Green new deal equals magical thinking

[brenthutch 383]

“Don’t tax you, don't tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree” 

R Long

[normiss 622]

2 hours ago, DJL said:

I voluntarily pay an additional $5 per billing cycle for my power company to develop renewables, I don't really care that it's likely a greenwash bit of bullshit.   True, people don't want to pay more money, not really a mystery, it's always someone eles's problem:

"Instead, clear majorities say they would prefer that climate initiatives be funded by increasing the taxes on wealthy households and on companies that burn fossil fuels."

This is the typical uninformed BS you'll see, that wealthy people and corporations need to pay for it.  The fact is that everyone was benefiting from low cost power, whether it be coal power plants or gasoline engines so we ALL need to pay for it.

Give those of us carrying the majority of the tax burden the same cut in tax rates, then maybe we'd be more inclined to give more.

[DJL 232]

22 minutes ago, normiss said:

Give those of us carrying the majority of the tax burden the same cut in tax rates, then maybe we'd be more inclined to give more.

We can add that to the list but we'll be dust and bones if we wait to fix the entire world of tax disparity.

[gowlerk 1,914]

edit, wrong thread

 

Edited September 17, 2019 by gowlerk
wrong thread

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

8 hours ago, DJL said:

 

"Instead, clear majorities say they would prefer that climate initiatives be funded by increasing the taxes on wealthy households and on companies that burn fossil fuels."

This is the typical uninformed BS you'll see, that wealthy people and corporations need to pay for it...

And the other side of the 'typical uninformed bullshit' is that these idiots ignore the very simple fact that the 'corporations' will pass on any tax increases to their customers. 

21 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Wake me up when yellow fever becomes more than click bait for the uninformed.

How many have to get sick before you wake up? How many have to die?

How about West Nile virus? How many for that?

Then there's Eastern Equine Encephalitis. That's a real fun one. While the confirmed cases are still in the single digits per state, it's on the increase. 

[brenthutch 383]

"September 17, 2019 6.39am AEST
Tim Flannery Professorial fellow, Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute, University of Melbourne

In this age of rapidly melting glaciers, terrifying megafires and ever more puissant hurricanes, of acidifying and rising oceans, it is hard to believe that any further prod to climate action is needed.

But the reality is that we continue to live in a business-as-usual world. Our media is filled with enthusiastic announcements about new fossil fuel projects, or the unveiling of the latest fossil-fuelled supercar, as if there’s no relationship between such things and climate change. 

A ‘colossal failure’ of climate activism

Each year the situation becomes more critical. In 2018, global emissions of greenhouse gases rose by 1.7% while the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere jumped by 3.5 parts per million – the largest ever observed increase.

No climate report or warning, no political agreement nor technological innovation has altered the ever-upward trajectory of the pollution. This simple fact forces me to look back on my 20 years of climate activism as a colossal failure."

Don't feel bad Tim, you are not alone, I think climate activists are colossal failures as well.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

"September 17, 2019 6.39am AEST
Tim Flannery Professorial fellow, Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute, University of Melbourne

In this age of rapidly melting glaciers, terrifying megafires and ever more puissant hurricanes, of acidifying and rising oceans, it is hard to believe that any further prod to climate action is needed.

But the reality is that we continue to live in a business-as-usual world. Our media is filled with enthusiastic announcements about new fossil fuel projects, or the unveiling of the latest fossil-fuelled supercar, as if there’s no relationship between such things and climate change. 

A ‘colossal failure’ of climate activism

Each year the situation becomes more critical. In 2018, global emissions of greenhouse gases rose by 1.7% while the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere jumped by 3.5 parts per million – the largest ever observed increase.

No climate report or warning, no political agreement nor technological innovation has altered the ever-upward trajectory of the pollution. This simple fact forces me to look back on my 20 years of climate activism as a colossal failure."

Don't feel bad Tim, you are not alone, I think climate activists are colossal failures as well.

Brent, you aren't educating anyone here. We warmist, alarmist, hysterical and blindered nincompoops are too hypnotized by foolishly perceived developing climatic conditions not the play by play action that informs your world view. You agree the planet is warming. You also acknowledge that human activity plays a role. You simply believe there is more good than bad for a certain, but yet, undefined while. Also, you are comfortable being wrong when you are long since dead. We prefer, if there is any possibility, to be right when we are dead. And we are willing to pay up now for that unlikely possibility. We aren't changing our views and neither are you. So how about we just fade this, and any irreconcilable second amendment differences for that matter, and move on? Surely there are other things that inspire you.

[billvon 2,400]

13 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Most Americans not willing to pay $2 a month to stop climate change

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/americans-increasingly-see-climate-change-as-a-crisis-poll-shows/2019/09/12/74234db0-cd2a-11e9-87fa-8501a456c003_story.html?noredirect=on

Looks like GND now stands for Green Not-going-to-happen Dream

68% support higher taxes on the wealthy to reduce emissions

60% support higher taxes on companies who burn fossil fuels - even if it leads to higher prices for consumers

And that would fund quite a lot of renewables + storage.

[brenthutch 383]

12 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Brent, you aren't educating anyone here. We warmist, alarmist, hysterical and blindered nincompoops are too hypnotized by foolishly perceived developing climatic conditions not the play by play action that informs your world view. You agree the planet is warming. You also acknowledge that human activity plays a role. You simply believe there is more good than bad for a certain, but yet, undefined while. Also, you are comfortable being wrong when you are long since dead. We prefer, if there is any possibility, to be right when we are dead. And we are willing to pay up now for that unlikely possibility.

I just want to remain actively engaged on the matter of policy.  Go ahead buy your electric car, festoon your house with solar panels, go vegan, take your hemp tote with you as you ride your bike to Whole Foods.  We can all agree that it will have ZERO impact on global climate.  Your virtue signaling is fine, just don't ask me to pay for it. 

As one of the progenitors of the green new deal said 

“The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all" 

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––

 

 

Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti then asked. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”Saikat Chakrabarti said in May, according to The Washington Post.

I have a problem with a thirty year old kid trying to change the whole economy, especially when that economy is doing quite well for the fast majority of Americans. 

Edited September 18, 2019 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,299]

3 hours ago, brenthutch said:

I just want to remain actively engages on the matter of policy.  Go ahead buy your electric car, festoon your house with solar panels, go vegan, take your hemp tote with you as you ride your bike to Whole Foods.  We can all agree that it will have ZERO impact on global climate.  Your virtue signaling is fine, just don't ask me to pay for it.

Engaging in public policy isn't accomplished by the sort of green shaming and trivializing you find funny. I don't have an electric car, a single solar panel on our house, I'm not a vegan and I don't ride a bike to Whole Foods toting a hemp bag. It's not that I wouldn't or because I think it's stupid to do so, I just don't. I suppose if I had a more regular life and was as clever as Bill I might sort out a solar/EV solution just for giggles and if the Whole Foods wasn't 20 miles away I might ride my bike. Going Vegan holds no appeal but I can definitely see the point and the observable health benefits.

The impact of those particular individual decisions, especially when multiplied as the practices become accepted by society is not ZERO. In terms of reduction of CO2 output against the whole the effect is inarguably de minimis. However, as the ideas gain acceptance, as demonstrated by practice, they will likely become drivers of public policy on things that do have real effect. That, I'm pretty sure, is what engagement actually looks like. 

[Bigfalls 110]

In regard to CO2 out put and atmospheric levels, a number of years ago the government put the ethanol program into effect to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.  When you grow corn, you have to plow, plant, fertilize, harvest, haul and dry the corn which all use petroleum.  Once at the ethanol plant, the corn has to be processed for fermentation which uses energy.  The ethanol then has to be transported to the terminals and mixed with the gasoline, more petroleum used.  When the process is completed, it takes more BTU's to produce a gallon of ethanol than the BTU's in the ethanol.  When added to the gasoline, the mileage on the vehicle decreases.  The byproducts of fermentation are alcohol and CO2, what happens to all the CO2 that these ethanol plants produce?  Is it going into the atmosphere or is it recovered.  Also the CO2 released during net loss of energy from producing ethanol.  Aren't we the largest producers of oil in the world, hasn't our dependence been reduced (probably not by ethanol).  I guess if the first presidential primary wasn't in Iowa where they grow corn, things may be different.

 

[DJL 232]

6 hours ago, brenthutch said:

I just want to remain actively engaged on the matter of policy.  Go ahead buy your electric car, festoon your house with solar panels, go vegan, take your hemp tote with you as you ride your bike to Whole Foods.  We can all agree that it will have ZERO impact on global climate.  Your virtue signaling is fine, just don't ask me to pay for it. 

Regardless of the picture you want to paint, your desire to not pay for mitigation against global warming isn't relevant.  You may actually die before it's no longer cost effective to own and drive a car with an internal combustion engine but I wouldn't be surprised if they're off the market sooner than we think.

[brenthutch 383]

I actually agree with you on that point.  Sometime late in this century when fusion power will be coming on line and battery technology will be lightyears ahead of what we have now, we will see the sunset of the era of the internal combustion engine.  Gasoline will be for classic cars and will have to be special ordered. 

[wmw999 2,122]

How do you think those things will happen in a practical application if there aren’t earlier tries? Do we still drive cars with a steering stick, on dirt tracks? 

No technology emerges complete. And your decision as to which is the best future direction is just as effective as mine. And, frankly, Billvon has done a whole lot more reading and learning about this; that doesn’t mean I implicitly believe everything he says, but it does mean he knows more than I do, and i listen to those inputs. 

Wendy P. 

[DJL 232]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

.  Gasoline will be for classic cars and will have to be special ordered. 

We'll know the apocalyse has arrived when the Mustang and Harley Davidsons have electric motors.

[ryoder 1,384]

23 minutes ago, DJL said:

We'll know the apocalyse has arrived when the Mustang and Harley Davidsons have electric motors.

Like this?

https://www.harley-davidson.com/us/en/motorcycles/livewire.html

[brenthutch 383]

3 hours ago, wmw999 said:

How do you think those things will happen in a practical application if there aren’t earlier tries? Do we still drive cars with a steering stick, on dirt tracks? 

No technology emerges complete. And your decision as to which is the best future direction is just as effective as mine. And, frankly, Billvon has done a whole lot more reading and learning about this; that doesn’t mean I implicitly believe everything he says, but it does mean he knows more than I do, and i listen to those inputs. 

Wendy P. 

That is the whole point!  There was no government program dictating how a car should be laid out, the market took care of that. The government supported an "expert" to build the first powered aircraft, he failed.  Who succeeded?  A couple of bicycle mechanics from Ohio.  Let the entrepreneurs try.  Some will fail others will succeed, the market will determine that, NOT THE GOVERNMENT.  The government told us that smoking was fine, it even supplied cigarettes in K-Rations to our soldiers.  The government has a HORRIBILE track record picking winners and losers .  Trust the collective force of each individual deciding what is best for them, chart the way.

Edited September 19, 2019 by brenthutch

[brenthutch 383]

5 hours ago, Bigfalls said:

In regard to CO2 out put and atmospheric levels, a number of years ago the government put the ethanol program into effect to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.  When you grow corn, you have to plow, plant, fertilize, harvest, haul and dry the corn which all use petroleum.  Once at the ethanol plant, the corn has to be processed for fermentation which uses energy.  The ethanol then has to be transported to the terminals and mixed with the gasoline, more petroleum used.  When the process is completed, it takes more BTU's to produce a gallon of ethanol than the BTU's in the ethanol.  When added to the gasoline, the mileage on the vehicle decreases.  The byproducts of fermentation are alcohol and CO2, what happens to all the CO2 that these ethanol plants produce?  Is it going into the atmosphere or is it recovered.  Also the CO2 released during net loss of energy from producing ethanol.  Aren't we the largest producers of oil in the world, hasn't our dependence been reduced (probably not by ethanol).  I guess if the first presidential primary wasn't in Iowa where they grow corn, things may be different.

 

But we have to do SOMETHING!!  It doesn't matter if it works, what matters is that we try.  Don't  confuse me with a bunch of facts. Ethanol has a certain truthiness that I find appealing.  

Edited September 18, 2019 by brenthutch

[gowlerk 1,914]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

But we have to do SOMETHING!!  It doesn't matter if it works, what matters is that we try.  Don't  confuse me with a bunch of facts. Ethanol has a certain truthiness that I find appealing.  

The ethanol for fuel business in the US, and Brazil, has nothing to do with carbon emissions and everything to do with past fuel shortages.

[brenthutch 383]

3 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

The ethanol for fuel business in the US, and Brazil, has nothing to do with carbon emissions and everything to do with past fuel shortages.

Because the US is a net exporter of fossil fuels, shortages are no longer a part of the conversation.  BTW how does burning two gallons of oil to get one gallon of ethanal deal with fuel shortages? It has EVERYTHING to do with the Iowa caucuses. 

Edited September 19, 2019 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,299]

2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

But we have to do SOMETHING!!  It doesn't matter if it works, what matters is that we try.  Don't  confuse me with a bunch of facts. Ethanol has a certain truthiness that I find appealing.  

Please go back to arguing your own arguments. There will always be some idiot thing to refute, just go back through my posts if you have doubts. Seriously, ejaculations like the above are like a phantom twitch; an absolute nothing that feels real to you alone. 

[brenthutch 383]

11 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Please go back to arguing your own arguments. There will always be some idiot thing to refute, just go back through my posts if you have doubts. Seriously, ejaculations like the above are like a phantom twitch; an absolute nothing that feels real to you alone. 

Just got done listening to a congressional panel on climate change headlined by a mentality ill teenager.  Way to go democrats, good on you. 

[JoeWeber 2,299]

2 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Just got done listening to a congressional panel on climate change headlined by a mentality ill teenager.  Way to go democrats, good on you. 

"Please go back to arguing your own arguments. There will always be some idiot thing to refute, just go back through my posts if you have doubts. Seriously, ejaculations like the above are like a phantom twitch; an absolute nothing that feels real to you alone."

See? It fit's again.

[gowlerk 1,914]

57 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Because the US is a net exporter of fossil fuels, shortages are no longer a part of the conversation.  BTW how does burning two gallons of oil to get one gallon of ethanal deal with fuel shortages? It has EVERYTHING to do with the Iowa caucuses. 

Yes, I agree with all of that. Just don't blame it on alarmists!

[gowlerk 1,914]

28 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

"Please go back to arguing your own arguments. There will always be some idiot thing to refute, just go back through my posts if you have doubts. Seriously, ejaculations like the above are like a phantom twitch; an absolute nothing that feels real to you alone."

See? It fit's again.

New stock reply?