That's why we have to get rid of coal and gas/oil plants.  Replace with nuclear or solar/wind/renewable.  Replace everything so we fully greeen.

Hmmmmm ok let’s make a world wide law that all humans must shove a cork up their ass to prevent passing gas. That should help!

When a bunch of billionaires get together the plan is always the same, which is to figure out how to get more free money from taxpayers. Climate change is real and the consequences are increasingly catastrophic, but forcing us to pay more taxes to support people who are too rich to pay taxes is not going to accomplish anything but a socialist revolution. The solutions for this have to come from the bottom up, not the top down, but top down feels more acceptable for people who rant and rave about climate change but refuse to address the energy overconsumption in their own lives.

That's why we have to get rid of coal and gas/oil plants.  Replace with nuclear or solar/wind/renewable.  Replace everything so we fully greeen.

What if get nuclear leak?  Gotta do away with electricity 100%.

That's why we have to get rid of coal and gas/oil plants.  Replace with nuclear or solar/wind/renewable.  Replace everything so we fully greeen.

All those technologies require fossil fuels. Green tech ends up using more fossil fuels because of all the energy conversions. It is better just to burn the fossil fuels and figure out ways to reduce our dependence on them. But that means the end of Hawaii megatourism.

All those technologies require fossil fuels. Green tech ends up using more fossil fuels because of all the energy conversions. It is better just to burn the fossil fuels and figure out ways to reduce our dependence on them. But that means the end of Hawaii megatourism.

We mentioned this to him. The response was something about technology needing to get better so it doesn't use fossil fuels as much.  And only way to get it better is to have a starting point of green tech that does use lots of fossil fuels and we work from there.

Conversation now went full circle.

We mentioned this to him. The response was something about technology needing to get better so it doesn't use fossil fuels as much.  And only way to get it better is to have a starting point of green tech that does use lots of fossil fuels and we work from there.

Conversation now went full circle.

Personal responsibility is not fashionable I guess

We mentioned this to him. The response was something about technology needing to get better so it doesn't use fossil fuels as much.  And only way to get it better is to have a starting point of green tech that does use lots of fossil fuels and we work from there.

Conversation now went full circle.

Shocking

And he’s also mixing up green, sustainable, renewable, and other terms.

There's not a single electric engine in existence that can do the work of big, heavy, industrial machines needed for mining, building, and transporting the things needed for "alternative" forms of energy.

Until Tesla starts producing all-electric versions of these, we're locked into needing fossil fuels.

Cargo ships
Road construction and maintenance
Building high rises
Landscaping for more housing
hauling infrastructure components like massive sections of water and sewer pipes, Rail Supports, etc.

The work needed everyday to build and maintain our infrastructure can't just be replaced with "new technology" because we wish it so.  Therefore, pretending we have total control over all factors in our lives that impact carbon emissions is naive or dishonest.

Even IF we could cut emissions in the US by 25%, that's ONE country.  Now, if we assume MAN contributes 10-15% of the total carbon emissions affecting Climate Change, cutting just our emissions by 25% is not even a drop in the bucket global.  The COST of that reduction could easily destroy our economy, as the energy sector would have to absorb the cost of retrofitting for new sources, and that cost would drive up the amount consumers pay for things like home heating and cooling, transporting goods and foods to the stores, and air transportation.  Any energy-related product or service would create a ripple effect in all prices, driving inflation like it did in the 1970s.

There's not a single electric engine in existence that can do the work of big, heavy, industrial machines needed for mining, building, and transporting the things needed for "alternative" forms of energy.

Until Tesla starts producing all-electric versions of these, we're locked into needing fossil fuels.

Cargo ships
Road construction and maintenance
Building high rises
Landscaping for more housing
hauling infrastructure components like massive sections of water and sewer pipes, Rail Supports, etc.

The work needed everyday to build and maintain our infrastructure can't just be replaced with "new technology" because we wish it so.  Therefore, pretending we have total control over all factors in our lives that impact carbon emissions is naive or dishonest.

Even IF we could cut emissions in the US by 25%, that's ONE country.  Now, if we assume MAN contributes 10-15% of the total carbon emissions affecting Climate Change, cutting just our emissions by 25% is not even a drop in the bucket global.  The COST of that reduction could easily destroy our economy, as the energy sector would have to absorb the cost of retrofitting for new sources, and that cost would drive up the amount consumers pay for things like home heating and cooling, transporting goods and foods to the stores, and air transportation.  Any energy-related product or service would create a ripple effect in all prices, driving inflation like it did in the 1970s.

but but but science
we can invent new things!
we have to TRY!
otherwise we are DOOMED!
how DARE you!

There's not a single electric engine in existence that can do the work of big, heavy, industrial machines needed for mining, building, and transporting the things needed for "alternative" forms of energy.

Until Tesla starts producing all-electric versions of these, we're locked into needing fossil fuels.

Cargo ships
Road construction and maintenance
Building high rises
Landscaping for more housing
hauling infrastructure components like massive sections of water and sewer pipes, Rail Supports, etc.

The work needed everyday to build and maintain our infrastructure can't just be replaced with "new technology" because we wish it so.  Therefore, pretending we have total control over all factors in our lives that impact carbon emissions is naive or dishonest.

Even IF we could cut emissions in the US by 25%, that's ONE country.  Now, if we assume MAN contributes 10-15% of the total carbon emissions affecting Climate Change, cutting just our emissions by 25% is not even a drop in the bucket global.  The COST of that reduction could easily destroy our economy, as the energy sector would have to absorb the cost of retrofitting for new sources, and that cost would drive up the amount consumers pay for things like home heating and cooling, transporting goods and foods to the stores, and air transportation.  Any energy-related product or service would create a ripple effect in all prices, driving inflation like it did in the 1970s.

This isn't some all or nothing.   Convert the ones you can and don't convert the ones you can't until technology catches up.   You can convert slowly.  I am not saying wake up tomorrow and all be electric.   One thing at a time. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/climate-change-intervention-cost/2020/09/17/c6715db6-f784-11ea-89e3-4b9efa36dc64_story.html

This isn't some all or nothing.   Convert the ones you can and don't convert the ones you can't until technology catches up.   You can convert slowly.  I am not saying wake up tomorrow and all be electric.   One thing at a time. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/climate-change-intervention-cost/2020/09/17/c6715db6-f784-11ea-89e3-4b9efa36dc64_story.html

At what cost?  Some of the things you want to convert can cost millions of dollars for one company to retrofit -- and to a technology that's not been time-tested.

Think, McFly!  Imagine if every company that could change had to invest millions at once.  How long to PRODUCE said tech products at the volume needed?  How much MORE do businesses pay in the beginning until economies of scale make the products more affordable?  How much in taxes THAT WE HAVE TO BORROW in subsidies are needed to help incentivize early adopters?

We aren't talking about mandating seatbelts or airbags over 5-10 years.  We're talking about reducing emissions.  How much of those emissions will be needed to produce the low emission products, making the total Climate Change problem WORSE?

"Big picture" isn't really your thing.

I spent ten years working in the Hawaiian astronomy world.
I learned a lot and from the best in the world.
It never ceases to amaze me, the ignorance of mankind, as to his
negligible importance or the small effect he can have on something
as dynamic and immense as our planet, much less our solar system.
This planet is 5 billion years old. We have only been here fucking it up for
a few thousand years.  What arrogance, that we in the recent 4 thousand
years or so have dramatically made a dent in the Earth's capability to
"survive".
Our climate is driven by our star AKA the sun. at various times in the
past the amount of CO2 far exceeded anything we can do, but we are here.
The destruction of life on earth by naturally occurring events
far exceeds what we think we can do with our bombs and our pollution's.
Once you make this arrogance political as many have done, you detract from
what we could do to improve life for humanity using what technology and resources
we have and will develop for however long we are here..
There is no such thing as "renewable energy"
The laws of Thermodynamics are pretty explicit.
So I repudiate those that demand the destruction of my culture,
my country, and my families future, for some imagined powers that
some experts are "gifted" with,  that will save us all.
Good news!  Pretty much in less than 5 billion years this Earth will
no longer exist regardless of what you Eco nuts do.

Once you make this arrogance political as many have done, you detract from
what we could do to improve life for humanity using what technology and resources
we have .

Observed this and advised leftists of their great strategic mistake in allowing the globull warming cult to turn into a liberal religion.

That pretty much relegated it to something to ignore and reject for independents and conservatives.  No one wants anything to do with liberal cult issues.

I spent ten years working in the Hawaiian astronomy world.
I learned a lot and from the best in the world.
It never ceases to amaze me, the ignorance of mankind, as to his
negligible importance or the small effect he can have on something
as dynamic and immense as our planet, much less our solar system.
This planet is 5 billion years old. We have only been here fucking it up for
a few thousand years.  What arrogance, that we in the recent 4 thousand
years or so have dramatically made a dent in the Earth's capability to
"survive".
Our climate is driven by our star AKA the sun. at various times in the
past the amount of CO2 far exceeded anything we can do, but we are here.
The destruction of life on earth by naturally occurring events
far exceeds what we think we can do with our bombs and our pollution's.
Once you make this arrogance political as many have done, you detract from
what we could do to improve life for humanity using what technology and resources
we have and will develop for however long we are here..
There is no such thing as "renewable energy"
The laws of Thermodynamics are pretty explicit.
So I repudiate those that demand the destruction of my culture,
my country, and my families future, for some imagined powers that
some experts are "gifted" with,  that will save us all.
Good news!  Pretty much in less than 5 billion years this Earth will
no longer exist regardless of what you Eco nuts do.

But, if we have to start NOW!  Because in 12 years ..... TOAST!!

So those new technologies OMIGOD posts about better be coming before Christmas, or we might as well blow it all on strippers and coke (The Hunter Biden Plan).

12 years?  It takes longer to get Congress to agree on drapery designs and carpet colors for their offices.

As I said on ALL THE PREVIOUS CLIMATE CHANGE topics,

"When the people telling us there's a climate crisis start acting like there's a crisis by making changes in their own lives,
MAYBE I'll start to believe there's a real crisis that requires me to make changes MY life."

"When the people telling us there's a climate crisis start acting like there's a crisis by making changes in their own lives,
MAYBE I'll start to believe there's a real crisis that requires me to make changes MY life."

There you go, casting aspersions on the sainted algore.   His exalted status entitled him to all those $$$ mansions, he is a patron saint of the globull warming hoax.

He deserves to live as wastefully as he wishes.............and have masseuses release his chakra............

I agree that it is important to point out that green energy sources are not really totally green. They still rely traditional fuel sources and material harvesting which are dirty.

However we also shouldn't let those facts make us believe that green technologies are no better than their oil and coal based counterparts either. Both an EV and a traditional gas vehicle are going to be dirty to produce however consuming the energy in a gas car is dirty while consuming the energy in an EV is basically clean.

We need to balance the reality of the costs of trying to go green with the ideal of a cleaner earth. The left wants to pretend green energy solves all our problems and the right wants to pretend that the technology and changes is so unrealistic and expensive we should resist any efforts.


One technology that interested me was supposed methods that could pull carbon out of the air at a better rate than the carbon put in the air to make it. If this did turn out to be doable we could theoretically set carbon levels exactly where we want them.

I have seen the reality of the “100% renewable by 2045” for Hawaii. Hint, it’s not quite what advocates make it out to be. Also those leading initiatives to get there are finding it’s not quite that easy. Not my project, but it severely impacts my current efforts.

Good ideas? Sure. Reality of getting there? Remains to be seen, but my opinion is folks who signed off on things were sold a lot of BS.

When people lose quality of power service, let’s see how they feel about 100% renewable HECO service. At least without “cheating”.

I have seen the reality of the “100% renewable by 2045” for Hawaii. Hint, it’s not quite what advocates make it out to be. Also those leading initiatives to get there are finding it’s not quite that easy. Not my project, but it severely impacts my current efforts.

Good ideas? Sure. Reality of getting there? Remains to be seen, but my opinion is folks who signed off on things were sold a lot of BS.

When people lose quality of power service, let’s see how they feel about 100% renewable HECO service. At least without “cheating”.

I agree that 100% renewable is not a realistic goal, especially if they mean that completely. Current technologies just aren't there yet. If someone makes some major advances in green technology we could get pretty close I think.

I agree that 100% renewable is not a realistic goal, especially if they mean that completely. Current technologies just aren't there yet. If someone makes some major advances in green technology we could get pretty close I think.

Much of the recent tech I saw was pretty darn good. Resistance to damage for hurricane prone regions and batteries though aren’t quite that great. It’s been a while since I was neck deep in research for this stuff, but when the PV industry advocated for replacing when panels got damaged instead of designing for better durability, that was telling.