Notices
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Even if you don't accept anthropogenic climate change...

  1. #1 Even if you don't accept anthropogenic climate change... 
    Forum Bachelors Degree x(x-y)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    462
    I still wonder why sceptics in general are so against the idea of using renewable resources and recycling current materials. Even if you don't believe in anthropogenic climate change, what is so bad about switching to the renewable sector and reusing and recycling our daily materials?

    We are going to deplete all the natural fossil fuels resources at some point anyway- oil in only ~60-70 years. So we need to steadily switch to renewables in order to be able to consume energy and use technological goods anyway! When we get to the point where we don't have any fossil fuels left to consume, and we haven't built up the renewable sector, we will all be without electricity etc for a long time while thousands of renewable power-plants have to be built for our energy needs. But if we gradually build up the renewable sector now (across the world that is), then when we reach that same point of fossil fuel depletion, we will still have energy supplied to us and won't be left with a blackout.

    So, even if anthropogenic climate change isn't real (which I strongly agree it is), why should you be against switching to the renewable sector?

    Thanks,

    - x(x-y)


    "Nature doesn't care what we call it, she just does it anyway" - R. Feynman
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Agreed.
    Also, you might consider changing the word "believe" to the word "accept," since available evidence takes it away quite significantly from a belief-based system.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    So, even if anthropogenic climate change isn't real (which I strongly believe it is), why should you be against switching to the renewable sector?
    If you are a corporation that has invested billions in developing the methods to extract, upgrade and market a product (any product) you are going to fight like hell to maintain the market for that product. The fact that one particular group of products, carbon based fuels, happens to have the potential to create a different world from the one we are familiar with, and that that world will most probably not be a better one, is irrelevant. A corporation's legal duty is to maximize profit to its shareholders. This is why it is necessary to have governments intervene, since governments are supposed to have a long term perspective for the good of all, where corporations are required to have a short term perspective for the good of shareholders only. Governments of course can be bought, or critical components of them, such as Senator Inhofe. Even Obama, from Illinois, has managed to avoid strong statements about coal, probably the worst fuel of all in terms of damaging the planet.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Bachelors Degree x(x-y)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    462
    I can see what you're saying Bunbury, but surely even shareholders of coal extraction and refinement companies agree that there is a limited time window for fossil fuel consumption! And that we will have to switch to renewables at some point...

    But I see your point...
    "Nature doesn't care what we call it, she just does it anyway" - R. Feynman
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    The coal propagandists would like us to believe the US has virtually unlimited coal. When asked for a firm number 250 years' supply might be mentioned. The National Academy of Sciences estimates the true size of our reserves at about 100 years, or less if consumption increases. But the sense that coal propaganda tries to purvey is that it is limitless, and lies repeated often enough become accepted as truth. The same strategy is used to mislead the public about climate change.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Bachelors Degree x(x-y)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    462
    From what I can see, you agree with the theory of anthropogenic climate change too?

    Anyway, how could anyone in the world believe that coal supplies are unlimited? If people actually believe this, I wonder about the future of humanity...!

    As it stands, from what I've heard, oil will last for ~60 years, coal for ~110 years and I'm not quite sure for methane but I'd say quite a bit more than coal and oil, correct me if I'm wrong...
    "Nature doesn't care what we call it, she just does it anyway" - R. Feynman
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Masters Degree Twit of wit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    553
    Quote Originally Posted by x(x-y)
    Anyway, how could anyone in the world believe that coal supplies are unlimited?
    The idea that resources are unlimited is very popular among libertarian/"free market solves all" types. So much that they call an idiot anyone who thinks otherwise.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    I'm not against renewables at all. Anyone who wants to pay more can. I'm just against forcing people to pay more unnecessarily, or subsidizing with tax dollars. When oil runs low and gets more expensive, then the free market will move to them when they are profitable. I find it very authoritarian to demand such changes in a free market.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Twit of wit
    Quote Originally Posted by x(x-y)
    Anyway, how could anyone in the world believe that coal supplies are unlimited?
    The idea that resources are unlimited is very popular among libertarian/"free market solves all" types. So much that they call an idiot anyone who thinks otherwise.
    Not so. How about the simple truth that energy companies will utilize other energy sources when they are profitable.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
    Quote Originally Posted by Twit of wit
    Quote Originally Posted by x(x-y)
    Anyway, how could anyone in the world believe that coal supplies are unlimited?
    The idea that resources are unlimited is very popular among libertarian/"free market solves all" types. So much that they call an idiot anyone who thinks otherwise.
    Not so. How about the simple truth that energy companies will utilize other energy sources when they are profitable.
    And IBM is the absolute undisputed leader in software and hardware, Sears the juggernaut of retail, and Union Pacific the worlds largest transporter because they were for decades before.

    In reality all the companies above missed their opportunities to transform and were eclipsed by smaller more agile companies who understood the new tech better and had more flexible business models. Large changes of this type often completely displace old regimes; most likely the same will happen for the largest fossil fuel based energy companies whether they be public or defacto extensions of middle eastern governments.

    The other point is the cheap price of fossil fuels are largely an illusion because it's not payed for by energy companies and mitigation cost largely passed to the consumer in the form of health care , point source clean up for the environment damage, taxes to pay for military involvement to secure the sources etc.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Masters Degree Twit of wit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    553
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
    Quote Originally Posted by Twit of wit
    Quote Originally Posted by x(x-y)
    Anyway, how could anyone in the world believe that coal supplies are unlimited?
    The idea that resources are unlimited is very popular among libertarian/"free market solves all" types. So much that they call an idiot anyone who thinks otherwise.
    Not so. How about the simple truth that energy companies will utilize other energy sources when they are profitable.
    Really? Give me some examples of "other energy sources".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    If you ask me, it takes a lot of faith to believe in renewable power, at least on a scale that would be needed to maintain our modern society. The technology just does not exist, nor do I see it being developed in the forseeable future.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by x(x-y)
    From what I can see, you agree with the theory of anthropogenic climate change too?
    I believe the evidence is convincing.

    Anyway, how could anyone in the world believe that coal supplies are unlimited? If people actually believe this, I wonder about the future of humanity...!
    Many people live from hand to mouth. Many more struggle to maintain a decent standard of living. I can understand why thinking about climate change is not high on their list of priorities. We elect leaders to deal with such issues. Unfortunately...well you know the rest.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    If you ask me, it takes a lot of faith to believe in renewable power, at least on a scale that would be needed to maintain our modern society. The technology just does not exist, nor do I see it being developed in the forseeable future.
    Does it take a lot of faith to believe that conservation could go a long way, and renewables added to conservation could reduce our future impact?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    If you ask me, it takes a lot of faith to believe in renewable power, at least on a scale that would be needed to maintain our modern society. The technology just does not exist, nor do I see it being developed in the forseeable future.
    Not really true. There are lots of even simple, effective and completely proven technology that Americans have absolutely rejected. For example the most common home is still inefficient ranch homes built by the dozens without regard for window placement or insulation to collect or reduce heat accumulation depending on location. Solar hot water heating was proven tech more than 75 years ago and part of everyday life in places like Israel where more than 90% of home use it as their primary source, but can't penetrate the American mindsets. I was part of a research group measuring active solar systems which provided over 50% of their winter heating in one of the cloudiest parts of the nation (Northern Vermont), and did so for less than 10% of the cost of the house with a 5-7 year payback; yet, virtually none of that has yet to be adopted except by an exceeding small number of home owners.

    The hard reality is Americans just don't "get it" and are more than willing to accept the misinformation that plant doubt by the largest industries on the planet, rather than make even a bit of change to how we've been conducting business for years.

    We could easily conserve 20-25% of energy use with no appreciable impact on our standard or how we live. It won't get us all the way, but it would be a good start for many reasons including energy independence, cost savings, and environmental impact just to name a few. The other thing people need to get through there heads is that JUST LIKE conventional sources who cover a range of production types (e.g., nuke, coal, oil, gas), renewable power will also come from many types (dams, solar, wind, geo etc) and need to work in conjunction with each other. We don't need a panacea of some uber tech that hasn't been discovered and if we did the best kind would be area of energy storage rather than production.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
    Quote Originally Posted by Twit of wit
    Quote Originally Posted by x(x-y)
    Anyway, how could anyone in the world believe that coal supplies are unlimited?
    The idea that resources are unlimited is very popular among libertarian/"free market solves all" types. So much that they call an idiot anyone who thinks otherwise.
    Not so. How about the simple truth that energy companies will utilize other energy sources when they are profitable.
    And IBM is the absolute undisputed leader in software and hardware, Sears the juggernaut of retail, and Union Pacific the worlds largest transporter because they were for decades before.

    In reality all the companies above missed their opportunities to transform and were eclipsed by smaller more agile companies who understood the new tech better and had more flexible business models. Large changes of this type often completely displace old regimes; most likely the same will happen for the largest fossil fuel based energy companies whether they be public or defacto extensions of middle eastern governments.

    The other point is the cheap price of fossil fuels are largely an illusion because it's not payed for by energy companies and mitigation cost largely passed to the consumer in the form of health care , point source clean up for the environment damage, taxes to pay for military involvement to secure the sources etc.
    Were these companies subsidized to do so?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Veracity Vigilante inow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    3,499
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    If you ask me, it takes a lot of faith to believe in renewable power, at least on a scale that would be needed to maintain our modern society. The technology just does not exist, nor do I see it being developed in the forseeable future.
    I suspect that your point has less to do with renewable power and more to do with our ability to store it effectively for use whenever needed. In short, your criticism applies to batteries, not wind/solar/geothermal, etc.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Professor Wild Cobra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by inow
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    If you ask me, it takes a lot of faith to believe in renewable power, at least on a scale that would be needed to maintain our modern society. The technology just does not exist, nor do I see it being developed in the forseeable future.
    I suspect that your point has less to do with renewable power and more to do with our ability to store it effectively for use whenever needed. In short, your criticism applies to batteries, not wind/solar/geothermal, etc.
    You know.

    That is a good aspect to consider. I point out the problems of storage at times, but maybe we will have a solution soon. We just might be close to affordable solutions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Isotope Bunbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,590
    Evidently the good people of Maine, Massachusetts and Florida are not taken in by fossil industry propaganda.

    http://woods.stanford.edu/docs/surve...ord-Survey.pdf
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •