I'm not hearing much about global warming now days.

[It will be fine]

nothing is cheaper in the long run than coal

That’s up there for top idiocy I’ve ever seen. Literally all energy on the planet comes from the sun. The only question is storage and conversion to usefulness. Burning coal spews carbon into the atmosphere causing global temperatures to rise. There is a cost to this. Long run direct conversion of solar energy is the cheapest.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

That’s up there for top idiocy I’ve ever seen. Literally all energy on the planet comes from the sun. The only question is storage and conversion to usefulness. Burning coal spews carbon into the atmosphere causing global temperatures to rise. There is a cost to this.
Long run direct conversion of solar energy is the cheapest.

I'd like to see a cost-benefit ratio analysis on that.
It is certainly more environmental and healthy ... no question.

But rod said it ... so it is certainly questionable.

 

[rod]

coal wins---hands down the cheapest ---most bang for the buck. Solar-wind-nuclear----those 3 cost big time to keep the systems up and running. Solar sucks in Mn. (we aren't noted as a sunshine state)----wind is too "iffy" and nuclear has all but been outlawed.

 

[It will be fine]

I'd like to see a cost-benefit ratio analysis on that.
It is certainly more environmental and healthy ... no question.

But rod said it ... so it is certainly questionable.

It’s the long run I have the biggest issue with. With greater investment in solar tech the efficiency will increase. Every other source of energy you’re losing something to a middle man. There’s a free fusion power plant 8 light minutes away, it’s just a matter of improving the transmission lines.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

That’s up there for top idiocy I’ve ever seen. Literally all energy on the planet comes from the sun. The only question is storage and conversion to usefulness. Burning coal spews carbon into the atmosphere causing global temperatures to rise. There is a cost to this. Long run direct conversion of solar energy is the cheapest.

Geothermal and nuclear are not solar derivatives. And even though many/most people still consider it fringe, there is strong evidence supporting the abiogenic oil theories. Which would mean oil, or at least some of it, is also not derived from the sun. Same goes for coal. Some is clearly derived from plant matter, as such the energy came from the sun, and some is mineral in origin, meaning it was formed from geologic processes.

Once we have developed a means of converting photons to electricity that does not require massive amounts of rare earth materials, and we solve storage related problems, then I would agree solar is the way to go in the long run.

 

[newfie]

That’s up there for top idiocy I’ve ever seen. Literally all energy on the planet comes from the sun. The only question is storage and conversion to usefulness. Burning coal spews carbon into the atmosphere causing global temperatures to rise. There is a cost to this. Long run direct conversion of solar energy is the cheapest.

maybe it can be some day but that price tag has to drop a whole bunch

 

[Eat Sleep Fish]

The weather is cyclical. Wild extremes in the weather has been going on forever. I read something a while back that said more scientists agree that there is no such thing of global warming. It's all a plot to fatten the pockets of losers like Gore and Bill Nye. This was fake news before fake news was cool.

 

[newfie]

The weather is cyclical. Wild extremes in the weather has been going on forever. I read something a while back that said more scientists agree that there is no such thing of global warming. It's all a plot to fatten the pockets of losers like Gore and Bill Nye. This was fake news before fake news was cool.

I think there is a reasonable position to take with climate change. I think anyone with sense would recognize that an ever growing population could if they take no action destroy their environment. I think you see the effort to do so with the pursuit of alternative fuels , and efforts to clean up the streams.

in my lifetime I've seen our environment in our country improve tremendously from the days of polluted streams and rivers and smog laden cities.

what I have always objected to is the alarmist hysteria and hypocrisy of the climate alarmist who put a ridiculous sky is falling timeline on potential climate change issues while they thierselves engage in their own do as I say not as I do lifestyles.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

what I have always objected to is the alarmist hysteria and hypocrisy of the climate alarmist who put a ridiculous sky is falling timeline on potential climate change issues while they thierselves engage in their own do as I say not as I do lifestyles.

How many times have we passed the deadline for the ice caps melting and everyone drowning?

 

[Meat]

I read something a while back that said more scientists agree that there is no such thing of global warming.

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

 

[Eat Sleep Fish]

I think there is a reasonable position to take with climate change. I think anyone with sense would recognize that an ever growing population could if they take no action destroy their environment. I think you see the effort to do so with the pursuit of alternative fuels , and efforts to clean up the streams.

in my lifetime I've seen our environment in our country improve tremendously from the days of polluted streams and rivers and smog laden cities.

what I have always objected to is the alarmist hysteria and hypocrisy of the climate alarmist who put a ridiculous sky is falling timeline on potential climate change issues while they thierselves engage in their own do as I say not as I do lifestyles.

Good post there and I agree. It made me think of the commercial back there in the 70's and 80's with the crying indian. Do you remember that one?

 

[oldngray]

Good post there and I agree. It made me think of the commercial back there in the 70's and 80's with the crying indian. Do you remember that one?

The one with the Italian guy dressed up as an Indian?

 

[vantexan]

I think there is a reasonable position to take with climate change. I think anyone with sense would recognize that an ever growing population could if they take no action destroy their environment. I think you see the effort to do so with the pursuit of alternative fuels , and efforts to clean up the streams.

in my lifetime I've seen our environment in our country improve tremendously from the days of polluted streams and rivers and smog laden cities.

what I have always objected to is the alarmist hysteria and hypocrisy of the climate alarmist who put a ridiculous sky is falling timeline on potential climate change issues while they thierselves engage in their own do as I say not as I do lifestyles.

I really liked the Atlantic article that someone posted the other day. Solution using existing technology to remove carbon from the air and turn it into fuel. Will be interesting to see if a viable solution will be allowed given that the Left sees climate change as a way to control everyone and bring about "social justice." And the oil companies would see it as a threat too.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

I really liked the Atlantic article that someone posted the other day. Solution using existing technology to remove carbon from the air and turn it into fuel. Will be interesting to see if a viable solution will be allowed given that the Left sees climate change as a way to control everyone and bring about "social justice." And the oil companies would see it as a threat too.

They wouldn't have a problem as long as they controlled the technology. The problem with pilling co2 out of the atmosphere is that it is still around 400 ppm, which makes it relatively difficult to find and capture. We already have technology that does it very efficiently, they're called plants.

 

[vantexan]

They wouldn't have a problem as long as they controlled the technology. The problem with pilling co2 out of the atmosphere is that it is still around 400 ppm, which makes it relatively difficult to find and capture. We already have technology that does it very efficiently, they're called plants.

In the article it was said that they'd already been doing this successfully in a small facility for several years. Plants obviously are important, but the idea here is to pull carbon out of the air to create gas, which the burning of put the carbon into the air to begin with. Enough of these facilities, and large enough, would in effect neutralize the affect of carbon emissions. Or at least greatly slow it down. The fuel created would pay for the facilities. A real world solution to a problem that is either real, or not, depending on who you ask. But more importantly it would prevent draconian measures to control everyone's behavior, which seems to be the path the far Left is on.

 

[newfie]

this summer could present some real challenges

https://www.theonion.com/report-ocean-levels-could-rise-foot-or-more-if-lots-of-1819576232

 

[zubenelgenubi]

For those of you who don't understand why I was asking about carbon 14, way back, here's a video that explains what I am referring to. It's funny to read back through and see how people who clearly have no science education were mocking me for bringing up valid points that they were unable to understand.

 

[Brown echo]

I wonder why?

time to divert,Republicans blocking anyone tried to stop Trump , it wont take 8 years with Trump doing away with all EPA polices put in place by OBAMA , but listen to scientist they are advising us from sharing their findings.let me ask you a question if Trump will told u to stop any medication because is not helping u is a hoax would you ? I wonder why ??

 

[vantexan]

time to divert,Republicans blocking anyone tried to stop Trump , it wont take 8 years with Trump doing away with all EPA polices put in place by OBAMA , but listen to scientist they are advising us from sharing their findings.let me ask you a question if Trump will told u to stop any medication because is not helping u is a hoax would you ? I wonder why ??

The U.S. isn't solely responsible for the world's pollution. Even if we did everything perfectly, which won happen, the rest of the world is nowhere near compliant with international accords and we'll still go over the cliff if there's a cliff to go over. We can't even control our spending which will probably lead to a fiscal meltdown at some point. So rag on Trump all you want, he didn't cause the problem, and nothing he does will solve it.

 

[newfie]

time to divert,Republicans blocking anyone tried to stop Trump , it wont take 8 years with Trump doing away with all EPA polices put in place by OBAMA , but listen to scientist they are advising us from sharing their findings.let me ask you a question if Trump will told u to stop any medication because is not helping u is a hoax would you ? I wonder why ??

third world countries desperately need your help catching up to the united states in clean up. feel free to blast them in your postings since you're allegedly so concerned about our climate issues.