The #1 thing we can do is to put a price on carbon that accounts for its externalities.
Climate Change getting worse, and so are the Republican excuses - article from Esquire.
- Thread starter Sleepless_in_Jefferson_County
- Start date
The problem is that clean coal is a myth at the moment. If it worked, we should use it, and I hope people invest in it to figure out if it will work. Plenty of people have tried on this, and they haven't had any real success to date, certainly not success like we are seeing in solar or wind or in investments in improved efficiency by end users.
New jobs...dude, look at the unemployment rate in North Dakota. Natural gas has created a ton of jobs lately. Many of those were taken directly from coal.
With respect to training, Americans need to get that education and companies need to work to train Americans as well, or else someone overseas will get the training/education and take the jobs from us.
Coal is dying whether you like it or not. Coal has been shedding jobs for a long time running now.
And this from the guy that was doing some major whining not that long ago when there was a possibility of a government shutdown and he might not get paid for a week or so.
Yes they did. Government labs are run by contractors, so our pay is not dependent on the government being open, as long as it's not a super prolonged shutdown.
"Clean Coal Plants" are a myth. Their only real purpose was a political one, bankrupt the Coal Industry.
Success with Solar and Wind???
WHERE?
I see Federal Government "subsidies" and "grants" for "Clean Energy Experiments" in the expansion of those technologies.
Northwest Missouri has "hundreds" of 200' (+) wind turbines, for what?
At a "cost" of over 1 million a piece they provide power to who?
The nearest Missouri city with a population of over a 150,000 is not even benefiting from their output.
The "technology to mass grid" that output over hundreds of miles "does not exist"....
Repeat..."does not exist".
The "legal question" of just where these wind farms can go add to the cost, hence ...
NWMO wildlife refuge.
The "Massive" amount of "land" needed to produce a wind farm, tens of thousands of acres.
Overall contribution to energy consumption in the United States is minuscule.
Do not even need to go into Solar..
Solyndra was a -$500,000,000 Federal Government bankruptcy failure.
The Tesla X model "Clean Energy" car,
ZERO carbon footprint ...
$150,000 , no thanks
The "GO GREEN" affordable "Smart Car" that know one wants.
Again a marketing win, a reality loss.
The Obama Administration has had (7) years to produce the "Clean Energy" he promised... Where is it. ?
Answer ... It does not exist
So what part of -$500,000,000.00 bankrupt Solyndra do you deny ?
A clean energy "National Wind Grid" does not exist.
If you think it does then prove it.
Last edited:
S
Stevedangos
Guest
Climate changes over thousands of years . U guys keep harping about changes in weather patterns.
Your point is meaningless. The fact that the world has underlying changes does not mean we cannot have effects as well. There is no natural effect that explains what is happening right now.
I know exactly why Solyndra failed. The United States Government is a "political machine", not a "business for profit".
The Obama Administration had decided early on that "they" would make the entire "Clean Energy Agenda" work, even if it meant they would need to choose winners and losers in the free market system.
What they did not factor in however were the "warning signs" that came up long before any tax payer money was issued.
Warning signs that included ...
#1) A "new energy system" that was not "unbiasedly vetted" by "non-political" decision-makers.
#2) A new "unproven product" that had many major flaws...
a. Was not compatible with existing residential roofing systems.
b. Was not compatible with large solar farms where years of solar technology already existed.
c. Was a technology that depended on existing technologies to "fail" in order for it to "succeed".
d. A technology that was solely dependent on Federal Government "subsidies" to supply sales rather than "demand" from the customer.
e. A technology unable to "compete" in the "real world " of Business thanks to the restrictions of its number one customer, the US Government .
Many on this board have used the "excuse" that the lower cost of polysilicon from $400 per kilogram to $50 per kilogram killed Solyndra.
And the "European" countries who promised sales through "subsidies" backed out due to their own poor economic conditions .
I would argue that the Federal Government got a lesson in Free Enterprise 101 from the American Business man.
If you think you can "buy" yourself a successful business, think again .
The killing of the fossil fuel industry, including coal.
The UNFCCC brainchild...
"The Paris Agreement" will be the beginning of the end for Fossil Fuels in this country.
The document will be signed by all 55 member parties on 04/22/2016 , including the Obama administration.
S
Stevedangos
Guest
Well since nothing is actually happening right now I guess you are actually correct
According to Al Gore, the father of Global Warming..."Climate Change".
The World as we know it will end in 2020.
If only we had listened...
A
anon_utvqikut1knht
Guest
Look back to the 2008 Beijing Olympics and you will get a hint at where (I am an ASIAN climate change believer) the problem really exists (India is equally to blame).
I agree that China is a huge contributor to greenhouse gasses.
Russian geologist Alexey Pavlov technical use of the term anthropogenic was a lead in to things to come.
Mans impact on the environment can not be denied.
Conservatives like myself disagreement however comes with, "how best do you fix it?".
The Helsinki Accords of 1975 in my opinion is not the answer.
Article X of that Accord states that all nations shall fulfill obligations in good faith under "International Law".
Liberals for decades have wanted the US to give up our "Domestic Legal Sovereignty" in exchange for "International Legal Sovereignty".
Rush Limbaugh warned about this very thing back in the early 1980s.
Today the "Paris Climate Change Conference" is attempting to revisit history with an "International" commitment by all parties involved to be bound by "International Law" in the quest for lowering greenhouse emissions.
Does there need to be an effort to counter Global Climate Change?
yes...
Should it be at the cost of giving up our Domestic Sovereignty?
No....
Let's cut off our nose to spite our face...domestic sovereignty at the cost of the world we inhabit.
The idea that Europe and Asia have sovereignty over America is a freedom I am not willing to give away.
Republicans in 3016: "Yeah, our policies destroyed the planet, but by God we maintained our national sovereignty."
I don't expect you to understand, you still think state law supercedes federal. Can't expect you to wrap your brain around this.
You obliviously don't take the "Father of Global Warming" to seriously.
He predicted 2020 would be the end of the World as we know it.
This kind of reminds me of the "Climate Change" (vs) "Global Warming" debate.
If no one is believing that it's getting warmer on the North Pole then just change the name to "Climate Change".
It has to be getting warmer somewhere, right?
Our per capita emissions are way higher than either of those countries. It is true they are growing faster and we have plateaued. But we are a huge polluteR relative to the EU and many other developed nations.
China deserves credit for what it is doing right now to address this. India needs to do more but it's also way behind China in terms of per capita emissions.
it also makes no sense. Republicans don't say "domestic sovereignty means we should do nothing about isis." It's just a way to make up an excuse to give cover to their corporate donors to not have to do anything.
That is a ridiculous counter to the argument that the Helsinki Accords are nothing more than liberalism on steroids.
If you are going to "pretend" that you know something about a subject that took place while your mommy was still in high school, then at least Google an intelligent response .
Your posts continue to be word salad devoid of actual content and meaning.
On other words without googling you have no idea what the Helsinki Accords or Kyoto Protocol are.
Great you libs are all about burning books....
On other words without googling you have no idea what the Helsinki Accords or Kyoto Protocol are.
Great you libs are all about burning books....
I like Italian dressing with my word salad. Make a point, don't force people to infer things that may or may not even be what you're getting at.
For God's sake, advance a conversation for once.
S
Stevedangos
Guest
I remember ten years ago after Katrina the Global warming idiots were running around saying we would be seeing more , as well as much more extreme hurricanes and it was going to be so bad we needed to create a "Catagory 6" hurricane
So what has actually happened??
Almost no hurricanes the last ten years, and the few we had were minor
So what has actually happened??
Almost no hurricanes the last ten years, and the few we had were minor
No hurricanes???? Climate change!!!!!!!
You just can't be wrong with climate change.
I know this is a hard concept to understand, but it's not just the weather in your back yard that counts, thus the word global
Not sure but I think this topic was debated and won by us a couple of years ago.
Guess if the World actually does come to an end as Al predicts in 2020 then we own these men of science one big apology. Until then, we will just accept yours...
Sure have had some nasty Typhoons goin a around.I know this is a hard concept to understand, but it's not just the weather in your back yard that counts, thus the word global
Scout you're slipping, you forgot capitalize us.Not sure but I think this topic was debated and won by us a couple of years ago.
Until then, we will just accept yours...
the strongest hurricane in recorded Western Hemisphere history occurred in October 2015
Not sure but I think this topic was debated and won by us a couple of years ago.
Until then, we will just accept yours...
Don't think you've won a single debate on here. For most of the conservatives on this site, those pesky facts sneak up and bite their opinion based posts.
For you, if posting cryptic jibberish that fails to advance a conversation counts as "winning", then congrats, you "win" all the time. No one can win a debate with someone who throws out trivial snippets of information that are so loosely tied to the actual points being made that it's impossible to infer the point you are trying to make.
Keep in mind millerbleach that the "Sun Worshippers" need (2) names for their religion to be right 99% of the time...
Climate Change & Global Warming
To be right 100% of the time their Climate Summit has come up with a "third" term...
Galactic Meltdown
And to think the silly Republicans are still worried about the JV Team...
Last edited:
Similar threads
