Global Warming*%#*

[Frankn]

Global 'Warming'*%#*

Think of all the damage the 'scientist' that presented this theory has done. He has killed the coal industry. The US has one of the largest, if not the largest reserve of coal in the world. He is indirectly responsible for legislation to head off GW. This legislation has killed industries and caused severe unemployment. The gov has spent BILLIONS backing alternate industries like solar and biodeisel. Most of these endeavors have failed. This economic downturn has reduced our standard of living all around. I wonder if this guy is still employed? Frank...
hay, maybe if we all start heating with coal we can warm it back up. Opps, the EPA, the great industry killer wouldn,t like that. They might drone you.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[RGINN]

You mentioned coal and that brought back a memory. Growin up in western Oklahoma we had a 'wood' burning stove. Not a whole lot of trees out there so we would go into town to the Rock Island Depot and buy coal and burn it. Sorry if we caused snow down in Alabama this week.

 

[TreasurePirate69]

The world is not black and white. Please stop thinking in "binary"...

As for alternative energies, long term we simply have no choice. The biggest problem with most people and alternative energies is that they only look at the short term costs and ignore the long term costs. For example, they compare what it would cost to put solar panels on their roof with what they currently pay for electricity each year. Of course, solar panels are way more expensive so they loudly claim that solar panels and alternative energies are a farce. The problem with that type of short term thinking is that the fossil energy conglomerates can ALWAYS ensure that fossil fuels cost less than alternatives. Price of solar panels comes down? No problem, just drop the price of electricity until solar panels are more expensive again. Suddenly alternative sources of energy aren't as viable and people go running back to fossil fuels. If you think this doesn't already happen just take a look at how the interest in alternative energies wanes when the gas prices come back down again. But the long term costs of fossil fuels can't be disputed. I'm not talking about global warming here either. We simply cannot ignore these costs forever.

For the record, I'm not some tree hugger and I don't put much stock into the theories of global warming. However, you can't ignore that more and more damage is being done to the earth the longer we stay addicted to fossil fuels as our primary source of energy. We need alternatives. You can't fly over a big city like Chicago at night, see all of the energy being wasted in the city in nighttime lighting alone, and not think to yourself that this current situation is completely unsustainable in the long term. To just imagine how much coal is being consumed every day in this country to light our lights and let us rant here on Treasurenet is completely mind boggling to say the least. If you haven't had that "ah-ha" moment in your life then you owe it to yourself to book a flight over Chicago or NYC at night and just try to imagine the amount of power that is being consumed each and every second. Then multiply that by the thousands or even millions all over the world.

I know that you have some background in electronics so I would expect you to understand what I am talking about. The amount of energy we use every day to power all of these gadgets, lights, transportation, and all the rest cannot keep coming from the ground indefinitely. And if all we ever care about is the short term costs then some day we are going to get into a very bad situation.

 

[Dave44]

The world is not black and white. Please stop thinking in "binary"...

As for alternative energies, long term we simply have no choice. The biggest problem with most people and alternative energies is that they only look at the short term costs and ignore the long term costs. For example, they compare what it would cost to put solar panels on their roof with what they currently pay for electricity each year. Of course, solar panels are way more expensive so they loudly claim that solar panels and alternative energies are a farce. The problem with that type of short term thinking is that the fossil energy conglomerates can ALWAYS ensure that fossil fuels cost less than alternatives. Price of solar panels comes down? No problem, just drop the price of electricity until solar panels are more expensive again. Suddenly alternative sources of energy aren't as viable and people go running back to fossil fuels. If you think this doesn't already happen just take a look at how the interest in alternative energies wanes when the gas prices come back down again. But the long term costs of fossil fuels can't be disputed. I'm not talking about global warming here either. We simply cannot ignore these costs forever.

For the record, I'm not some tree hugger and I don't put much stock into the theories of global warming. However, you can't ignore that more and more damage is being done to the earth the longer we stay addicted to fossil fuels as our primary source of energy. We need alternatives. You can't fly over a big city like Chicago at night, see all of the energy being wasted in the city in nighttime lighting alone, and not think to yourself that this current situation is completely unsustainable in the long term. To just imagine how much coal is being consumed every day in this country to light our lights and let us rant here on Treasurenet is completely mind boggling to say the least. If you haven't had that "ah-ha" moment in your life then you owe it to yourself to book a flight over Chicago or NYC at night and just try to imagine the amount of power that is being consumed each and every second. Then multiply that by the thousands or even millions all over the world.

I know that you have some background in electronics so I would expect you to understand what I am talking about. The amount of energy we use every day to power all of these gadgets, lights, transportation, and all the rest cannot keep coming from the ground indefinitely. And if all we ever care about is the short term costs then some day we are going to get into a very bad situation.

You are not thinking clearly. Remember when whale oil was what you used in your lantern? Probably not,, follow the story to right now.

BTW, Gov intervention is never the answer. The Free Market shows the way with feasible and economic progression, if left alone. When it is pressured you will have mercury filled light bulbs.

 

[Frankn]

Well lets just take a look at your post. You keep saying damage to the earth from fossle fuel. That warming theory is kind of frozen in time here today. It is 18 degrees outside! Now for your cost factor. It works both ways. When I see comparisons for solor, they don't show that the output of a solor panel drops with age, and they do fail with age. You are right about my electronic background, and that is why I favor LED lights, BUT that cost factor works both ways. I pay $1 something for an old fashion light bulb and will not pay $20 for it's replacement. I know those bulbs could be produced for near the same cost as the old style. The CF bulbs are a joke on the buyer. They pollute more than the old style, there light spectrum is less efficient, and they don't last as long as the old style because the process efficiency drops down as the size is reduced.

Now the biggy! If you turn out the street lights in Chicago & NYC, can you even image the rise in the crime rate?

You really don't have to penalize every citizen of the USA for a failed theory. Hay nobody even mentioned geothermal energy. You could build a geothermal power generating station at Yellowstone park that could supply the complete USA, but hay, the Sierra Boys would stomp on that. It would mess up THEIR environment.

Just my 'digital' thoughts, Frank...

 

[TreasurePirate69]

You are not thinking clearly. Remember when whale oil was what you used in your lantern? Probably not,, follow the story to right now.

BTW, Gov intervention is never the answer. The Free Market shows the way with feasible and economic progression, if left alone. When it is pressured you will have mercury filled light bulbs.

So when whale oil was used we had electric lighting all over the world?

As for "Government intervention is NEVER the answer" you just proved my point. That's "binary thinking". Or do you think speed limits are a bad idea and people would be much better off without such "intervention" on behalf of the government? We give the government the right to intervene in our lives every day for thousands of things and it generally suits us as long as they don't overstep their bounds too much. But you find a case where that intervention pisses you off and suddenly "government intervention is NEVER the answer!". Really? Hmmm.... maybe my kids shouldn't be going to school? Maybe I should be burying my trash and feces in my own back yard? Maybe I should be responsible for paving my own street or going to get my own letters from the person who wants to send them to me? Maybe I should personally inspect the kitchens of all of the restaurants I eat at? And on, and on, and on, and on.....

By the way, I never said that I agreed with the idea of government intervention in the case of alternative energies. I may or may not believe that it is called for in certain situations. But I never really said that. You assumed that though.

 

[TreasurePirate69]

Well lets just take a look at your post. You keep saying damage to the earth from fossle fuel. That warming theory is kind of frozen in time here today. It is 18 degrees outside! Now for your cost factor. It works both ways. When I see comparisons for solor, they don't show that the output of a solor panel drops with age, and they do fail with age. You are right about my electronic background, and that is why I favor LED lights, BUT that cost factor works both ways. I pay $1 something for an old fashion light bulb and will not pay $20 for it's replacement. I know those bulbs could be produced for near the same cost as the old style. The CF bulbs are a joke on the buyer. They pollute more than the old style, there light spectrum is less efficient, and they don't last as long as the old style because the process efficiency drops down as the size is reduced.

Now the biggy! If you turn out the street lights in Chicago & NYC, can you even image the rise in the crime rate?

You really don't have to penalize every citizen of the USA for a failed theory. Hay nobody even mentioned geothermal energy. You could build a geothermal power generating station at Yellowstone park that could supply the complete USA, but hay, the Sierra Boys would stomp on that. It would mess up THEIR environment.

Just my 'digital' thoughts, Frank...
View attachment 937701

You started with "hey let's look at your post" and then continued to completely tap dance around it? Did you actually address anything I said or did you just create a bunch of hand waving to try and make us all believe that you addressed some of the points?

The only one you got close on was the "price works both ways". Yes, the long term costs of solar have to be considered as well. But surely you agree that gas and electrical systems need to be replaced over time too. Solar is not alone in that regard.

Crime because we took away lighting in Chicago? Where in the world did I imply that we should take away any lighting in Chicago? Quite the contrary. What I tried to imply is that if we intend to keep this type of energy usage up then we need to find alternative energy sources (and yes, geothermal is a great option) if we intend to keep this up for the long term.

The question you need to answer is: Do you personally think that we can continue to power all of the worlds energy needs indefinitely using mostly fossil fuels? 100,000 years from now will there still be enough fossil fuels available to power our needs at today's (and tomorrow's) levels? If your answer is yes, then that is your belief and you are entitled to it (although I would disagree with you). If your answer is no, then you have to admit that we eventually need to look at alternatives sources of energy at some point. HOW we look at those alternatives and whether or not there is government intervention is a completely different argument.

 

[Dave44]

So when whale oil was used we had electric lighting all over the world?

As for "Government intervention is NEVER the answer" you just proved my point. That's "binary thinking". Or do you think speed limits are a bad idea and people would be much better off without such "intervention" on behalf of the government? We give the government the right to intervene in our lives every day for thousands of things and it generally suits us as long as they don't overstep their bounds too much. But you find a case where that intervention pisses you off and suddenly "government intervention is NEVER the answer!". Really? Hmmm.... maybe my kids shouldn't be going to school? Maybe I should be burying my trash and feces in my own back yard? Maybe I should be responsible for paving my own street or going to get my own letters from the person who wants to send them to me? Maybe I should personally inspect the kitchens of all of the restaurants I eat at? And on, and on, and on, and on.....

By the way, I never said that I agreed with the idea of government intervention in the case of alternative energies. I may or may not believe that it is called for in certain situations. But I never really said that. You assumed that though.

You said something has to be done. You present theory that things are happening that have to be dealt with. You are proving your point that you are thinking in a binary fashion. You don't seem to comprehend that before whale oil there wasn't many choices in lighting,, and it left because of scarcity and availability and someone invented something better. Are you trying to tell me that a politician invented the toilet and sanitation?

I am not pissed, I am just pointing out that you don't follow logic or history when you tell us that everyone has to suffer for the greater good. That is not a necessary path.

 

[Dave44]

TP69
"The question you need to answer is: Do you personally think that we can continue to power all of the worlds energy needs indefinitely using mostly fossil fuels? 100,000 years from now will there still be enough fossil fuels available to power our needs at today's (and tomorrow's) levels? If your answer is yes, then that is your belief and you are entitled to it (although I would disagree with you). If your answer is no, then you have to admit that we eventually need to look at alternatives sources of energy at some point. HOW we look at those alternatives and whether or not there is government intervention is a completely different argument."

Not a question based in reality. Not the root of the problem. You're linear thinking is on the wrong path.

 

[TreasurePirate69]

You said something has to be done. You present theory that things are happening that have to be dealt with. You are proving your point that you are thinking in a binary fashion. You don't seem to comprehend that before whale oil there wasn't many choices in lighting,, and it left because of scarcity and availability and someone invented something better. Are you trying to tell me that a politician invented the toilet and sanitation?

I am not pissed, I am just pointing out that you don't follow logic or history when you tell us that everyone has to suffer for the greater good. That is not a necessary path.

Where did I say that everyone has to suffer for the greater good? Where did I even imply that? I never said anything about getting rid of fossil fuels altogether and I envision that we will always be using them in some capacity. I simply believe that fossil fuels are not unlimited and we need to be looking for alternatives in a sane manner. You imply that looking for alternative energy sources is forcing everyone to suffer for the greater good. Again, I think that is binary thinking. Although some people may suffer in getting to our desired destination, not everyone will suffer. And some may suffer more or less than others (if at all). Not to mention no one said that we have to take the current path that we are taking. Perhaps there is another way to get where we want to go that minimizes suffering AND eventually gets us to alternative energy sources. The binary thinking part is the belief that our current path is the ONLY way to accomplish our goals. And since the current path doesn't seem to be working very well that we should just completely throw up our hands at the whole idea. Why? What good is that type of mindset?

I still don't get your whale oil analogy. Can you explain what you mean by that? And I really don't get the politician thing. When did I ever say that politicians should be in charge of this stuff? Let me take one more crack at this whale oil analogy thingy:

1. Before whale oil there weren't too many other options (candles, wooden torches, tallow, etc.).
2. We started using whale oil because we thought it was plentiful and it was better than the other alternatives.
3. Whale oil started to become scarce and we felt that we needed better alternatives for a long term solution.
4. Someone tackled the problem and invented something better (albeit with some of the same long term limitations).

Aren't we in the exact same situation once again? Isn't it time to "invent something better"? Or is that what you are trying to say and we are actually on the same side of the argument?

Just for kicks, you do realize that when "someone invented something better" in step 4 above (say... electricity) that there was government intervention required to bring that technology to the masses in a safe and economically viable way. When the first AC vs DC current wars were being fought there was a lot of campaigning on behalf of each technology to governments both here and abroad. Without the intervention of at least local governments where would we be today? Would your neighbors be using DC electrical systems while you use AC systems? Who knows?

For the record I'm not a fan of big government. And I'm not a fan of small government either. Both of those are binary thinking. I'm a fan of "gray government" or "letting the government intervene if we feel that the task is well suited for government intervention". I do not believe in giving the government carte blanche powers over regulation. And I certainly don't believe that you can say "government intervention is NEVER a good thing". Especially when I have clearly shown cases where it can be a good thing.

 

[Dave44]

TP69

"1. Before whale oil there weren't too many other options (candles, wooden torches, tallow, etc.).
2. We started using whale oil because we thought it was plentiful and it was better than the other alternatives.
3. Whale oil started to become scarce and we felt that we needed better alternatives for a long term solution.
4. Someone tackled the problem and invented something better (albeit with some of the same long term limitations)."

I see where part of the problem is. WE didn't feel there needed to be alternatives. Someone saw opportunity and invented something better.
Scare tactics are not needed here. The earth turns and new inventions happen all of the time.

You can yell that the sky is falling, but don't force us to buy an overpriced umbrella for your beliefs.

And I never implied anything lasts forever. Quite the contrary.

 

[bigscoop]

Polar Vortexes aren't anything new, it's just that they tend to happen so infrequently they just have to be seen as another prelude to the end of the world when they do happen. A volcano erupts that's been silent for a few centuries and yep, must be a prelude to the end of the world. Granted, the world is a messed up place, that's for sure, and the biggest reason it's messed up is people like us simply have to have our cars, trucks, detectors, etc., etc., etc. We can point all the fingers we want but if there is no demand........enough said.

 

[TreasurePirate69]

TP69
"The question you need to answer is: Do you personally think that we can continue to power all of the worlds energy needs indefinitely using mostly fossil fuels? 100,000 years from now will there still be enough fossil fuels available to power our needs at today's (and tomorrow's) levels? If your answer is yes, then that is your belief and you are entitled to it (although I would disagree with you). If your answer is no, then you have to admit that we eventually need to look at alternatives sources of energy at some point. HOW we look at those alternatives and whether or not there is government intervention is a completely different argument."

Not a question based in reality. Not the root of the problem. You're linear thinking is on the wrong path.

Why is that not a question based in reality? I really don't get this whole linear thinking thing you keep talking about. Can you explain it to me please? Is there a non-linear way that we can make the earth's fossil fuels last forever at our current rate of consumption?

 

[TreasurePirate69]

TP69

"1. Before whale oil there weren't too many other options (candles, wooden torches, tallow, etc.).
2. We started using whale oil because we thought it was plentiful and it was better than the other alternatives.
3. Whale oil started to become scarce and we felt that we needed better alternatives for a long term solution.
4. Someone tackled the problem and invented something better (albeit with some of the same long term limitations)."

I see where part of the problem is. WE didn't feel there needed to be alternatives. Someone saw opportunity and invented something better.
Scare tactics are not needed here. The earth turns and new inventions happen all of the time.

You can yell that the sky is falling, but don't force us to buy an overpriced umbrella for your beliefs.

And I never implied anything lasts forever. Quite the contrary.

So without an alternative and when the whale oil population had become completely decimated, would WE not have wanted an alternative to going back to using sticks, candles, and tallow? I agree. An enterprising person came up with electricity because it was better. Ok... so what the heck does whale oil have to do with anything? Why do you keep trying to tell me that whale oil is pertinent to the discussion if it apparently has nothing at all to do with the current situation that we are in? Your linear thinking and whale oil arguments sure are confusing to me. Perhaps I lack the mental capacity to understand. If you want me to be able to have an intelligent discussion with you about such things then you are going to have to stop speaking in riddles and innuendos.

 

[Dave44]

It's easier for me if you follow the logic yourself. Electricity wasn't the first trade off for whale oil. The progression continues.

TP69-"Is there a non-linear way that we can make the earth's fossil fuels last forever at our current rate of consumption?" This is a false argument that no one is making but you? And even though you keep saying it, it is not a premise that is based in reality. It nearly looks like mechanism to show the other side as foolish.

 

[Msbeepbeep]

I think it's not so much for the greater good but for the greater greed. We do need to find power sources that aren't killing us and the planet but honestly they need to put a lot more thought into it. I would rather have an old filament bulb fall and break than a new,better (?) more expensive fluorescent bulb that contains mercury which is toxic, plus they don't illuminate as well.
Oil or coal burning plants verses nuclear which would you rather have burn to the ground in your neighborhood?
A few solar panel plants here got Gov. $$ then went belly up or moved to China.
Wind power the affluent on Martha's Vineyard screamed & hollered not in their pristine back yard (it was for the birds).
I remember reading years ago a guy invented a hot air heating system, spinning double barreled, used very little energy, oil Co. bought him out and buried it never to be built. Why? They would lose money from oil sales.
If the powers that be we're truly serious about it, it would have been done by now, money talks loudly at times.
Seems they can't be honest and truthful about anything now days, and I don't think they care beyond the next election.
So tell me will they blame us for the next ice age too? While they fly around in their jets saving the world from it's self.

As you can tell I have been inside way too long! I hope to remedy that Sunday...or go nuts trying! HH!

 

[TreasurePirate69]

It's easier for me if you follow the logic yourself. Electricity wasn't the first trade off for whale oil. The progression continues.

TP69-"Is there a non-linear way that we can make the earth's fossil fuels last forever at our current rate of consumption?" This is a false argument that no one is making but you? And even though you keep saying it, it is not a premise that is based in reality. It nearly looks like mechanism to show the other side as foolish.

Huh? If you continue to refuse to at least explain what the heck you are trying to get at then I can't continue to have a conversation with you. Perhaps this is what you want. If so, just say so and I can gladly quit because it means nothing to me at all.

Explain why this a false argument because currently, you are the only one saying that it is and you have not provided any logical reason why you think it is false.

 

[TreasurePirate69]

I think it's not so much for the greater good but for the greater greed. We do need to find power sources that aren't killing us and the planet but honestly they need to put a lot more thought into it. I would rather have an old filament bulb fall and break than a new,better (?) more expensive fluorescent bulb that contains mercury which is toxic, plus they don't illuminate as well.
Oil or coal burning plants verses nuclear which would you rather have burn to the ground in your neighborhood?
A few solar panel plants here got Gov. $$ then went belly up or moved to China.
Wind power the affluent on Martha's Vineyard screamed & hollered not in their pristine back yard (it was for the birds).
I remember reading years ago a guy invented a hot air heating system, spinning double barreled, used very little energy, oil Co. bought him out and buried it never to be built. Why? They would lose money from oil sales.
If the powers that be we're truly serious about it, it would have been done by now, money talks loudly at times.
Seems they can't be honest and truthful about anything now days, and I don't think they care beyond the next election.
So tell me will they blame us for the next ice age too? While they fly around in their jets saving the world from it's self.

As you can tell I have been inside way too long! I hope to remedy that Sunday...or go nuts trying! HH!

I totally agree with you.

The way we have gone about it to date has been wrong. But that doesn't mean that we should stop trying. I hate CF light bulbs as much as the next person and there is no doubt that their current usage is nothing but politics. There is no room for that type of thing in our world today. We need to put our heads together and come up with a better answer. Throwing alternative energies of all kinds under the bus because we haven't handled the transition well is not a good strategy. Neither is believing that private industry is going to take care of the problem. Most alternative energies are not new. The Dutch have been using wind mills for centuries. If private industry were single-handedly going to solve this problem then I think we would be a little bit further along than we are now.

 

[Dave44]

Oh My. Ok, Unless you are a magician,, or a scientist working on it, who's heads do you suppose "we" ought to put together? Be as green as you want,, people are working on it right now, as we speak, when a breakthrough is made you will hear about it,, but let's not be forced into some very expensive half baked idea that doesn't work just because it makes a couple of people feel better.

I guess I should have asked why you are so urgent,, what do you figure the timeline is before we run out of Current energy sources? ( Put in Context, how long have we relied on oil, electricity? How long has the home computer and Ipad been out? Do you think they were willed into existence because you and I put our heads together?)

Relax, if you wanna build a better mousetrap start drawing the designs up, don't force "we" to start and fund a profitable business for you, or the Government.

You are full of angst, it must just be my age showing, I remember when I didn't have any remotes, no computer, no microwave. So I say again, change is inevitable, and it happens amazingly fast nowadays. Don't get a hernia trying to push something you have no control over.

 

[TreasurePirate69]

Oh My. Ok, Unless you are a magician,, or a scientist working on it, who's heads do you suppose "we" ought to put together? Be as green as you want,, people are working on it right now, as we speak, when a breakthrough is made you will hear about it,, but let's not be forced into some very expensive half baked idea that doesn't work just because it makes a couple of people feel better.

I guess I should have asked why you are so urgent,, what do you figure the timeline is before we run out of Current energy sources? ( Put in Context, how long have we relied on oil, electricity? How long has the home computer and Ipad been out? Do you think they were willed into existence because you and I put our heads together?)

Relax, if you wanna build a better mousetrap start drawing the designs up, don't force "we" to start and fund a profitable business for you, or the Government.

You are full of angst, it must just be my age showing, I remember when I didn't have any remotes, no computer, no microwave. So I say again, change is inevitable, and it happens amazingly fast nowadays. Don't get a hernia trying to push something you have no control over.

Who said anything about pushing something immediately? Why is the desire to start doing something for the future always perceived as trying to do something right away, right now, all at once, and at the expense of everyone in the world? Why do you keep trying to put words into my mouth that I never said? Where is this angst and why won't you just answer the simple question I have asked so many times?

Here it is again, either answer it or tell me why you can't answer it. Stop the tap dancing. Anything else is an admission that you CAN'T answer it because you know it shows that you don't have a leg to stand on:

Do you personally think that we can continue to power all of the world's energy needs indefinitely using mostly fossil fuels?