Sobering global warming article...

[exiledNms]

I do remember in the '70's when the next world ending event was another ice age. :eek2:

Me too. The science was settled. The Ice Age cometh.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I don't know if we can do anyuthing as humans to reverse it, but I do agree that energy companies get an amazing free ride.

Free ride? Which do you mean? The employment of hundreds of thousands of people at really nice salaries or the paying billions in taxes for the government to waste?

I say tax them, and give them an incentive to produce cleaner energy. That will drive up the price of fossil fuels, making it more feasible to produce more efficient automobiles and light bulbs. It also might possibly save out planet from a drastic future...

Social engineering through tax code manipulation, eh? Well, this country suffers countless unintended consequences from such a strategy, so what's one more?

I'm not surprised you want a government-led solution. It's a fairly common viewpoint.

But, consider that what you want is innovation in the energy industry. What drives innovation better? Relative wealth or relative poverty? A wealthy populace has disposable income that allows them to demand things beyond basic necessities. This in turn drives the innovation to supply the demand. You see this everywhere in this country - from smart phones to fancy smoothies at fast food restaurants. So, the more wealth the more demand the more innovation.

You want the government to siphon off wealth. Less wealth leads to less innovation.

Just something to consider.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Social engineering through tax code manipulation, eh? Well, this country suffers countless unintended consequences from such a strategy, so what's one more?

I'm not surprised you want a government-led solution. It's a fairly common viewpoint.

But, consider that what you want is innovation in the energy industry. What drives innovation better? Relative wealth or relative poverty?

I honestly don't know what to believe, but if we were to assume AGW is factual, then we must treat it like any other big business damaging the environment - we regulate what they can do. The EPA exists not as social engineering, but because (many) companies - large and small - were unwilling to spend the extra money to protect the environment without regulation. It's (the EPA) not perfect by a long shot, but without it we'd look a lot more like China wrt pollution.

IOW, if AGW is truly occurring, we probably DO need the government to step in a regulate - the large oil companies certainly don't currently have any incentive to change their business model.

 

[PacadermaTideUs]

I honestly don't know what to believe, but if we were to assume AGW is factual, then we must treat it like any other big business damaging the environment - we regulate what they can do. The EPA exists not as social engineering, but because (many) companies - large and small - were unwilling to spend the extra money to protect the environment without regulation. It's (the EPA) not perfect by a long shot, but without it we'd look a lot more like China wrt pollution.

IOW, if AGW is truly occurring, we probably DO need the government to step in a regulate - the large oil companies certainly don't currently have any incentive to change their business model.

AGW is occurring - the science is clear on that. Atmospheric CO2 (one of many sources) captures longwave radiation and therefore causes global warming. Humans add atmospheric CO2. Therefore we contribute to global warming. The real question is "What percentage of total warming is anthropogenic?" We must answer that question before we can do a proper cost/benefit analysis of the proposed solutions, particularly when we already know that the costs of the commonly proposed solutions will be so high.

Edit: According to UAH satellite derived temperature trends, it appears as though recent total warming (since the 1980's) has slowed or even leveled off over the past decade. This would suggest that the anthropogenic contribution has been offset by natural variability.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I honestly don't know what to believe, but if we were to assume AGW is factual, then we must treat it like any other big business damaging the environment - we regulate what they can do. The EPA exists not as social engineering, but because (many) companies - large and small - were unwilling to spend the extra money to protect the environment without regulation. It's (the EPA) not perfect by a long shot, but without it we'd look a lot more like China wrt pollution.

IOW, if AGW is truly occurring, we probably DO need the government to step in a regulate - the large oil companies certainly don't currently have any incentive to change their business model.

While I'm not against all government regulation, generally I much prefer (because it is more effective and honest) that regulation come from consumer choice than bureaucratic whim. And, unfortunately, much of what the EPA does now is social engineering. As with anything else, the bigger role the role the government gives itself in an issue, the more it whores itself out to the special interests.

 

[Bamaro]

While I'm not against all government regulation, generally I much prefer (because it is more effective and honest) that regulation come from consumer choice than bureaucratic whim. And, unfortunately, much of what the EPA does now is social engineering. As with anything else, the bigger role the role the government gives itself in an issue, the more it whores itself out to the special interests.

Consumers will choose the cheapest solution. Thats why rivers caught fire 40 years ago.

 

[Bodhisattva]

Consumers will choose the cheapest solution. Thats why rivers caught fire 40 years ago.

I buy based on quality, and I have never set a river on fire.

Consumers with little/no disposable income buy on the cheap. The big government crowd makes consumers poorer than they otherwise would be. See how those dots connect?

 

[bamacon]

I like to add this to the discussion when GW comes up. Sums it up http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/2572842/html5

 

[crimsonaudio]

Interesting paper here: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....Store_id=66585975-a507-4d81-b750-def3ec74913d

 

[CajunCrimson]

A bad economy, where it's citizens are struggling will buy on the cheap....the harder the times, the cheaper we buy. Thus, the best way to help the environment is to have a booming economy. YET, a booming economy requires more industrial output and the consumption of more products putting stress on the environment and the ozone layer....thus causing the Earth to warm.

So, a bad economy is bad for the environment, yet a good one is just as bad....

OR it could just be the evolution of the planet, Or our orbiting pattern and it's proximity to the sun, Or the natural tilting of our axis shifting the climates slightly north....making farmland in North Dakota and Southern Canada more valuable.....Or it could just be the fact that we are not as important as we think we are, and there is not a darn thing we can do about it either way, and to be so arrogant as to believe that using a can of raid is causing it to get hotter in Missouri is the same logic that says Obama will fix Global Warming with a flick of his really big stick

 

[rizolltizide]

Hello Tidefans non-sports junkies! Bet you thought I gave up and just withered away under all your scorn and right wing rhetoric. Uh uh. Still around. Became a dedicated Christian. Married again after losing my wife of 44 years. But still a moderate, still believe that there is science. Still opposed to posts that essentially encourage us not to think.

Global Warming is here. We are experiencing it across our country. I just drove from Alabama to Lake Superior in Wisconsin, and the corn in Illinois and southern Wisconsin is brown at the base and two feet shorter than it should be. The data is as clear as the visible evidence.

So the response here is to declare that we are in a natural cycle; or that people have been wrong before; or that there is a conspiracy to increase our taxes; or to shoot the messenger; or that we have snow in the winter so it can't be getting warmer: or that we can't do anything about it anyway so just shut up. The last may be the most operative response. Just lean down and force your head between your knees and kiss your *** goodbye.

I don't know if we can do anyuthing as humans to reverse it, but I do agree that energy companies get an amazing free ride. The dump their waste into the atmosphere, and it increases their profit margin at our expense. You can't do that to the rivers or the oceans without a penalty. Instead we give them an oil depletion allowance, a tax break because oil is a non-renewable resource! I say tax them, and give them an incentive to produce cleaner energy. That will drive up the price of fossil fuels, making it more feasible to produce more efficient automobiles and light bulbs. It also might possibly save out planet from a drastic future...

Man. Dead kern. How will I ever get my more efficient, cheaper, and cleaner burning effanols.

 

[bamachile]

Hello Tidefans non-sports junkies! Bet you thought I gave up and just withered away under all your scorn and right wing rhetoric. Uh uh. Still around. Became a dedicated Christian. Married again after losing my wife of 44 years. But still a moderate, still believe that there is science. Still opposed to posts that essentially encourage us not to think.

Welcome back Bob. I'm just recently back after a year-and-a-half hiatus myself. Congratulations on the marriage and on Christianity. It's not perfection (at least in this life), but it's certainly betterment. As a conservative-leaning Libertarian, I welcome input from other perspectives (I'm looking at you, Bamaro ). A tug to the left keeps the car from going in the right ditch, and vice versa.

 

[cbi1972]

Welcome back Bob. I'm just recently back after a year-and-a-half hiatus myself. Congratulations on the marriage and on Christianity. It's not perfection (at least in this life), but it's certainly betterment. As a conservative-leaning Libertarian, I welcome input from other perspectives (I'm looking at you, Bamaro ). A tug to the left keeps the car from going in the right ditch, and vice versa.

I first read this as "Congratulations on the marriage aid in Christianity"