3 3
brenthutch

Green new deal equals magical thinking

Recommended Posts

(edited)
22 hours ago, DJL said:

Another example of a country with no regard for human health.

Good health and a large carbon footprint go hand in hand.  Countries with the highest per capita carbon footprint are: Saudi Arabia, Australia, USA, and Canada.  The countries with the lowest carbon footprint per capita are: Lesotho, Burundi, Chad, Mali, The Congo Republic and Rwanda.  Where would you rather live?

Saudi life expectancy-75 years, Australia- 82.5 USA- 78.5 

Lesotho life expectancy- 53 years, Burundi-60, Chad- 54

Edited by brenthutch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
20 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Good health and a large carbon footprint go hand in hand.  Countries with the highest per capita carbon footprint are: Saudi Arabia, Australia, USA, and Canada.  The countries with the lowest carbon footprint per capita are: Lesotho, Burundi, Chad, Mali, The Congo Republic and Rwanda.  Where would you rather live?

Saudi life expectancy-75 years, Australia- 82.5 USA- 78.5 

Lesotho life expectancy- 53 years, Burundi-60, Chad- 54

How about countries with 1/3 to 2/3 of the US emissions, with longer life expectancy.  France, Spain, Norway, Netherlands, Italy, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Japan, UK, etc. ?   In fact, of the 37 countries with higher lifespan than the US, 90% of them have per capita emissions in the range of 1/3 to 2/3 of the US emissions.

Edited by headoverheels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, headoverheels said:

How about countries with 1/3 to 2/3 of the US emissions, with longer life expectancy.  France, Spain, Norway, Netherlands, Italy, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Japan, UK, etc. ?   

What about them?  They are all in the top third of carbon producers on the globe.  We know how to reduce our carbon footprint, Sub-Saharan Africa has shown us the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, brenthutch said:

What about them?  They are all in the top third of carbon producers on the globe.  We know how to reduce our carbon footprint, Sub-Saharan Africa has shown us the way.

I'm curious what is you think Sub-Saharan Africa is doing that achieves your point of simultaneous  low emissions, quality of life and an advanced economy.  You do a bad job of "owning libtards".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DJL said:

I'm curious what is you think Sub-Saharan Africa is doing that achieves your point of simultaneous  low emissions, quality of life and an advanced economy.  You do a bad job of "owning libtards".

Advanced economies don’t have small carbon footprints.  That is the whole point of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Advanced economies don’t have small carbon footprints.  That is the whole point of this thread.

But they often have 1/3 of the footprint of the US.   You are the one who touted lifespan as a function of carbon footprint.  Even the examples you gave don't all have longer lifespan than the US.    90% of the countries with longer lifespan have significantly lower carbon footprint than the US, averaging ~a factor of 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, headoverheels said:

But they often have 1/3 of the footprint of the US.   You are the one who touted lifespan as a function of carbon footprint.  Even the examples you gave don't all have longer lifespan than the US.    90% of the countries with longer lifespan have significantly lower carbon footprint than the US, averaging ~a factor of 2.

A blue whale is 25X larger than an elephant, but an elephant is still pretty huge.  My point was that a small carbon footprint correlates very poorly with a healthy environment. It was a rejoinder to DJL's comment that economies which are trying to develop, using coal, don't care about the health and wellbeing of their populations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Let’s take a trip down memory lane and remember what BillV had to say about oil/gas

“It would  be silly to think that oil/gas will get cheaper; indeed, the reason we have more access to it now is that rising oil prices have paid for the higher extraction costs of tight oil.”

Or maybe new technology is the reason?

Any thoughts?

 

Edited by brenthutch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2020 at 6:54 PM, brenthutch said:

Let’s take a trip down memory lane and remember what BillV had to say about oil/gas

“It would  be silly to think that oil/gas will get cheaper; indeed, the reason we have more access to it now is that rising oil prices have paid for the higher extraction costs of tight oil.”

Or maybe new technology is the reason?

Any thoughts?

 

How do you possibly think "new technologies" is counter to what Bill said?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2020 at 9:54 PM, brenthutch said:

Let’s take a trip down memory lane and remember what BillV had to say about oil/gas

“It would  be silly to think that oil/gas will get cheaper; indeed, the reason we have more access to it now is that rising oil prices have paid for the higher extraction costs of tight oil.”

Or maybe new technology is the reason?

Any thoughts?

 

Honestly Brent, you're like Ron; you have no place else to go to be noticed. You need another hobby besides SC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Honestly Brent, you're like Ron; you have no place else to go to be noticed. You need another hobby besides SC.

Sorry Joe you're wrong. Anthropologists need dinosaurs and SC needs people like Ron and Brent. Such that trump supporters can be understood,  analysed and dissected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Sorry Joe you're wrong. Anthropologists need dinosaurs and SC needs people like Ron and Brent. Such that trump supporters can be understood,  analysed and dissected.

That's actually part of what I enjoy about this, it's fun to pull apart their arguments and I enjoy reading up on the science involved in these things.  Same went with the "9/11 was an inside job" thread that went on for so long.  The arguments are beyond dumb but reading up on demolition and the psychology of how people fool themselves into believing things with no scientific foundation is quite interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, DJL said:

That's actually part of what I enjoy about this, it's fun to pull apart their arguments and I enjoy reading up on the science involved in these things.  Same went with the "9/11 was an inside job" thread that went on for so long.  The arguments are beyond dumb but reading up on demolition and the psychology of how people fool themselves into believing things with no scientific foundation is quite interesting.

Completely agree. Without these forums i would have no idea that thinking like Ron's existed as I'm not a researcher of sociology or psychology. As such I would have no direct interactions with such types. Without direct interactions outliers like him are difficult to quantify.

I know Brent plays with everyone in his responses. Nobody could have been born in 1940 and never changed in the least and I know he's not dumb. But I've never met anyone so set in their ways. Custer's last stand comes perversely to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Sorry Joe you're wrong. Anthropologists need dinosaurs and SC needs people like Ron and Brent. Such that trump supporters can be understood,  analysed and dissected.

No Phil, you are wrong. Anthropologists need people to study and SC needs Ron as much as we need to hear a Dan Hicks and the Hot Licks album skipping. I might concede on Brent however but only for the comedic value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Coreece said:

I suppose we could just leave and let you guys circle jerk this place to death while Phil preaches to the choir. . .

Is that what you want?

What's the we? Just because you're full of it don't mean I don't adore you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Coreece said:

I suppose we could just leave and let you guys circle jerk this place to death while Phil preaches to the choir. . .

Is that what you want?

 

5 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

No Phil, you are wrong. Anthropologists need people to study and SC needs Ron as much as we need to hear a Dan Hicks and the Hot Licks album skipping. I might concede on Brent however but only for the comedic value.

Well I've been wrong before and somehow I think the American choir will be in harmony for the first time in four years come January.

As far as preachers go the evangelical flock will be facing the stark reality of confession for their sins. Sizable pecuniary donations will be necessary to atone for those sins. But prayer and donations won't atone for their moral bankruptcy.

Preachers will spin it though they always have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve stayed out of this thread. But my father has driven me over the edge! I’ve had 6 weeks of every evening and him writing letters to the BBC, his local MP and everyone else he can think of. He’s an 80 year old retired electrical engineer with a long history of power electronics (designing 25kA rectifiers, electrical locomotives etc).

His view is that green energy is a farce, technology pushed by people with humanity degrees and no knowledge of electrical engineering. The ONLY viable solution to him is nuclear. 
 

I am an electronics engineer, but not very knowledgeable in power systems and with very little interest as well. So I’m not going to pretend to know much. I guess I agree with my dad that fossil fuels are not sustainable, personally I like green energy. I’m puzzled why wave and hydro aren’t more widespread.

Any way rant over :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

I’ve stayed out of this thread. But my father has driven me over the edge! I’ve had 6 weeks of every evening and him writing letters to the BBC, his local MP and everyone else he can think of. He’s an 80 year old retired electrical engineer with a long history of power electronics (designing 25kA rectifiers, electrical locomotives etc).

His view is that green energy is a farce, technology pushed by people with humanity degrees and no knowledge of electrical engineering. The ONLY viable solution to him is nuclear. 
 

I am an electronics engineer, but not very knowledgeable in power systems and with very little interest as well. So I’m not going to pretend to know much. I guess I agree with my dad that fossil fuels are not sustainable, personally I like green energy. I’m puzzled why wave and hydro aren’t more widespread.

Any way rant over :)

There are three main reasons why your dad is wrong.Fukushima, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Engineers tend to emphasize mechanical- technical rational process. Political,liability insurance,cost overruns, consumer resistance are not factors quantifiable to some engineers.

Those same aforementioned reasons are why hydro is a tough sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

His view is that green energy is a farce, technology pushed by people with humanity degrees and no knowledge of electrical engineering.

It would be fun to introduce him to Bob Gudgel, Martin Fornage, Heart Ackerman, Steve Johnston, and Tim Economu and see if he thinks they have "no knowledge of electrical engineering."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, billvon said:

It would be fun to introduce him to Bob Gudgel, Martin Fornage, Heart Ackerman, Steve Johnston, and Tim Economu and see if he thinks they have "no knowledge of electrical engineering."

To be honest it’s rather sad. It’s pretty clear his mental capacity is failing fast. He used to be very clever and fully computer literate. But now he’s a scared old man. Doesn’t understand Windows since they changed it from Win 95. And don’t even mention smartphones!

A friend of mine tried to talk to him about the lifecycle costs of nuclear and my dad flat out refused to listen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

3 3