Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
So you can't invest in renewable tech and limit or eliminate obsolete fossil fuels to reduce CO2 emissions?
Why the fuck not? Explain that to me please
Changing opinion on Global Warming
- Thread starter Bugeye
- Start date
Why the fuck not? Explain that to me please
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
I think I'm the only one saying we should invest directly in national academies of science if we want to break our dependence on carbon, doesn't take billions of dollars of taxpayer money per country per year tho.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
How much does it take?
heckler73
Well-Known Member
Money alone isn't the issue, and blindly handing it over to academies is not necessarily the most effective means. Policies surrounding science are more pernicious.
http://www.sciencepolicy.ca/
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
When you figure that out then you'll have found a truly useful number in this whole debate.
Use ITER as an example, international coalition all contributing an amount relative to their populations.
A full deuterium/tritium reaction is expected in the next 15 years, that's progress, not this "we need to do something".
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
How do you know it won't take billions of dollars in technological investments to overcome the biggest issue facing mankind?
I'm afraid it will take much more than that since we've waited so long to address the problem, and it will take MUCH more the longer we wait. We will wait longer because some 65% of GOP elected officials don't even accept the climate is changing because they're being bribed by the fossil fuel industry not to.
"Something will happen in the next 2 decades! Don't worry bout it now!"
Yeah... no. That's a pretty stupid plan. What happens in 2 decades when that plan fails, now we're exactly where we are now, except 2 decades of carbon later.. I'd rather not put all of humanities eggs in one single basket.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
We only need two things to completely overcome it.
1. A clean, reliable source of generating industrial amounts of electricity. For this, my bet is either fusion or thorium salt fission reactors
2. Batteries with an energy density an order of magnitude greater than our current technology
Ask any real scientist.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
And you don't think it'll cost more than a billion dollars to do that?
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
It'll cost what it'll cost, but there needs to be a plan before you start the largest campaign against the poor there ever was.
That's effectively what a carbon tax is, there are people who can barely afford to heat their houses with natural gas as it is...
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Can you explain how a tax on carbon pollution hurts the poor?
We're not talking about taxing people burning wood to heat their homes, we're talking about taxing corporations that excessively pollute the environment that everyone on Earth shares
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
A carbon tax (like have been untaken in some EU countries for example) involve a tax on all carbon fuels, like gasoline, coal, etc that is passed onto the consumer by the supplier.
This isn't some "quote a source" bullshit, it's widely known here across Europe.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
The problem exists in transferring the burden from those who own it onto those who don't, and all it takes is some good 'ol legislation to prevent it
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
You can't legislate away a company's ability to raise prices to meet rising costs...
That's just plain ridiculous.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
As I said, plain ridiculous.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Padwan thinks if you steal all the profit from business owners and give it to workers, businesses will be booming!!!
Flaming Pie
Well-Known Member
Well the theory is, that carbon credits will force companies to seek ways to reduce their carbon output to save on taxes.
Does anyone what the world Bank will be doing with the money it raises from carbon credits?
Will it be used for research?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Yes, research into how to get more of that money ...
Flaming Pie
Well-Known Member
The world Bank is going to become VERY powerful.
see4
Well-Known Member
Let's work backwards here, shall we?
re WSJ + libtard + victim:
You quoted nothing of the such. And yes, you labeling me as following some "leftist master" is you calling me a "libtard". I am far from playing victim madam, I'm white, make more in one year than you've made in 10, own 4 homes, 3 vehicles and more guns and ammo than a small Michigan Militia. You are certainly confusing me with someone else, you have no idea who I am and what I represent.
re "So you said these countries all are using 50% or ....":
I never said, those countries I listed were using 50% or better renewables, those are literally your words. Nice try though "no spin zone". Stick with facts madam, it will work out better for you in the long run.
re Scotland and Germany energy failure:
Yes, let's talk about the failed renewable energy in Scotland and Germany. Please provide me with links to [credible] sources showcasing the failures, Im curious to see what you consider a failure.
Clearly your panties are tangled in a bunch and you've got your defensive back up against a wall. Take a step back, breathe, calm down. Now, let's examine a few points here. First, we are having this "discussion" because I dismissed your reference to brietbart -- can you provide me with the same information that brietbart has provided from a different source? Say, AP or Reuters? Second, if you wish to debate something on the merits of fact, let's try to stick to them, shall we? Please quote exactly where I stated that all the countries I listed previous are using 50% or better renewable energy.
I will not participate in your spinning of half truth and assumptions based on your biased political leaning. If you'd like to discuss facts, I'm open.