The real climate change catastrophe

[Shadow Wolf]

We probably will be as long as the free market is allowed to operate. I believe it will come up with the alternatives as needed. Pedicting doom and fear mongering is a hobby for many though.

But why not prepare for a future crisis now? It's more exact than predicting the end of the world, as we know that we will run out. It's not a matter of if, but when. And allowing the free market to take care of it can potentially mean that 5 bucks for a gallon of gas will seem cheap. This is the same market and same companies that tried to halt fuel production when prices plummeted to raise them back up.
Were I live, we can benefit greatly from wind, solar during the summer, and water powered turbines. Yet we have none of these.

 

[Copernicus]

Were I live, we can benefit greatly from wind, solar during the summer, and water powered turbines. Yet we have none of these.

And that is because it is still cheaper to pay $5 a gallon for gas than to use even available alternative energy systems to replace the dirty energy. The market actually works against the use of those alternative energies, because established energy providers do not want to see their business models undermined.

Human history is full of disasters caused by short-sightedness. It took quite a few typhoid epidemics to get governments to install sewage systems, even though they had the technology to do it and knew that typhoid was caused by poor sanitation.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

If I'd known you were going to get such mileage out of that phrase I'd have slapped a copyright on it so I could bill you a flat fee per use.

I'll send you a dollar.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Why only that?

I have to start somewhere and since global warming means the temperature is rising it is a logical place to start.

Sandy, it's not a simple case of deductive reasoning. You need to know quite a lot of field-specific lingo and what the various abbreviations and symbollic representations used by climatologists mean before you can even get a toe in the door as far as interpreting the data is concerned. The whole "show me the raw data" approach is simply not going to work for you, or for anybody else without a relevant degree (or the equivalent amount of free time on their hands to learn the field independently).

But, anyway, good luck with that. It will be interesting to see what you come up with.

Hey, I'm pretty smart. I went clean through the sixth grade. It only took me three tries.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And that is because it is still cheaper to pay $5 a gallon for gas than to use even available alternative energy systems to replace the dirty energy. The market actually works against the use of those alternative energies, because established energy providers do not want to see their business models undermined.

No doubt. One thing I caught onto was that when gas prices went up, the cost of goods went up. It's to be expected, since it is now costing more to have raw material shipped to produce goods, and then it is costing more to have these goods shipped and distributed. But when gas prices dropped, the prices of goods have stayed the same or went up.
And it's easy to see why people who control the coal and oil industries do not want us to switch to clean energy. Metaphorically speaking, they have the world by it's balls. They have so much power they can put out fake research claiming the so called "clean coal" is better, even though it is still just as bad.
Reminds me of a pro-coal for energy commercial I saw. This commercial reminded the viewers that (unfortunately) most of our nation is powered by burning coal. It made me want to not just cancel service with our electricity provider, but just cut the cables going to my house.

 

[Alceste]

I have to start somewhere and since global warming means the temperature is rising it is a logical place to start.

OK, well from what I understand, sea levels are a better place to start. There are only two ways sea levels can rise: heat causing expansion and melting ice caps. The ocean is like a giant thermometer, and also an enormously significant contributor to climate.

Atmospheric and local temperature measurements, which are pretty chaotic, do not capture the overall trend as well as the ocean can, as the ocean stores heat.

Hey, I'm pretty smart. I went clean through the sixth grade. It only took me three tries.

Well done!

 

[sandy whitelinger]

No doubt. One thing I caught onto was that when gas prices went up, the cost of goods went up. It's to be expected, since it is now costing more to have raw material shipped to produce goods, and then it is costing more to have these goods shipped and distributed. But when gas prices dropped, the prices of goods have stayed the same or went up.
And it's easy to see why people who control the coal and oil industries do not want us to switch to clean energy. Metaphorically speaking, they have the world by it's balls. They have so much power they can put out fake research claiming the so called "clean coal" is better, even though it is still just as bad.
Reminds me of a pro-coal for energy commercial I saw. This commercial reminded the viewers that (unfortunately) most of our nation is powered by burning coal. It made me want to not just cancel service with our electricity provider, but just cut the cables going to my house.

I can think of a better reason to get off of foreign dependance on oil. We send an enormous amount of money in the form of American dollars to oil producing countries (oil is traded on the American dollar). This leads to a reduction of the national money supply (this was the real crisis we experienced recently) which needs to be replaced. This is replaced by running a national deficit which either brings money back by the purchase of T-bills by other countries or the monetization of the debt by the Fed.

This export of dollars also leads to the devaluation of the American dollar and the rising of oil prices as well as imported goods.

Complete domestic energy dependence would allieviate these problems. I find it hard to imagine that the smarty-pants in goverment ecomonmics do not understand this, yet they maintain the current state of affairs for a reason that they will not give us. Perhaps the ability to run a deficit to redistribute wealth and reshape society with a giant slush fund is too appealing.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I can think of a better reason to get off of foreign dependance on oil. We send an enormous amount of money in the form of American dollars to oil producing countries (oil is traded on the American dollar). This leads to a reduction of the national money supply (this was the real crisis we experienced recently) which needs to be replaced. This is replaced by running a national deficit which either brings money back by the purchase of T-bills by other countries or the monetization of the debt by the Fed.

We export a good amount of products and companies. We send money out, but McDonalds alone fetches a good amount back. Coke, Disney, and Microsoft also bring in a good chunk of cash.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

We export a good amount of products and companies. We send money out, but McDonalds alone fetches a good amount back. Coke, Disney, and Microsoft also bring in a good chunk of cash.

The foreign trade deficit for 2008 was $677 billion, thats with a "b." Interestingly, wasn't that about what the stimulus package was?

 

[kai]

i dont know much about climate change or global warming or whatever its called these days, but i can tell hypocrisy when its staring me in the face.
our own Bonnie prince Charlie flew to copenhagen to tell us the world is on the brink , i would have taken more interest if he cycled there but no , he took a jet belonging to the Queen that according to the news paper i am reading generated 6.4 tons of carbon dioxide, 5.2 tons more than if he used a commercial flight.

Our Mr Brown told us we had 50 days to save the world , so he chartered a 185 seat airbus to take him and 20 aides. no room on Charlies flight then? no chartered flights available? leading by example ? evidently not. i ask you any wonder people are skeptical?

 

[Reverend Rick]

People don't understand that all these new technologies are great if you could afford to pay for them. Putting people out of jobs and raising energy prices for everyone would be a disaster especially when we are still in a recession with double digit unemployment.

Being more green is a wonderful idea. The timing really sucks however.

I think the science behind man made global warming or climate change, what ever we are calling it right now is a huge pile of dung.

Being energy sufficient and breathing cleaner air is a wonderful goal and should be commended.

Instead of cutting our power lines, why don't we stop buying products from India and China?

It makes no sense to ruin what is left of our economy and raise the price of energy for a noble goal that will not be reached because someone else is polluting more and we are polluting less.

Unless the whole planet is on board, it is a big waste of time. Would it not make sense to ban products from entering our country that is made from dirty energy? We cannot even stop lead paint from showing up on our children's toys.

Climate change is not a national issue, it is a global issue. Unless the whole world complies, it is a waste of time, money and resources.

 

[Copernicus]

People don't understand that all these new technologies are great if you could afford to pay for them. Putting people out of jobs and raising energy prices for everyone would be a disaster especially when we are still in a recession with double digit unemployment.

I can see where money is really important to you. So suppose we just keep going on like we are, dumping tons of heat-trapping carbon into the atmosphere at an increasing rate.

It appears that this process will be destroying markets all over the globe, which means a lot of money will disappear as a result of our ignoring the trend. If money is so important to you, why do you not want to prevent a global catastrophe that will destroy all that money? (Evidently, loss of life is not as important as money, so let's not even go there.)

Being more green is a wonderful idea. The timing really sucks however.

I agree with both points.

I think the science behind man made global warming or climate change, what ever we are calling it right now is a huge pile of dung.

So we gather. Your expertise in that science is unimpressive, however. The vast majority of people who actually possess the expertise are much more alarmed by the scientific results.

Being energy sufficient and breathing cleaner air is a wonderful goal and should be commended.

We very strongly agree on this point.

Instead of cutting our power lines, why don't we stop buying products from India and China?

Er, can we really afford that? Remember how important money is to you. In any case, it would be a bad idea to anger the Chinese if we want them to keep propping up the dollar. You can thank the guy you voted for in the 2000 and 2004 elections for putting us in that place.

It makes no sense to ruin what is left of our economy and raise the price of energy for a noble goal that will not be reached because someone else is polluting more and we are polluting less.

Agreed. India and China together are huge polluters, and we are all in the same sinking boat.

Unless the whole planet is on board, it is a big waste of time. Would it not make sense to ban products from entering our country that is made from dirty energy? We cannot even stop lead paint from showing up on our children's toys.

This makes no sense. Our own products are produced by the dirtiest type of energy--coal. We look like hypocrites to the rest of the world, and we have been seen as the main roadblock to reducing greenhouse gasses ever since the problem came to the world's notice. All your policy embargoes would do is throw a monkey wrench into international relations.

Climate change is not a national issue, it is a global issue. Unless the whole world complies, it is a waste of time, money and resources.

Agreed. Worse yet, we have no choice but to try to solve the problem.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Putting people out of jobs and raising energy prices for everyone would be a disaster especially when we are still in a recession with double digit unemployment.

How would it put people out of jobs. We would need people to construct the windmills, solar panels, etc., and then people to maintain them, and people would still be needed at power plants.

Instead of cutting our power lines, why don't we stop buying products from India and China?

That might not be a good idea. China has so many bonds in the American dollar that if they sold them, even your fortune would become worthless overnight. And lets just accept the facts that foreign products costs, and are usually more durable. Cars especially. American cars are known for having problems and being expensive, but a good number of foreign cars, such as Kia, are known for being cheap, dependable, and getting good gas mileage.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I think the science behind man made global warming or climate change, what ever we are calling it right now is a huge pile of dung.

Can you back up that tatement with any data or studies?

Instead of cutting our power lines, why don't we stop buying products from India and China?

It makes no sense to ruin what is left of our economy and raise the price of energy for a noble goal that will not be reached because someone else is polluting more and we are polluting less.

Actually the buying of foreign goods will raise the price of oil. We aproxomately 3/4 trillion dollars to the world supply of American dollars every year. The purchase of oil is based on the American dollar. As long as we flood the market their will be inflation on anything bought with a greenback. That's what the declining dollar will do. The use of oil in America is strongly related to dollar hegemony as long as oil is traded on the American dollar (petrodallar) . If the world stops using oil or oil producing countries switch to another currency for the purchase of oil then our monetary system will collape. There is more to "climate change" than climate.

 

[Troublemane]

How would it put people out of jobs. We would need people to construct the windmills, solar panels, etc., and then people to maintain them, and people would still be needed at power plants.

It would absolutely shut down business all over the country, especially small business. The climate change elitists want to impose a global tax on everyone, calling it a carbon tax, and their plan is to use a police force to enter people's place of business and even their homes, and if they are emitting too much, to impose fines on them. FINES, which will cause many small busniesses to simply close. The big companies, guess what, are able to pay, and so they will and they WONT CHANGE A THING. So this tax wont fix anything except cause: massive unemployment, vast redistribution of wealth, create a dictatorial world government capable of seizing private property without due process,--and erase national sovereignty.

But dont believe me, believe the words of the dictator from Venezuela, who spoke at the Copenhagen 'climate conference' recently, calling what they were doing now the "end of capitalism", and that their goal is to 'destroy capitalism and force it to serve [us]"....big applause.

So wake up, guys. Its not about climate change, its about destroying the free market, and making us all serfs in the new communist empire. :yes:

 

[Troublemane]

Heres a link to what he said.
FORA.tv - President Hugo Chavez Lambasts Capitalism at COP15

He's pretty slick. He blames the western world for the environmental catastrophes in his own country. He makes it seem like hes against the big banks, and makes a joke that if the climate was a big bank then the US would have saved it already. Although its funny and true, hes making it seem like hes fighting against those banks! When he is in fact in power BECAUSE of oil wealth. If there was no mass comsumption of oil, there would be no Hugo Chavez.

 

[Copernicus]

But dont believe me, believe the words of the dictator from Venezuela, who spoke at the Copenhagen 'climate conference' recently, calling what they were doing now the "end of capitalism", and that their goal is to 'destroy capitalism and force it to serve [us]"....big applause.

This is a complete red herring. Nobody cares what Chavez thinks about global warming. Even if Pol Pot, Saddam Husseian, Stalin, Hitler, and Osama bin Laden were known to favor sharp reductions in CO2 emissions, we would still need to do it in order to avert global catastrophe.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It would absolutely shut down business all over the country, especially small business. The climate change elitists want to impose a global tax on everyone, calling it a carbon tax, and their plan is to use a police force to enter people's place of business and even their homes, and if they are emitting too much, to impose fines on them. FINES, which will cause many small busniesses to simply close. The big companies, guess what, are able to pay, and so they will and they WONT CHANGE A THING. So this tax wont fix anything except cause: massive unemployment, vast redistribution of wealth, create a dictatorial world government capable of seizing private property without due process,--and erase national sovereignty.

And this pertains to my posts how? And BTW, the government can already seize your property for any reason they want. And unfortunately, "just compensation" is not defined.
And, many corporations have already put a stranglehold on many smaller businesses. When Walmart comes to town, its a fact that it will shut down smaller mom and pop stores, especially in small towns. Some towns here in Indiana will not allow Walmart to open a store for that very reason.
And I for one welcome the fall of Capitalism as it stands in our nation. Hell, I'll even throw a big party when it's officially declared over. Then us working people might be able to actually get ahead for once, and not have to bite our tongues knowing that those in charge, who do not work nearly as hard and are supported by their workers, have it so easy and they think they somehow deserve their large salaries, yet if they had no workers, they have no large salaries.

Sorry, now to get back on track, but who cares about what Hugo Chavez says? One republican senator flew to Copenhagen on his own private jet. I see that as being a slap in the face to those who are actually concerned about fixing things.
But in the end, yes, all nations will have to cooperate to some degree, but if just America cut back, that that alone would be a major impact. And saving the environment has nothing to do with a nations sovereignty. That's like saying being a good dad makes him loose his manliness. Saving the planet for us, and future generations, should be a priority on everyone's list. I'll admit, I could do better, but at least I'm trying to do my part.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I for one welcome the fall of Capitalism as it stands in our nation. Hell, I'll even throw a big party when it's officially declared over.

When this happens, the need for workers will be over. Why would I employ anyone if there is nothing in it for me?

Then us working people might be able to actually get ahead for once, and not have to bite our tongues knowing that those in charge, who do not work nearly as hard and are supported by their workers, have it so easy and they think they somehow deserve their large salaries, yet if they had no workers, they have no large salaries.

That would mean I would have no income and would pay no income taxes. You do understand that you would be paying no taxes as well right? Think about it, do you believe companies like Walmart would truck in all this produce from all over, pay expensive rent or property tax, high electric bills, employee salaries for no return on their investment? There is a reason people get out of bed in the morning. Remove the incentive, (capitalism) and it would be every man and women for themselves.

Saving the planet for us, and future generations, should be a priority on every one's list. I'll admit, I could do better, but at least I'm trying to do my part.

As am I. I heat my house with a geothermal system, have a hybrid car, plant trees, and use solar panels to heat my water. Man made global warming is a myth. The planet is cooling. It has been for the last 10 years. That does not mean we should not do what is right for the planet, we just have the same goals for different reasons.

If I was not a capitalist, I could not afford to run a battered women's shelter and a food bank. Instead of running a business, I would farm to feed my family and would have no income. That means I would pay no income taxes and my workers would be unemployed.


You see, the problem with socialism is, most people would have no incentive to work hard and produce. They would pretend to work and the government would pretend to pay them. Everyone would be poor and there would not be any money left to take from the rich anymore. You would run out of other folks money to spend on the undeserving.

 

[Troublemane]

Its still hilarious, Rick, how socialists bring in more government to solve a problem, then the problems are instead made worse they use it as an argument for even more government. Hilarious! The jokes over though when government owns 100% of everything, including the people's internal organs.....or is that when the real hilarity begins? I forget. Guess it depends on how sadistic you are....:trampo: