ADVERTISEMENT

Global Climate Changes

Tskware said:
Of course, but to many, climate change is just liberal commie BS started by the UN and Al Gore, so any steps at all to address the issue, even a smart phased in approach, are just a colossal waste of time and money. My view is that if you don't even acknowledge it as a problem, hard to have a dialogue.
Click to expand...
We aren't talking about a smart phased approach. They are eliminating gas vehicles by 2030 and killing our domestic oil production to increase fossil fuel prices enough to force people to switch to renewables.... The problem is that China, India and others aren't going to slit their throats and we will suffer economically if this doesn't 100% pay off. Modern agriculture is based on fertilizers that are based on petrol. We cannot feed the world if we shut off 50% of our fertilizer production.

Do you intend to kill yourself when the famines start or do you plan to wait and see who else dies first?
 
  • Like
Reactions: roguemocha and Lost In FL
hmt5000 said:
We aren't talking about a smart phased approach. They are eliminating gas vehicles by 2030 and killing our domestic oil production to increase fossil fuel prices enough to force people to switch to renewables.... The problem is that China, India and others aren't going to slit their throats and we will suffer economically if this doesn't 100% pay off. Modern agriculture is based on fertilizers that are based on petrol. We cannot feed the world if we shut off 50% of our fertilizer production.

Do you intend to kill yourself when the famines start or do you plan to wait and see who else dies first?
Click to expand...
Not going to argue but will ask who are "they", how are "they" eliminating gas vehicles in 8 years, and how are "they" killing our domestic oil production?
 
Global Climate Change is an enormous problem which is now high on the list at the Department of Defense as an ongoing risk. Here is a link to DODs risk analysis:


As pointed out above by some however the US can't solve this problem on it's own and the big polluters like China and India have to start increasing alt energy to their energy mix. My own personal opinion however is that GCC will not be seriously addressed by treaties, it will only be seriously addressed when alt fuels become more economically advantageous than tradition fossil fuel sources. The good news is, things like solar panels are becoming technologically more efficient, and lower in cost every year so we are close to and are reaching the point in some areas, where utilities are opting for solar, wind, geothermal etc. over coal fired steam plants.

In the end however the alt energy industry is a win/win situation. It's a burgeoning industry that will continue to employ many more people than the mining and fossil fuel combustion industry, therefore I see it has an economic opportunity, not an economic burden. The country that leads the way will own the next couple of decades economically IMO.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: P19978, ThroughBlue, Kingseve1 and 1 other person
Caveman Catfan said:
An “unexpected” 14 degree drop in temperature between 2003 and 2018. Neptune’s 40 earth-year summer is confusing researchers. They expected a gradual increase in temperatures. Then, between 2018 and 2020, there was a raise by 20 degrees. This kind of polar warming has never been seen on Neptune until now. Neptune’s average temp is a chilly -340 degree Fahrenheit. Researchers still don’t know what is causing the temperature shifts.
Click to expand...
Got to be the SUVs and cow farts on Neptune.
 
Blue_2_the_bone said:
That’s the issue. The left doesn’t want to slowly phase things out. They want to do it rapidly at the expense of the economy. They always set an unattainable goal, jump head first, hurt bystanders, & make excuses about why it didn’t work. They did the same with Race to the Top, Common Core Standards and ESSA in education.
Click to expand...
Kinda like Marxism. Trying it over and over and when it inevitably fails, "well it didn't work because it wasn't true marxism."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blue_2_the_bone and sefus12
Tskware said:
Of course, but to many, climate change is just liberal commie BS started by the UN and Al Gore, so any steps at all to address the issue, even a smart phased in approach, are just a colossal waste of time and money. My view is that if you don't even acknowledge it as a problem, hard to have a dialogue.
Click to expand...
Prove it's actually a problem. Then prove we caused the problem. Then prove how these rushed measures will do anything to help, rather than harm, the environment itself. Wind power is a non starter. It's inefficient, extremely pollutant in terms of sound, and disposable parts(the blades don't degrade). Solar panels have improved, as have batteries, but mining, and disposal of these materials are extremely hazardous to humans and the environment. Go nuclear, fix the grid itself, and then start placing charging stations across the country. Then push for all electrical vehicles. In that order. Otherwise, it's just leftist communist bullshit.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Lost In FL, jmalone7us, wildcatwelder and 7 others
Deeeefense said:
Global Climate Change is an enormous problem which is now high on the list at the Department of Defense as an ongoing risk. Here is a link to DODs risk analysis:


As pointed out above by some however the US can't solve this problem on it's own and the big polluters like China and India have to start increasing alt energy to their energy mix. My own personal opinion however is that GCC will not be seriously addressed by treaties, it will only be seriously addressed when alt fuels become more economically advantageous than tradition fossil fuel sources. The good news is, things like solar panels are becoming technologically more efficient, and lower in cost every year so we are close to and are reaching the point in some areas, where utilities are opting for solar, wind, geothermal etc. over coal fired steam plants.

In the end however the alt energy industry is a win/win situation. It's a burgeoning industry that will continue to employ many more people than the mining and fossil fuel combustion industry, therefore I see it has an economic opportunity, not an economic burden. The country that leads the way will own the next couple of decades economically IMO.
Click to expand...

WaDT.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018
Deeeefense said:
It's a burgeoning industry that will continue to employ many more people than the mining and fossil fuel combustion industry,
Click to expand...

Link?


Are you saying after the rest of the employees are forced out of jobs due to Govt mandates? Although as FJB said....they can learn to code.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kaizer Sosay
Deeeefense said:
Global Climate Change is an enormous problem which is now high on the list at the Department of Defense as an ongoing risk. Here is a link to DODs risk analysis:

Click to expand...

The foreword of the study is by Lloyd Austin. The same inept politician who determined the second most enormous problem for the US Military is all of the white-supremacists in its ranks. I wouldnt believe that clown if he said last Sunday was Easter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lost In FL, IdaCat and PhDcat2018
DrH. Lecter said:
Link?


Are you saying after the rest of the employees are forced out of jobs due to Govt mandates? Although as FJB said....they can learn to code.
Click to expand...
All I'm saying is alt energy is exploding as the country and the world transition from fossil fuels and there are economic opportunities associated with that.

​

This is from 2017 it's more than that now:

www.forbes.com

Solar Employs More People In U.S. Electricity Generation Than Oil, Coal And Gas Combined

In the United States, more people were employed in solar power than traditional coal, gas and oil energy combined last year.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
 
Deeeefense said:
All I'm saying is alt energy is exploding as the country and the world transition from fossil fuels and there are economic opportunities associated with that.

​

This is from 2017 it's more than that now:

www.forbes.com

Solar Employs More People In U.S. Electricity Generation Than Oil, Coal And Gas Combined

In the United States, more people were employed in solar power than traditional coal, gas and oil energy combined last year.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Click to expand...
Govt forcing technological changes that aren’t ready yet isn’t good for anyone outside of the companies the govt is filtering money to. Businesses/people will get rich off renewable energy, but forcing utilization before the technology is there will crush the economy, as it’s already starting to do.

Also, any govt who doesn’t push nuclear generation as a major way to lower energy sector emissions isn’t really serious about lowering emissions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bertfan31 and PhDcat2018
sefus12 said:
Govt forcing technological changes that aren’t ready yet isn’t good for anyone outside of the companies the govt is filtering money to. Businesses/people will get rich off renewable energy, but forcing utilization before the technology is there will crush the economy, as it’s already starting to do.

Also, any govt who doesn’t push nuclear generation as a major way to lower energy sector emissions isn’t really serious about lowering emissions.
Click to expand...
How do you think government is making us switch to technology that isn't there? Government has had emission standards on utilities for decades, utilities are making the decision to switch to more economic and cleaner alt sources of power production like solar, wind and nat gas which is cheaper to meet compliance than putting a ton of money into ancient coal-fired steam plants to make them more compliant.

Utilities make decision based on economics, individuals in the sun belt are putting solar panels on their roofs because it's cheaper long term, people are buying EVs for the same reason. These are individual decisions that people and business make not because government is making them.
 
Deeeefense said:
All I'm saying is alt energy is exploding as the country and the world transition from fossil fuels and there are economic opportunities associated with that.

​

This is from 2017 it's more than that now:

www.forbes.com

Solar Employs More People In U.S. Electricity Generation Than Oil, Coal And Gas Combined

In the United States, more people were employed in solar power than traditional coal, gas and oil energy combined last year.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Click to expand...
It looks like the study is in need of context. It says several times that the additional jobs, the majority of which are found in the construction industry. Building the new facilities etc.... and infrastructure required. Those are TEMPORARY but make for a great headline for headline readers.

I had this same conversation with a dishonest reporter (sorry for being redundant) from the CJ who at the time had written a front page headline and article using the same argument....large increase in jobs associated with LG&E conversion of the old coal plant to NG. The jobs were temporary construction jobs.

I asked why he didn't make that clear which just angered him. I also asked, will the new NG version of the plant employ more or fewer people once it is online. He admitted fewer are required for the NG version. I then asked, where does the NG come from. He said a pipeline from LA and TX. I said where does the current coal come from....KY on barges.

So I asked, what happens to the LGE employees who will lose their jobs with the fewer required? He said KU/LGE at least didn't say they should "learn to code" like Biden suggested happen. They said they could move to work at other KU plants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thornie1
DrH. Lecter said:
The same that caused the majority of temp rise on the planet from 1900 thru 1950. The sun.
Click to expand...
Id say that there were factors that led to those changes in temperature though. I don’t know much about this topic at all. I just know that climate has been changing since before humans were around. I’m sure stuff we do contributes to it, I just wonder how much. Maybe we contribute a lot. Idk. I would just like to know why we assume we are the cause of climate change if it has been changing, essentially, forever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lamar Card and PhDcat2018
Deeeefense said:
How do you think government is making us switch to technology that isn't there? Government has had emission standards on utilities for decades, utilities are making the decision to switch to more economic and cleaner alt sources of power production like solar, wind and nat gas which is cheaper to meet compliance than putting a ton of money into ancient coal-fired steam plants to make them more compliant.

Utilities make decision based on economics, individuals in the sun belt are putting solar panels on their roofs because it's cheaper long term, people are buying EVs for the same reason. These are individual decisions that people and business make not because government is making them.
Click to expand...

Do you recall that the Govt made incandescent bulbs illegal? How about limiting the capacity of the water in toilets. The govt will force us out of SUVs with mileage standards before the battery tech is there.

Tax credits to "bribe" us into buying a Tesla will go away. Elon Musk is the richest man on the planet largely because his company "never" made a profit but was supported by tax credits.

I think the messaging is the biggest problem. Take away the tree hugging save the planet BS and change the argument to SAVE MONEY....I'm all on board. I hated those horrible early pigtail lightbulbs but in time the LED bulbs became good and save me money. That is what I want, not smug preaching how doing so will keep Polar Bears from drowning. The messaging is pathetic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018 and JumperJack
WonderBraa said:
Id say that there were factors that led to those changes in temperature though. I don’t know much about this topic at all. I just know that climate has been changing since before humans were around. I’m sure stuff we do contributes to it, I just wonder how much. Maybe we contribute a lot. Idk. I would just like to know why we assume we are the cause of climate change if it has been changing, essentially, forever.
Click to expand...
You can look it up. It is generally agreed, even among the greenies, that solar output caused the majority of global "warming" for the first 50 years of the last century. But the dishonest left includes those years in the "manmade" stats that they produce. All the while their predictions go badly wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018
Deeeefense said:
How do you think government is making us switch to technology that isn't there? Government has had emission standards on utilities for decades, utilities are making the decision to switch to more economic and cleaner alt sources of power production like solar, wind and nat gas which is cheaper to meet compliance than putting a ton of money into ancient coal-fired steam plants to make them more compliant.

Utilities make decision based on economics, individuals in the sun belt are putting solar panels on their roofs because it's cheaper long term, people are buying EVs for the same reason. These are individual decisions that people and business make not because government is making them.
Click to expand...
What do you think renewable generation mandates are? How successful are the more advanced state programs in places like CA and MA? Utilities are making these decisions because the state says they have to, whether the tech is ready or not. Get ready to see more issues with generation not meeting demand and the big price spikes that result. That’s not good for businesses unless you are the one getting money to build govt mandated renewable generation.

Renewable generation/battery storage will be great when the technology is here, but forcing cheap and reliable generation offline in order to force technology that isn’t ready is idiotic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018
sefus12 said:
What do you think renewable generation mandates are? How successful are the more advanced state programs in places like CA and MA? Utilities are making these decisions because the state says they have to, whether the tech is ready or not. Get ready to see more issues with generation not meeting demand and the big price spikes that result. That’s not good for businesses unless you are the one getting money to build govt mandated renewable generation.

Renewable generation/battery storage will be great when the technology is here, but forcing cheap and reliable generation offline in order to force technology that isn’t ready is idiotic.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the transformation to alt energy, including some that require technological advancement won't come without some glitches and I don't doubt your citing of some over regulatory burden will need to be dealt with. But big picture over time all technology evolves and energy is no exception, the kinks will work themselves out over time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kingseve1
Deeeefense said:
I'm sure the transformation to alt energy, including some that require technological advancement won't come without some glitches and I don't doubt your citing of some over regulatory burden will need to be dealt with. But big picture over time all technology evolves and energy is no exception, the kinks will work themselves out over time.
Click to expand...
Govt mandates don’t equal kinks. These mandates will destroy jobs and entire industries while killing an energy advantage US manufacturing had. The private sector and govt will figure renewable energy out in time. Forcing it is the govt choosing winners and losers while hurting everyone except the chosen winners. Pretty simple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: runningbears, PhDcat2018 and cole854
DrH. Lecter said:
You can look it up. It is generally agreed, even among the greenies, that solar output caused the majority of global "warming" for the first 50 years of the last century. But the dishonest left includes those years in the "manmade" stats that they produce. All the while their predictions go badly wrong.
Click to expand...

"Sunspot data indicate there was a small increase in the amount of incoming sunlight between the late 1800s and the mid-1900s that experts estimate contributed to at most up to 0.1°C of the 1.0°C (1.8°F) of warming observed since the pre-industrial era. However, there has been no significant net change in the Sun’s energy output from the late 1970s to the present, which is when we have observed the most rapid global warming."

"We find that climate models published over the past five decades were generally quite accurate in predicting global warming in the years after publication, particularly when accounting for differences between modeled and actual changes in atmospheric CO2 and other climate drivers."

The deniers had gotten pretty quiet for a few years, after their supposed "pause" ended and we shot up to new record highs. It does seem like as time goes on, we get less and less "it's not happening" or "we're not causing it" and more "it's not really that bad" and "there's nothing we can do about it."
 
Deeeefense said:
But big picture over time all technology evolves and energy is no exception, the kinks will work themselves out over time.
Click to expand...

"Over time"....how much time and at what cost? I suppose we can all just go out and put in skylights, windmills, and buy electric cars....the kinks will work themselves out.....over time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sefus12
ganner918 said:
The deniers had gotten pretty quiet for a few years, after their supposed "pause" ended and we shot up to new record highs. It does seem like as time goes on, we get less and less "it's not happening" or "we're not causing it" and more "it's not really that bad" and "there's nothing we can do about it."
Click to expand...

I have noticed that trend as well.

As for the example of KU switching to NG, instead of coal, I can agree that producing a ton of coal is more labor intensive than the equivalent energy output of NG, but if NG is cheaper, and it burns cleaner, what do you want KU to do, keep buying the more expensive dirtier energy source just to save some jobs for a handful of years in the coal fields, until they are completely mined out? That is total opposite of capitalism.

And as renewables get more plentiful and the kinks continue to be worked out, they will continue to get more and more cost effective, and then NG won't be the choice either, and once the renewable is built, there will be less jobs in NG as well. But that same advance has occurred in a thousand different ways throughout history, in coal mining, in farming, in manufacturing, robots now build cars, not people, that can't be avoided.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Deeeefense
cole854 said:
"Over time"....how much time and at what cost? I suppose we can all just go out and put in skylights, windmills, and buy electric cars....the kinks will work themselves out.....over time.
Click to expand...

It won't be easy and it won't necessarily be cheap, or cheaper, in the short run. But first we have to agree that climate change is a serious problem that has to be addressed. But as I stated earlier in this thread, if there is no fundamental agreement on that point, then there is no real chance for dialogue.
 
No amount of technological evolution can overcome basic physics and chemistry. There is simply orders of magnitude greater energy released by breaking the carbon-carbon bonds in oil, coal, and natural gas as compared to wind/solar -- and even the inherent power in fossil fuels pales in comparison to nuclear fission.

Alt/renewables will simply never, ever be able to meet the world's ever-increasing energy demands. It's not even a close call really. They will forever be a minor supplement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhDcat2018
Only one thing will make alternative energy practical.*

* running out of the best energy source (fossil fuels) and that isn't likely to happen for the next 200 plus years.

Necessity is the mother of invention (and of course Frank Zappa)
 
_Mav_ said:
No amount of technological evolution can overcome basic physics and chemistry. There is simply orders of magnitude greater energy released by breaking the carbon-carbon bonds in oil, coal, and natural gas as compared to wind/solar -- and even the inherent power in fossil fuels pales in comparison to nuclear fission.

Alt/renewables will simply never, ever be able to meet the world's ever-increasing energy demands. It's not even a close call really. They will forever be a minor supplement.
Click to expand...

HymanKaplan said:
Only one thing will make alternative energy practical.*

* running out of the best energy source (fossil fuels) and that isn't likely to happen for the next 200 plus years.

Necessity is the mother of invention (and of course Frank Zappa)
Click to expand...

The large majority of new energy installations in the US (~80%) are renewables and the fraction of energy they provide grows yearly. The change won't happen overnight - hasn't that been a big deal in the discussion here lately, that this should happen slowly and not overnight? - but over the past decade non-hydro renewables grew from about 5% to 15% of US energy and the rate of growth increased in recent years. Within another decade renewables look like they'll easily be bigger than either nuclear or coal (which are about 20% and 23% of US energy, respectively).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back