real money spent (FY 2005, think it was $30M).  No real progress to date- the storage/transportation problem remains.  Extremely unlikely to be a real solution, certainly not in the next decade.
2)  Clean coal- integrated gasification (IGCC) along with carbon sequestration.  A funding bill of $5.4B recently passed, construction of some 34 plants announced.  Pilot plants have shown no economic benefit compared to existing coal plants -efficiency claims of >50% of IGCC plants compared to 35% of conventional coal plants have not been achieved (and have a materials problem that may be unsolvable.) and operating economics data on the existing plants is very hard to come by.  However, the bill does seem to benefit large existing utilities and powerplant manufacturers.
3)  China is building a 500 MW coal fired plant/wk (50/yr) which do not make use of coal gasification technology.  Coal gasification in China has been developed because oil supplies are limited in China and mining coal is inexpensive compared to the US.  Coal gasification in China is used for chemicals production, whereas the US uses oil for chemicals for the most part, with some natural gas feedstock as well.  The US investment in "clean coal" technology is a poor investment indeed- the costs of carbon sequestration are likely to be enormous. Since there has been no carbon sequestration on the scale being contemplated, the idea that carbon sequestration when added to an IGCC plant will increase costs by 10-20% is laughable.  An argument that costs could increase by a factor of 10-20 is more realistic.  Recall that this is the administration that budgeted how few billions for the Iraq war?
4) The idea that we need a fully interconnected power grid for the US smacks of the idea of collective farming which failed so miserably in the USSR.  The energy distribution in the country varies widely, as does the pattern of power consumption.  A one-size fits all strategy does not make intelligent use of resources, striving instead for non-existant economies of scale.
5)  As an example- the best solution for power generation in the Midwest is wind. The cost of wind power has fallen by a factor of 5 since the 1980s, and the leading two global companies in this $25B business are both located in Germany.  GE has less than 6% of the market.  IIRC, the US was the largest market for new wind power generation last year, but clearly US companies are not reaping the benefits.  Wind  is now probably the least expensive form of power for the Midwestern states. 
6)  Biofuels now supply 25% of Germany's diesel consumption.  Bioethanol from corn (a terrible feedstock) has made the US the largest global producer of ethanol, but Brazil's production is more efficient.  Again, US R+ D in this arena has been next to nothing.  Global power production from biomass is also increasing quickly, but not in the US.
7)  The largest global producer of solar photovoltaics is Sharp in Japan, with some 600 MW of the 1,600 MW global production capacity.  No US companies currently challenge the market dominance of Japanese firms.  Note that Germany has 8x the installed solar PV capacity of the US, however, some of the largest installations are thermosolar.  Spain leads the world in this technology, although there is a 400MW thermosolar plant in the Mojave that has been in operation for some 20 years.  Note that for decades, the US lead the world in solar R+D with NREL in Golden Colorado, established after the first energy crisis in 1973, but left to languish in the Reagan administration, and threatened with closing by the current Bush administration.
8)  Nuclear- often touted as the only current technology capable of alleviating the global warming crisis- there are some two dozen plants around the world that are currently under production, many of which were mothballed or left unfinished in the 1970-s1980s.  There are less than half a dozen modern nuclear plants (so called Gen 3) being built in Asia.  The economics of nuclear no longer necessarily beat wind and other alternatives, and these plants have extremely high shutdown costs and capital expense- especially with variable construction schedules.

Summary- so called alternative energy sources, solar, wind, and biomass are becoming mainstream rapidly.  Growth in solar manufacturing capability exceeds 40% AAGR- while wind and biomass both exceed 20% AAGR.  These technologies are "hockey sticking" but the US is failing to benefit from most of this economic growth since most of the manufacturing in these technologies is being carried out outside the US.  Thus, the supposed economic benefit of the US of ignoring the perils of global warming has lead rather to an economic deficit by failing to establish quickly these growing industries domestically.

Sam




luckydog1 -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/6/2007 10:54:42 AM)

Samboct, you make some interesting points, but I am not sure I buy some of them.  for example,"As more people work in offices rather than in factories, industrial energy requirements declined."  That is true, however the power required to run an office went up, signifacntly.  And maintianing the Net Infrastructure requires a lot of energy, and we now have them in our homes making energy go up, ect.  Does West Europe and Japanctually have a declining or stable energy consumption.  Are you just refering to Catron output or total energy used.  They get better Carbon numbers by using Nuclear energy on a massive scale, not a good idea in my opinion.  And we do not manufacture many windmills ect for the same reason we manufacture so little in general.  Labor costs, regulatory costs, and NIMBY.  Making a Solar cell is incredibly toxic.  I really agree with your point 4, the national Grid is a stupid idea.  I am very glad my state is not connected to it.



Lordandmaster -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/6/2007 12:07:41 PM)

A very good post--but it IS real.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070406/ap_on_sc/superior_warming;_ylt=ArOp5m5E3skPXsYgliNRzssiANEA

Summer surface temperatures on Lake Superior are 4.5 degrees higher than they were in 1979.  That's not real?

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

The debate over global warming is now effectively irrelevant.  It doesn't matter whether it's real or not- but the economic consequences of not doing anything about are becoming abundantly clear (from the US perspective anyway.)



samboct -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/6/2007 12:12:28 PM)

Lucky Dog

Hmm, let's try some other numbers then-
At the turn of the century, many economies were measured in terms of their steel output, including the US.  Looking at the cost of steel, it's basically held steady at around $1.25-$2/lb for the last 60 years.  (Some recent spikes due to demand from China.)  This is in actual dollars, not inflation adjusted.  Both the volume of steel and its percentage of the US economy have declined during this time frame, which has left steel manufacturers in a very dismal position.  Steel remains one of the basic components of durable goods however, which translates to the fact that durable goods are a decreasing part of our economy.

Your point is well taken however, in that I don't know how much energy input per worker a steel mill required, but I suspect that it's a heck of a lot more than the average computer (which needs what- 100-200 watts/hr?)  However, the statistics I've seen out of DOE do show declining industrial usage of energy, while residential use of energy has climbed dramatically- a function of larger homes and more electronics.  Gasoline useage has also continued to climb- pretty much nonstop since the 1930s with a little blip for the 1970s.  Again, this isn't due to increased durable goods production, but rather increased commuting distances and the transition to aircraft and trucking versus rail/water for shipping.

In terms of Western Europe/Japan- IIRC- their energy requirements have shown either little or no growth over time (decades) while GDP increased between 4-10% during this time period- and all of the numbers I've seen out of DOE don't look at carbon output- this is just straight energy production.  Also- while France has ~ 70% of energy production from nuclear power, Germany does not.  And Sweden is busy mothballing existing nuclear construction.  Japan may be increasing it's reliance on nuclear- don't know, but I do know that it's less than France. 

Some of us would say that lack of domestic mfg capability is also a function of national policies as well as the constraints you mentioned.

One disagreement however- I think the idea that solar cell mfg is incredibly toxic is something of a red herring.  Some of the nasty compounds involved in solar cells such as cadmium are actually in a complex with tellurium, which reduces the toxicity markedly.  Furthermore, the volumes of these materials required is actually pretty small-they're rather expensive and you only need thin (measured in nanometers) films.  If we contrast the volume of mercury released from coal combustion, or the ongoing bellyache of nuclear waste, solar is downright attractive environmentally. It's important to focus on what can actually work- there's often a tendency to pick apart a technology which isn't perfect.  I think it was Plato who commented that sometimes the perfect is the enemy of the good- something that you have to be careful about in this field.  It lead to a lot of wasted time on hydrogen which was touted as having no detrimental environmental impact (true depending on source) but since it's so impractical at this point, waiting for it is a disaster.

Sam



popeye1250 -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/6/2007 2:09:46 PM)

Anyone who believes in this "global warming" stuff does their cause no good by allying themselves with the "U.N."
I just shut off their argument.



Real0ne -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/6/2007 2:38:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

Anyone who believes in this "global warming" stuff does their cause no good by allying themselves with the "U.N."
I just shut off their argument.


well that is a 2 way street you know?   the un wants more control over the world as a whole too which all helps to validate the nwo or better said the nwg.



samboct -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/6/2007 6:37:43 PM)

Have to make an addendum to my point #6.  Biodiesel is not 25% of German supply, it's closer to 10%.  Gotta yell at a prof for the fumble- and dopey me for not checking his numbers myself.

Sam



luckydog1 -> RE: Global warming....etc. (4/6/2007 7:00:23 PM)

Samboct, I checked on Europeon energy usage.  According to the EIA, "In 2004, total energy production in Europe was 2.4 quadrillion Btu higher than in 1994 (Table F.1). Gains between 1994 and 2004 were greatest for natural gas, 2.6 quadrillion Btu, nuclear electric power generation, 1.4 quadrillion Btu, and geothermal, solar, wind and wood and waste electric power, 1.0 quadrillion Btu (Tables F.4, F.7, and F.8, )."  Here is a link to a chart breaking it down.   http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tablef1.xls  So your claim that their energy usage is flat/declining is simply not true.  Also we must remeber that the USA has a rapidly growing population, while Europe does not.

Also there is no issue with storage/transport of hydrogen.  You treat it exactly like Natural gas or Propane.

I think the constraints I mentioned are part of our national policies.

I agree it is very important to not let the Perfect be the enemy of the good.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875