DutchJazzer
Banned
why don't the 60 million people who voted voor killaray clinton do a crowdfunding and show them how it''s done i am sure they can come up with the money usa was gonna pay!
US Pulling Out of Paris Climate Accord
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
[MENTION=54]Beantown[/MENTION]
We should not spend a dime subsidizing power generation from solar. It's a wasteful investment. The technology is still behind where it need to be and it is likely that it will never be more than a relatively small portion of energy production. R&D yes, subsidies for current tech no. Spend that money on a low carbon backbone technology like nuclear. Today we have the technology to replace the 99%. Why should we focus so much on the 1 %. Especially considering that it will likely never approach producing even half our energy needs?
PS if you are connected to the grid then you get most of your energy from fossil fuels. Fact
We should not spend a dime subsidizing power generation from solar. It's a wasteful investment. The technology is still behind where it need to be and it is likely that it will never be more than a relatively small portion of energy production. R&D yes, subsidies for current tech no. Spend that money on a low carbon backbone technology like nuclear. Today we have the technology to replace the 99%. Why should we focus so much on the 1 %. Especially considering that it will likely never approach producing even half our energy needs?
PS if you are connected to the grid then you get most of your energy from fossil fuels. Fact
Beantown
Well-Known Member
#1: We should stop subsidizing big oil companies. That should be your first concern.
#2: Solar technology is behind? There's nothing more archiac then digging up oil and burning it to pollute our air and water. Good hell you're an idiot.
#3: Nuclear is not clean. The amount of waste and water it uses is ridiculous. Not to mention the the cancer issues and safety issues. Ever heard of Fukishima?
#4 Here is how much space is needed to power the entire earth with solar.....
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Some great posts from Bean and Red here.
Lets look at a few things:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lbsbus...be-an-error-of-epic-proportions/#1a5ba1514ffa
Forbes is hardly known as a left-wing anti-business media source. And yet even they say:
Furthermore, does anyone wonder how the GOP devolved from acknowledging climate change and working for legislation for alt energy and cap and trade to 2017 where virtually all of its presidential candidates flat out denied climate change? Could you imagine the outrage from the right today if any of the presidential candidates had spoken like McCain did in 2008?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQMxIwpK_es
The NY Times has a fantastic op-ed for you!
You'll want June 6.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/tuesday-june-6-2017/id1200361736?i=1000386210100&mt=2
Or you can read it at:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/us/politics/republican-leaders-climate-change.html
For those who want the Reader's Digest:
1. In 2008, both major democrats and republicans agreed on climate change legislation. Newt Gingrich and Nancy Pelosi were giving speeches together. Cap and Trade passed the House... But that was right as the Koch Bros, who have massive holdings in fossil fuels, began to ratchet up their anti-climate change campaign.
2. 2010 Citizens United ruling makes it easier for the Kochs to flood our political system with their tainted money. Republicans who did not deny climate change, were blackmailed by their money. Koch think tanks ramped up their anti-climate change rhetoric. Scientists on their payroll began to publish works with hopes to confuse the debate and render the public cynical towards science.
3. 2008-10, President Obama, already being depicted by Republicans for being a dictator, threatens Repubs that if they don't take the necessary steps to pass cap and trade and deal with climate change now, then he would do it via executive order. This only cemented the right's hatred of Obama and severely politicized climate change to the point that legislation to aid in climate change has died. Cap and trade never passed, it died in the senate.
4. Today, we are seeing the full effect of Koch money. The right largely doesn't consider climate change a problem, the president claimed it was a hoax, and we have now sided with Syria against 180 countries (most of them our allies).
Lets look at a few things:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lbsbus...be-an-error-of-epic-proportions/#1a5ba1514ffa
Forbes is hardly known as a left-wing anti-business media source. And yet even they say:
Furthermore, does anyone wonder how the GOP devolved from acknowledging climate change and working for legislation for alt energy and cap and trade to 2017 where virtually all of its presidential candidates flat out denied climate change? Could you imagine the outrage from the right today if any of the presidential candidates had spoken like McCain did in 2008?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQMxIwpK_es
The NY Times has a fantastic op-ed for you!
You'll want June 6.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/tuesday-june-6-2017/id1200361736?i=1000386210100&mt=2
Or you can read it at:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/us/politics/republican-leaders-climate-change.html
For those who want the Reader's Digest:
1. In 2008, both major democrats and republicans agreed on climate change legislation. Newt Gingrich and Nancy Pelosi were giving speeches together. Cap and Trade passed the House... But that was right as the Koch Bros, who have massive holdings in fossil fuels, began to ratchet up their anti-climate change campaign.
2. 2010 Citizens United ruling makes it easier for the Kochs to flood our political system with their tainted money. Republicans who did not deny climate change, were blackmailed by their money. Koch think tanks ramped up their anti-climate change rhetoric. Scientists on their payroll began to publish works with hopes to confuse the debate and render the public cynical towards science.
3. 2008-10, President Obama, already being depicted by Republicans for being a dictator, threatens Repubs that if they don't take the necessary steps to pass cap and trade and deal with climate change now, then he would do it via executive order. This only cemented the right's hatred of Obama and severely politicized climate change to the point that legislation to aid in climate change has died. Cap and trade never passed, it died in the senate.
4. Today, we are seeing the full effect of Koch money. The right largely doesn't consider climate change a problem, the president claimed it was a hoax, and we have now sided with Syria against 180 countries (most of them our allies).
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
The cynicism towards science, knowledge, and anything intellectual continues.
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
The irony level here is too damn high.
I was thinking the same thing.
Well, we have a lot of political people who want to push for change, and the Accord was their program. It didn't really do anything to address climate change, leaving India and China and other nations to burn all they want, while imposing financial burdens on US companies and taxpayers basically for the great cause of redistribution. I can see Wall Street being all for it because of the benefits of having low wages/dirty business located elsewhere, and strong benefits for the cartels/international players.
I've been thinking of a new classification for the folks who study pathological problems humans sometimes exhibit.
I'll call it the Nye Syndrome.
A basic stunted intellect trotted out in front of kiddies to explain the world who morphs into actually becoming self-convinced that "teacher knows it all".
So here's what we have at a glance.
Rockefeller and the smaller club of really big oil cartels running the world, on two basic precepts:
1) Keep a lid on supply/crush the competition. False propaganda on scarcity/uber regulation by wholly-owned government bureaucrats run out to play enforcer on the racket.
2) Use Theirs First. (UFT)
I might have called this stupid, but just because we're stupid to buy it.
The ideas actually fail, not because the Bigs aren't clever and effective, but because there is more C-fuel resources than we ever imagined, and because the UFT project....pump the middle east dry....is effectively meaningless in the scale of real resources.
So it has become necessary to impose a totally false climate narrative on top of it all, just to keep a lid on the market.
But probably the smarter thing that has been happening is using the climate narrative to incentivize technological gains in other energy sources, with the Bigs getting in there first to own the technology..... well, we'll see if anyone can really own technology.... just like we'll see if we can ever really have a basically fascist world government that does not morph into a self-feeding cannibalistic monster.
fundamentally, humans will never have good government unless they---the humans--can be good.
Until then, it's the various brands of attempting fascist controllers one agin the others.
funny seeing the dems start howling about the Russians after a hundred years of preening themselves in the knowledge they are the Ruskies' favs.
Rockefeller and the smaller club of really big oil cartels running the world, on two basic precepts:
1) Keep a lid on supply/crush the competition. False propaganda on scarcity/uber regulation by wholly-owned government bureaucrats run out to play enforcer on the racket.
2) Use Theirs First. (UFT)
I might have called this stupid, but just because we're stupid to buy it.
The ideas actually fail, not because the Bigs aren't clever and effective, but because there is more C-fuel resources than we ever imagined, and because the UFT project....pump the middle east dry....is effectively meaningless in the scale of real resources.
So it has become necessary to impose a totally false climate narrative on top of it all, just to keep a lid on the market.
But probably the smarter thing that has been happening is using the climate narrative to incentivize technological gains in other energy sources, with the Bigs getting in there first to own the technology..... well, we'll see if anyone can really own technology.... just like we'll see if we can ever really have a basically fascist world government that does not morph into a self-feeding cannibalistic monster.
fundamentally, humans will never have good government unless they---the humans--can be good.
Until then, it's the various brands of attempting fascist controllers one agin the others.
funny seeing the dems start howling about the Russians after a hundred years of preening themselves in the knowledge they are the Ruskies' favs.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
#1: We should stop subsidizing big oil companies. That should be your first concern.
#2: Solar technology is behind? There's nothing more archiac then digging up oil and burning it to pollute our air and water. Good hell you're an idiot.
#3: Nuclear is not clean. The amount of waste and water it uses is ridiculous. Not to mention the the cancer issues and safety issues. Ever heard of Fukishima?
#4 Here is how much space is needed to power the entire earth with solar.....
Who cares? What a silly graphic. You are not going to run a continent on batteries while the sun is down. We have to have a backbone of steady reliable power generation. I bet you don't even get all of your power from solar. How many batteries do you have? You claim that you do but it in reality you probably trade your excess clean power for dirty power that you can't get by without. Solar will only ever represent a portion of power generation. Nuclear could replace carbon dirty power. Jesus christ natural gas has done more to reduce emissions in recent years than solar has.
As far as I'm concerned you can shut the **** up about global warming if you are opposed to nuclear power. You are part of the problem.
Fission now, lots of r&d for a fusion future.
CO2e (e means equivalent) is only lower in nat gas by the length of the carbon chains or rings. But CO2 emissions from coal peaked in 2005 and have declined to 1986 levels last I checked (2012). Global CO2 emissions were flatlined from 2014-2016, mostly from gains in the US and China.
You would be shocked at how much lower the other criteria pollutants are in nat gas vs. coal.
green
Well-Known Member
This was written by a conservative who is actually intelligent:
I've said this before, but when did it become so cool on the right to be ignorant? Is it "faith" in something higher that allows them to be so stupid on a topic like this and not worry about it? Do they have too much "faith" in these AM radio blowhards?
How do they no realize that Hannity, Rush, Jones, etc are all actors and are in it for the money? They don't believe a word they sell (especially Rush, he has made it perfectly clear that he is in it for the money).
But whatev's.