Let's look at the Green New Deal being presented in Congress

[JackRT]

She said in an interview that I linked to earlier that this is not legislation, it's basically a goal list or priorities they are interested in pursuing. It only needs to pass the house.

Yes, it is a wish list. Nothing more.

 

[hislegacy]

Sounds like Stepford, but we get to keep the original version of our women, and that's good...right?​

I don’t have a clue as to what you are referring to

She said in an interview that I linked to earlier that this is not legislation, it's basically a goal list or priorities they are interested in pursuing. It only needs to pass the house.

And why does a “goal” list have to pass if it isn’t legislation, or the first step to it?

 

[GlabrousDory4]

Glad to see that you admit her plan is silly.

Actually her plan isn't silly per se. Yeah, idealistic. I do agree she sometimes says some silly things which I attribute to her youth and inexperience.

Her plan is idealistic but certainly many of the aspects are not only possible but some will be necessary within the next few decades.

America's level of income inequality is at historic levels not seen since the Gilded Age...corrections happen when enough people are without seeing a small cadre with all the goods. History shows us this over and over again. We need to seriously consider that we can be a more equitable nation with regards to education, income and healthcare access.

As for the green initiatives, well those will either happen or we will all fail. Climate change is having measurable impacts now on our economy and soon we will run out of options to deal with it.

If attempting to address these issues is "silly" then I guess I'm 100% for the silly party. If the goal here is to simply denigrate idealism then that's pretty easy to do. It's always easy to tear down something. It is much, much harder to build.

 

[hislegacy]

Lets look at some of the practical aspects of replacing airlines with high speed rail service.

1. What are the cost of replacing and/or building new tracks that will safely accommodate high speed travel between every major city it the United States?

2. How many trains will it take to accommodate the 1,700,000 people per day that currently fly?
With capacity of 90 per rail car we would need 18,890 rail cars moving at high speed daily.

3. What do businessmen do who now can board a plane, go from Boston Logan to LA in about 5 hours now are required to take a train that goes 300kph. 4,800 kilometers away. That 5 hour trip now becomes a minimum of 16 hours if it was non stop. It could realistically be a 24 to 28 hour trip one way.

 

[GlabrousDory4]

Here is a winner:

(E) upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency, water effi- ciency, safety, affordability, comfort, and dura-
bility, including through electrification;

Every building in the US upgraded in the next ten years.

Within the next 10-12 years we will have probably sealed our fate with regards to climate change. Let that sink in. We may not suffer the worst stuff within 10-12 years but we will have put in place warming that will ultimately have disastrous effects in the longer term and we won't be able to do a thing about it. If we don't deal with our energy usage within 10-12 years we will likely see our economy destroyed (as well as most of the Western world's economies) by the end of the century.

That sounds pretty scary and unimaginable but the science indicates we are speeding along to that point. So definitely laugh it up now. Because sometime in the next 20 years we'll get the notice that stuff is going to happen that we will be powerless to stop.

I've got a PhD in geochemistry and 20+ years experience as a research chemist. I'm actually reasonably concerned about the latest forecasts. I know folks will want to point to previous forecasts that haven't come to fruition, but sooner or later we WILL run out of time. Even if this forecast isn't perfectly accurate, soon we WILL run out of time to make the necessary changes. And those changes will be draconian. You think it's funny now...wait until electricity is rationed or completely unavailable. Wait until your town's infrastructure is decimated by climate refugees from the coast. Wait until trade collapses with Europe because their climate shifts dramatically due to the shut down of the Gulf Stream and their economies crater.

So, yeah, let's laugh at AOC while we have the capacity to do so. Because soon we won't be laughing about much.

 

[GlabrousDory4]

Lets look at some of the practical aspects of replacing airlines with high speed rail service.

1. What are the cost of replacing and/or building new tracks that will safely accommodate high speed travel between every major city it the United States?

2. How many trains will it take to accommodate the 1,700,000 people per day that currently fly?
With capacity of 90 per rail car we would need 18,890 rail cars moving at high speed daily.

3. What do businessmen do who now can board a plane, go from Boston Logan to LA in about 5 hours now are required to take a train that goes 300kph. 4,800 kilometers away. That 5 hour trip now becomes a minimum of 16 hours if it was non stop. It could realistically be a 24 to 28 hour trip one way.

You seem to be of the opinion that air travel is some sort of right that we all will continue to have in the future.

Interesting.

You know...it's entirely possible that in the future flying will be so ridiculously expensive that few if any can afford it and then one day maybe it won't even be available.

Again, as someone who has done a lot of travel for work in industry both nationally and internationally, there is a move toward "telepresence" for meetings (via Skype or video conference rooms or Zoom meetings, etc.) At some point that's going to be how a LOT of these business travel things are dealt with.

 

[Nithavela]

Within the next 10-12 years we will have probably sealed our fate with regards to climate change. Let that sink in. We may not suffer the worst stuff within 10-12 years but we will have put in place warming that will ultimately have disastrous effects in the longer term and we won't be able to do a thing about it. If we don't deal with our energy usage within 10-12 years we will likely see our economy destroyed (as well as most of the Western world's economies) by the end of the century.

That sounds pretty scary and unimaginable but the science indicates we are speeding along to that point. So definitely laugh it up now. Because sometime in the next 20 years we'll get the notice that stuff is going to happen that we will be powerless to stop.

I've got a PhD in geochemistry and 20+ years experience as a research chemist. I'm actually reasonably concerned about the latest forecasts. I know folks will want to point to previous forecasts that haven't come to fruition, but sooner or later we WILL run out of time. Even if this forecast isn't perfectly accurate, soon we WILL run out of time to make the necessary changes. And those changes will be draconian. You think it's funny now...wait until electricity is rationed or completely unavailable. Wait until your town's infrastructure is decimated by climate refugees from the coast. Wait until trade collapses with Europe because their climate shifts dramatically due to the shut down of the Gulf Stream and their economies crater.

So, yeah, let's laugh at AOC while we have the capacity to do so. Because soon we won't be laughing about much.

Personally I cant wait for that notice. It will be hilarious to see mankind suffer.

 

[GlabrousDory4]

Personally I cant wait for that notice. It will be hilarious to see mankind suffer.

When we finally DO realize we've piddled away our time to fix the problem while we try to convince non-scientists that science is actually real, you just know that suddenly there will be NO ONE who ever admits to having been a climate change denialist/skeptic.

 

[Nithavela]

When we finally DO realize we've piddled away our time to fix the problem while we try to convince non-scientists that science is actually real, you just know that suddenly there will be NO ONE who ever admits to having been a climate change denialist/skeptic.

Luckily there will be a lot of evidence left on the internet.

You know, until the climate catastrophes destroy the internet infrastructure.

 

[hislegacy]

You seem to be of the opinion that air travel is some sort of right that we all will continue to have in the future.

Interesting

Who is going to restrict our travel in the future? The government? Doesn’t sound like freedom to me. Kinda sounds like Russia.

 

[GlabrousDory4]

Interesting

Who is going to restrict our travel in the future? The government? Doesn’t sound like freedom to me. Kinda sounds like Russia.

Seems like you aren't quite grokking this point.

Here's an example: if you found yourself in the middle of a hurricane decimating your town....would you be complaining about not being able to go shopping at the outlet mall at just that moment?

Like I said we can debate settled science forever if you like, but sooner or later there won't be any "choices". Market forces won't be fast enough to deal with the problems and at that point, IF WE ARE LUCKY we'll be able to use government mandates.

But, hey, we are getting off track. We need to keep laughing at AOC's naivete.

 

[Speedwell]

Interesting

Who is going to restrict our travel in the future? The government? Doesn’t sound like freedom to me. Kinda sounds like Russia.

The government won't need to, that's the point.

 

[Hammster]

America's level of income inequality is at historic levels

Says who?

 

[Hammster]

Within the next 10-12 years we will have probably sealed our fate with regards to climate change.

 

[Nithavela]

Interesting

Who is going to restrict our travel in the future? The government? Doesn’t sound like freedom to me. Kinda sounds like Russia.

Its propably just going to be too expensive. Air travel will be for emergencies and the rich and famous, and there will be cases where it will simply be impossible because of weather phenomena or shortages.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Here is a winner:

(E) upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency, water effi- ciency, safety, affordability, comfort, and dura-
bility, including through electrification;

Every building in the US upgraded in the next ten years.

Think of the slumlords! How unfair...

 

[Hammster]

Think of the slumlords! How unfair...

Do you understand that it says all buildings?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Do you understand that it says all buildings?

Do you understand why that makes sense?

 

[Speedwell]

Its propably just going to be too expensive. Air travel will be for emergencies and the rich and famous, and there will be cases where it will simply be impossible because of weather phenomena or shortages.

Oh, no, you don't get it. As soon as this resolution passes the Left is going to commander bulldozers and raze private property and airports to enforce their evil designs.

 

[hislegacy]

Think of the slumlords! How unfair...

Example:

There are approximately 3,500,000 homes in Los Angeles To upgrade all the homes (part of all buildings) you would have to upgrade more than 950 a day every day for ten years and that doesn’t include other types of buildings.

It’s not a slumlord thing, it would effect everyone.