ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Imagine what others could be made if we allocated just 10% of our military budget to this? The jobs created alone would be a huge boost to the economy!
Stop Blaming 'Both Sides' for America's Climate Failures
- Thread starter ttystikk
- Start date
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I just want a well thought out non-partisan, non-political, science based plan that lays out options and gives legislators a reliable place to start. The objectives of the paris climate change accord ought to be enough to put together such a plan. I don't think putting together a plan should cost much but it should give a ball-park cost figure for the total cost.
Of course, the political tugging and questioning will be substantial. That's all part of the thrash needed before this country can decide on a direction. Strong leadership is needed to eventually end discussion and begin a path. No doubt there will be offended parties on both sides regardless of the chosen path.
An option I'd like to have on the table is companies who profited should pay for a substantial amount of the cost. I don't know why taxpayers should be on the hook for all of it..
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
The neoliberal establishment has sold out the entire process and now it's nothing more than a charade.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. Sadly, it ain't gonna happen anytime soon;
https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/6mlvi2/i_went_to_the_ny_and_paris_climate_conferences_in/
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Trump's import tariff on foreign made solar panels is the single biggest climate fuck up he's made so far.
Whenever I order Chinese panels now I'll just tell them to mark them as "electronic parts" with a value of $10.
Whenever I order Chinese panels now I'll just tell them to mark them as "electronic parts" with a value of $10.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Couldn't agree more. This tariff is proof that the Chump only consorts with porn stars for show and that he's actually gay; clearly, he loves to suck Kochs.
In this case, there is definitely something wrong with that.
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Before the tariffs we were slowly accelerating towards solar in spite of monied interests favouritism of coal, oil and gas.
The tariff fucks even that over with the claim of "protecting American panel producers".
I must admit I lol'd at the Koch sucking.
Ripped Farmer
Well-Known Member
And im sure they are willing to risk fucking up trade relations just to give you a deal.
Justin-case
Well-Known Member
When we want your opinion we'll give it to you, klansocko
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
You've obviously never bought anything from China...
They'll mark it as 14inch black rubber dildos priced at $1 each if you ask them (I mention that because it's obviously a regular order to your house anyways).
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Neither solar nor wind power is perfect but they're already cheaper than coal, nevermind the environmental benefits. Imagine what would happen if America had millions of electric cars plugged in all afternoon during peak generating hours? Imagine all the fossil fuels we wouldn't be burning! Can't have THAT!
Those environmental benefits have cost savings associated with them, too; things like lower incidence of cancer and asthma in the population, less pollution in air and water, less destruction of the land, etc. The fact that these cost savings can't be monetized by the coal fired energy industry doesn't mean they aren't real.
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Solar is pretty much perfect, we've got storage down and there's trillions of watts wasted per day across the surface of the earth. If every building had panels on the roof, etc that'd be more than enough.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
too larry
Well-Known Member
Research is being done to make H2 with the leftovers. Making progress, but all the kinks are not worked out yet.
RetiredGuerilla
Well-Known Member
So have the military cut its own throat? That will never happen. The CIA themselves own huge stock in oil co.s among others even health care cos. Car manufacturers could build cars that ran on ocean water or magnets. BUT What do you think would happen if all the sudden there was no longer a need for oil? A lot of pissed off powerful people? All you have to do is look at a map and you can see the military strategy involved. Since 911 they have taken a particular Interest in Central Asian energy. Iran is next. Oil is here to stay.Because the military has already made a huge commitment to help market it. They are guarding pipelines through Afghanistan and Iraq everyday.
Last edited:
somedude584
Well-Known Member
Global energy security =/= Investments in oil companies.
This tired old debate needs to be brought out to pasture and put down. Oil is a global security threat, threatening every single nation on the planet. If U.S. forces had ignored the oil producers in the Middle East and had let them be captured or destroyed, the world would have delved into chaos and the wars in the Middle East would have looked like children playing in sandbox.
Alternatives to combustion engines certainly exist, but it's about economics, and those alternatives are not economically viable at the moment for one reason or another.
Batteries and EVs in general (specifically their price, pre-subsidy) are still too expensive and inefficient to take down combustion engines, and not to mention the fact that there is no electric grid on the planet to the best of my knowledge that could handle ubiquity of EVs, and on that note, EV's are charged almost entirely by fossil fuel generated electricity, so EV's merely shift the burden elsewhere.
Nuclear is not a boogey man. There are designs for reactors that could (at scale) be made efficiently and have 0% risk of any nuclear meltdown like we are familiar with. Thorium reactors are a proven technology, and yes, their byproducts remain radioactive (and far less so than conventional materials) for mere hundreds of years. This isn't even to mention fusion, which is also an inherently safe technology that hasn't received nearly enough governmental focus and is actually the future of energy, not your solar and wind. Fusion is also believed, with the proper materials, to be capable of miniaturization and scaling, meaning potentially operating vehicles, think planes and ships, homes, remote outposts, etc. Fusion in principle works the issue has been always that we lack the materials to conduct it and produce more energy than we put in. That is quickly changing thanks to many developments in science ranging from magnets, artificial intelligence, super materials like graphene, etc etc that weren't even imaginable at the turn of the century.
Solar and wind are stopgaps at best, and at worst, failed government subsidy programs that are mis-allocating funds.
The reality is the markets are changing and there are hundreds of alternatives to fossil fuels popping up every day, it's only time before economics kicks in and they become successful financially, government policies be damned. Take a toke and realize that things aren't as dire as many would like to have you believe. There's an insane amount of technology being worked on that would blow your minds if you spent 30 minutes a day reading about it as I do. Humans have always been driven by necessity, and our transition away from our environmental practices will be no different.
Oh yeah, and I'm a conservative leaning independent. To the OP, don't be so quick to throw an entire constituency, many of whom support alternatives to fossil fuels, into the same boat. Based on your rhetoric you clearly voted for Hillary the "Deplorables" Clinton. It's your kind of black and white thinking that has ravaged the Democratic Party and precluded me and many like me from offering support. The average American is and has been always centrist, and the sooner our politics stops moving to either extreme, progress will be made.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
For sure, I've seen something along those lines myself.
It's a problem we can certainly solve, we just haven't yet. Maybe if we put as much money and effort into that as we are currently investing in autonomous vehicles?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
An interesting take.
I respectfully disagree about nuclear power; we humans simply cannot afford the long term costs, which include not just radiation and contamination but the all too ready access to nuclear weapons.
Fusion power is only 20 years away... and it always has been! Maybe we'll get there in my lifetime but it's frankly looking like a long shot.
Solar and wind are HERE, they're NOW, they're cheaper than fossil fuels today and still improving. The only obstacle to powering the entire human race is storage.
Electric cars are the ultimate flexible fueled vehicles; anything that makes electricity can power them. They're also a decent stopgap storage system; Denmark uses its national fleet of electric cars to buffer their own wind and solar powered grid to great effectiveness.
Agreed that we humans need to wean ourselves from the oil teat ASAP, for environmental reasons if nothing else.
My politics are well to the left of the current Democratic Party establishment, so you'll get few arguments from me there. I suspect that both parties will quickly become more responsive to the majority of our population if we can manage to get money out of politics. It's a tall order but I believe it is an essential prerequisite for moving away from oil. After all, it's profitable- and those profits can and are used to buy political control.
Finally, things ARE in dire straits. It's time to get moving right now, long before our kids wake up one day and realize there is no ecosystem left for us to live on.
SneekyNinja
Well-Known Member
Define how we're "not there on storage yet".
You can literally run your house on laptop batteries.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
No, it was Republicans.
I don't know why you need to dress up your posts with big words. A psychologist might be able to explain but I'll just point out the result.
Using Big Words Doesn’t Always Make You Sound Smarter
https://lifehacker.com/using-big-words-doesn-t-always-make-you-sound-smarter-1737035773
Essentially, the more complicated language you try to use, the higher the chance it will backfire on you. You might come off sounding like a phony, or like someone who isn’t intelligent enough to understand their audience. Keep things simple and focus on getting your message across, not trying to sound impressive.
peabody2018
Well-Known Member
Sunlight isn’t wasted. It’s what keeps us alive