Evolve Now

[PolyHedral]

There's a lot more uranium to squabble over. Not to mention that you can also use plutonium, thorium and, IIRC, neptunium.

And just because France is a lot smaller doesn't mean that it's infeasible for the US to change. (Though they might take too long about it) From that chart you posted, most of the cost seemed to be in the fixed costs, like building the plants.

 

[Danny Heim]

Just because a disaster, of some origin and magnitude, will happen in the future, does not mean we should abandon someone or something and call it quits.

Well actually, it does. We have been sticking with our current paradigms to deal with climate change for a long time now. What appears to me as a result of that, we seem to be getting further away from solutions to climate change. Obviously, it's time to abandon those paradigms and find something new, real quick. Would you stay with a stock broker that kept loosing you money?

 

[painted wolf]

It's still finite and needs to be extracted, processed and shipped, which will take more resources, and exploitation of vulnerable environments and populations.

France is also a lot more socialistic and their energy sector is nationalized... such a system is not going to fly in the USA.

My issue with the site I posted is that it doesn't account for all of the costs and focuses on the fixed costs. It doesn't seem to account for security costs, legal issues and so on. Let alone externalites.

Given the highly patchwork nature of Americas infrastructure and political climate... we can't expect to produce a single answer solution.

wa:do

 

[JustAsking]

Well actually, it does. We have been sticking with our current paradigms to deal with climate change for a long time now. What appears to me as a result of that, we seem to be getting further away from solutions to climate change. Obviously, it's time to abandon those paradigms and find something new, real quick. Would you stay with a stock broker that kept loosing you money?

Respectfully, I disagree. No one can point to the _one_ reason for climate change and thus no one can point to one solution. It would behoove us all to attempt as many avenues, no matter how small or great, to remedy the situation in the hopes that one day we will have tried enough solutions to fix the scales.

Now, there is a flip side to my thoughts. Does it really matter? The world goes through cycles of hot times and cold. Global Warming and Cooling. We _are_ in a period of global warming and I'm sure we're helping it along. But at some point, we're going to cool again. The only thing we can do is speed up or possibly slow down the cycle. We will _never_ stop it, we can only hope to influence it enough to make ourselves comfortable for longer.

The only sticking point is, how long until the cooling cycle starts. Or to put it another way, how long will this heating cycle last? Can we slow it down enough to give us as a species more time to prepare for the worst of it?

I'd submit we just might be able to slow it down, long enough, to "brace for impact" and make life bearable for the majority, if not everyone (that wishes for help).

In the pursuit of making life better for all, we should be trying to mitigate, if not reverse, the human impact and potential natural events that impact the planets cycle so we can prepare.

At least in my opinion...

 

[Danny Heim]

Do you know what happens when you simply preach at people.... they ignore you as a crackpot.

The only way we will preserve anything is by getting the governments of the nations involved to understand it's in their best interests.... that means carrots not sticks.

I'm not simply talking about mitigation... I'm talking about strategies for changing things.

But if you want to keep preaching and wondering why people ignore or ridicule you... be my guest.:beach:

wa:do

I know what you mean about preaching. I know how I sound, believe it or not, I mean to sound that way. Here's why, nothing else has worked. I've been at this for 18 years. I was an admin. director of an environmental group for 10 years. Believe me, legislation is not going to work, taxes, regulation, none of it is going to happen in time and whatever it does happen will be way too weak. Scientists say this over and over, I suspect you know that.

What(?) maybe 1 in 10 educated people have not heard that climate change could become catastrophic by the end of this century. And maybe 1 in 5 do not realize that the majority of the worlds scientists agree on these things. Now, what the hell else do we need to know? Our leading scientists have said it, it's right there in front of our face and has been for at least 10 years now. AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED? We are further away from doing anything than we were 10 years ago. Yes, I’ll take ridicule and all the rest because I preach, because I've experienced what you are advocating, at the professional level, it did nothing and ain't doing nothing either. If it is, show me.

 

[Danny Heim]

Respectfully, I disagree. No one can point to the _one_ reason for climate change and thus no one can point to one solution. It would behoove us all to attempt as many avenues, no matter how small or great, to remedy the situation in the hopes that one day we will have tried enough solutions to fix the scales.

Now, there is a flip side to my thoughts. Does it really matter? The world goes through cycles of hot times and cold. Global Warming and Cooling. We _are_ in a period of global warming and I'm sure we're helping it along. But at some point, we're going to cool again. The only thing we can do is speed up or possibly slow down the cycle. We will _never_ stop it, we can only hope to influence it enough to make ourselves comfortable for longer.

The only sticking point is, how long until the cooling cycle starts. Or to put it another way, how long will this heating cycle last? Can we slow it down enough to give us as a species more time to prepare for the worst of it?

I'd submit we just might be able to slow it down, long enough, to "brace for impact" and make life bearable for the majority, if not everyone (that wishes for help).

In the pursuit of making life better for all, we should be trying to mitigate, if not reverse, the human impact and potential natural events that impact the planets cycle so we can prepare.

At least in my opinion...

I don't know if you realize it but you are actually talking about a lot of what my paper is talking about. I am talking about adaptation. And I think you are here also. Plus, I do not concern myself as to how much is natural cycle or how much is man made. I concern myself with what is happening and what trends are in place. Whatever the cause of a 100 foot wave coming at you really doesn't matter, what matters is you get the hell out of its way.

(I can give sources that prove the world is flat)

 

[JustAsking]

I don't know if you realize it but you are actually talking about a lot of what my paper is talking about. I am talking about adaptation. And I think you are here also. Plus, I do not concern myself as to how much is natural cycle or how much is man made. I concern myself with what is happening and what trends are in place. Whatever the cause of a 100 foot wave coming at you really doesn't matter, what matters is you get the hell out of its way.

(I can give sources that prove the world is flat)

Maybe we have similar goals (or at least "end thoughts") but differ on execution. Really, I don't mean that we "adapt" to the climate as I'm not sure there is enough time to do so on a human level. We may be able to develop technological means to weather, well, the weather, but the more time we can buy until the ability to weather the change presents itself, the better.

This is why we should push for any corrective action (within reason) and hope technology is able to make up for the hardships we are going to endure.

 

[PolyHedral]

It's still finite and needs to be extracted, processed and shipped, which will take more resources, and exploitation of vulnerable environments and populations.

France is also a lot more socialistic and their energy sector is nationalized... such a system is not going to fly in the USA.

My issue with the site I posted is that it doesn't account for all of the costs and focuses on the fixed costs. It doesn't seem to account for security costs, legal issues and so on. Let alone externalites.

Given the highly patchwork nature of Americas infrastructure and political climate... we can't expect to produce a single answer solution.

wa:do

Well, IMO, the single answer solution is nuclear fusion, but we're not quite at that stage yet.

And we're not going to get anywhere with trying to fix the planet if we consider social inertia an insurmountable obstacle. If there were some technical obstacle, such as nuclear power not scaling, I can see why we would have to find alternate solutions, but "People won't like it" isn't that convincing.

 

[Danny Heim]

Maybe we have similar goals (or at least "end thoughts") but differ on execution. Really, I don't mean that we "adapt" to the climate as I'm not sure there is enough time to do so on a human level. We may be able to develop technological means to weather, well, the weather, but the more time we can buy until the ability to weather the change presents itself, the better.

This is why we should push for any corrective action (within reason) and hope technology is able to make up for the hardships we are going to endure.

I can dig that. It becomes a matter of where do we put our efforts, or what is our smartest move? As I state in my paper, a major adaptation effort would naturally have mitigation efforts automatically within it. If we are going to brace our infrastructure for abrupt climate change, then we are certainly not going to include in that restructuring more greenhouse gas emissions. In a way, I am not saying anything different than you. You say the difference is execution, actually I think it may be as simple as the use of two words, mitigation and adaptation. But in this day and age, I think those two words need a lot of clarity. they can mean life and death if we do not deal with each of their meanings.

 

[painted wolf]

I know what you mean about preaching. I know how I sound, believe it or not, I mean to sound that way. Here's why, nothing else has worked. I've been at this for 18 years. I was an admin. director of an environmental group for 10 years. Believe me, legislation is not going to work, taxes, regulation, none of it is going to happen in time and whatever it does happen will be way too weak. Scientists say this over and over, I suspect you know that.

What(?) maybe 1 in 10 educated people have not heard that climate change could become catastrophic by the end of this century. And maybe 1 in 5 do not realize that the majority of the worlds scientists agree on these things. Now, what the hell else do we need to know? Our leading scientists have said it, it's right there in front of our face and has been for at least 10 years now. AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED? We are further away from doing anything than we were 10 years ago. Yes, I’ll take ridicule and all the rest because I preach, because I've experienced what you are advocating, at the professional level, it did nothing and ain't doing nothing either. If it is, show me.

It hasn't worked in part, because there has been too much preaching already.
The issue has become a divider of people rather than a unifier.
Liberals attacking conservatives as evil comes to mind.

When one of the two halves of American governance has taken up denouncing the issue as a campaign issue... you know you have lost and preaching will only reinforce their opposition.

You need to give them an argument that will work on their level rather than just shouting the old message louder.

wa:do

 

[Danny Heim]

There are now sources in the paper. Please, please, check way beyond any resources given and always check with the big boys. Below are some big boys to check with.

Climate Change: Evidence

MIT Center for Global Change Science

NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - Climate Service

National Academy of Sciences Urges Swift U.S. Action to Curb Greenhouse Gases - NYTimes.com

Climate Change: A Summary of the Science - Publications - The Royal Society

If you can't get it from these guys, then we are doomed.

 

[Danny Heim]

It hasn't worked in part, because there has been too much preaching already.
The issue has become a divider of people rather than a unifier.
Liberals attacking conservatives as evil comes to mind.

When one of the two halves of American governance has taken up denouncing the issue as a campaign issue... you know you have lost and preaching will only reinforce their opposition.

You need to give them an argument that will work on their level rather than just shouting the old message louder.

wa:do

It all has to be within reason, of course. "Arguments" have all be given already. We don't need anymore arguments. Isn't the staement from the National Academy of Sciences enough? I mean, that is our top guns, what more do we need?

And I am certainly not just preaching or shouting in my paper, or in this thread. I am yelling RUN! Just like anyone would when a bear has entered the camp. Would you rather I sit quietly and watch my fellow campers discuss the potential threat of bear attacks in the forest of America while the bear quietly slips thru the door?

But while I am yelling run, I am also yelling "run this way". I am giving you reasons to run, why you should run and yes where you should run. You should run to the first place that gives you a chance to ask, "What can I do to help?" The number one thing you can do to help right now is yell, RUN!!

 

[painted wolf]

I'd rather educate people on how they can live more sustainably and why it's economically and ecologically sensible to do so.

Even if you don't believe in global climate change, everything I propose still makes sense to do.

wa:do

 

[Danny Heim]

I'd rather educate people on how they can live more sustainably and why it's economically and ecologically sensible to do so.

Even if you don't believe in global climate change, everything I propose still makes sense to do.

wa:do

I can dig that.