Trump Pushing Carbon Bubble That Is Bound To Burst

[Douger]

This video highlights one of the most confounding things (there are a few other biggies) to me about American conservatism and most recently, the Trump administration, that is the obsession with fossil fuels.

 

[pat34lee]

What is difficult to understand? Would you rather have cheap power or expensive? Remember that we're choosing for everyone, including the poor.

By the time this 'carbon bubble' bursts, your great-great-grandkids will be long gone.

His major reason, climate change, is a hoax. No reason at all.

 

[Douger]

What is difficult to understand? Would you rather have cheap power or expensive? Remember that we're choosing for everyone, including the poor.

By the time this 'carbon bubble' bursts, your great-great-grandkids will be long gone.

His major reason, climate change, is a hoax. No reason at all.

Environmentally speaking, I'd rather have clean power which doesn't damage or destroy watersheds and entire biomes to produce. I want my great grand children to have land to farm, animals to hunt and clean water to use and all of those things in abundance.
In economic terms, I'd rather have the new technology that has now surpassed the old in terms of economic viability. When renewable energy technology can profitably produce electricity 2 cents per kwh, why on earth would we want a revival in coal or oil?

 

[pat34lee]

Environmentally speaking, I'd rather have clean power which doesn't damage or destroy watersheds and entire biomes to produce. I want my great grand children to have land to farm, animals to hunt and clean water to use and all of those things in abundance.
In economic terms, I'd rather have the new technology that has now surpassed the old in terms of economic viability. When renewable energy technology can profitably produce electricity 2 cents per kwh, why on earth would we want a revival in coal or oil?

I would love to have peace on earth, and clean oceans and rivers, no pesticides or GMOs. Free energy and no pollution. We have to deal with reality at the moment, which means solar is more expensive than coal, and wind even more expensive, not to mention it kills way too many birds. Hydroelectric is not a good option, as seen in California recently. Maybe we can change over in five or ten years as the technology for batteries and solar panels gets better and cheaper.

 

[ViaCrucis]

By the time this 'carbon bubble' bursts, your great-great-grandkids will be long gone.

Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die eh?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[StarTemple]

If dinosaurs couldn't survive it will take external aid to survive the outcome of the things which these issues merely distract from. (Matthew 24:21-22)

Man and their world government ideas are just a speck of dust on the lens at this time. Poof, it will pass. (Daniel 2)

But many will make it. (Revelation 14:6-7)

 

[iluvatar5150]

What is difficult to understand? Would you rather have cheap power or expensive? Remember that we're choosing for everyone, including the poor.

Once you get over the hump of the initial investment, how can clean renewables not be cheaper than fossil fuels? There isn't a limited supply of sunlight or wind. You don't have to transport it or refine it or dispose of the waste.

 

[pat34lee]

Once you get over the hump of the initial investment, how can clean renewables not be cheaper than fossil fuels? There isn't a limited supply of sunlight or wind. You don't have to transport it or refine it or dispose of the waste.

The wind may blow constantly in certain areas, but the sun only shines about half the time and less at full strength. If you just ship out the power, you will have high and low times, so you need backup power. That means either fossil fuel plants, or batteries if you have enough power to store. Batteries must be maintained, and disposed of when they go bad. Solar arrays have a limited lifespan, and so do wind generators. Not to mention the birds killed by the windmills.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Fossil fuels are needed badly to keep up with the new global demands for energy. Clean energy just can't keep up. The short term answer is conservation, but few are interested in that. Also millions of new buildings are being built with few if any design provisions for clean energy applications (orientation of roofs, super insulation, insulated 'heat sink' foundations, etc.). People still want traditional designs built with traditional materials.

But probably the biggest roadblock is the general attitude that nothing can be done, as well as a general apathy and feeling of hopelessness for the future. Mankind seems to be 'tired' of life; 'dead people walking' as it were.

 

[USincognito]

The wind may blow constantly in certain areas, but the sun only shines about half the time and less at full strength. If you just ship out the power, you will have high and low times, so you need backup power. That means either fossil fuel plants, or batteries if you have enough power to store. Batteries must be maintained, and disposed of when they go bad. Solar arrays have a limited lifespan, and so do wind generators. Not to mention the birds killed by the windmills.

Buildings and cats kill orders of magnitude more birds than windmills. If you're really so worried about the birds, you'd be advocating that we get rid of them.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die eh?

-CryptoLutheran

I actually think we are doing that already (have been for some time).

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I would love to have peace on earth, and clean oceans and rivers, no pesticides or GMOs. Free energy and no pollution. We have to deal with reality at the moment, which means solar is more expensive than coal, and wind even more expensive, not to mention it kills way too many birds. Hydroelectric is not a good option, as seen in California recently. Maybe we can change over in five or ten years as the technology for batteries and solar panels gets better and cheaper.

No alternative energy sources can do what fossil fuels can do, especially oil. The need for more high energy fuel increases every day. Solar and wind produced electricity can't fuel vehicles for more than a few miles. Gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels are going to be around for a long time to come. We do need to find ways to burn them more efficiently however.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Solar and wind produced electricity can't fuel vehicles for more than a few miles.

All the Tesla models have ranges of at least 200 miles, with some getting over 350-400, depending on certain factors. That's comparable to the range from a tank of gas on many passenger cars and more than enough for most commuters. The Chevy Bolt EV is in the lower end of that range, too, and while the BMW i3 and Nissan Leaf have shorter ranges, they're still enough for most people to get back and forth to work.

I'm not aware of anybody saying that we could completely eliminate the need for fossil fuels any time soon, but EV's have the potential to reduce our usage by a significant amount.

 

[pat34lee]

Buildings and cats kill orders of magnitude more birds than windmills. If you're really so worried about the birds, you'd be advocating that we get rid of them.

If your cat is killing bald eagles, he's a badder cat than mine are.
Pigeons and robins will have to look out for themselves.

 

[pat34lee]

No alternative energy sources can do what fossil fuels can do, especially oil. The need for more high energy fuel increases every day. Solar and wind produced electricity can't fuel vehicles for more than a few miles. Gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels are going to be around for a long time to come. We do need to find ways to burn them more efficiently however.

Hydrogen is the fuel of the near future. The only problem is storage, and that can be bypassed if the hydrogen and oxygen are taken from water as needed and used.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

All the Tesla models have ranges of at least 200 miles, with some getting over 350-400, depending on certain factors. That's comparable to the range from a tank of gas on many passenger cars and more than enough for most commuters. The Chevy Bolt EV is in the lower end of that range, too, and while the BMW i3 and Nissan Leaf have shorter ranges, they're still enough for most people to get back and forth to work.

I'm not aware of anybody saying that we could completely eliminate the need for fossil fuels any time soon, but EV's have the potential to reduce our usage by a significant amount.

I think those mileage figures are a bit optimistic and are achieved under ideal (read unrealistic) driving conditions.

Electric vehicles would still be just a small fraction of the vehicles on our roads. Even now GM has a surplus of passenger cars as buyers are still going for the SUV's and pickups. This will probably increase as well as the economy picks up.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Hydrogen is the fuel of the near future. The only problem is storage, and that can be bypassed if the hydrogen and oxygen are taken from water as needed and used.

The bigger problem is the energy input needed to produce it. If nuclear produced electricity were used it might be economical.

 

[USincognito]

If your cat is killing bald eagles, he's a badder cat than mine are.
Pigeons and robins will have to look out for themselves.

Wow. those goal posts moved faster than a windmill turbine.

 

[Douger]

I would love to have peace on earth, and clean oceans and rivers, no pesticides or GMOs. Free energy and no pollution.

We could have all of that if we wanted it enough. None of those things have to get in the way of our needs or even luxuries.

We have to deal with reality at the moment, which means solar is more expensive than coal, and wind even more expensive, not to mention it kills way too many birds.

Economically speaking, the math is against what you're saying. Use of renewables is lowering the cost of electricity all over the world.
Environmentally, of course there are problems with things like dams and wind turbines, but surely you aren't suggesting that those problems are greater than the use of fossil fuels, are you?
For example, a dam might stop the run of migratory fish to their headwater breeding grounds. But coal mining simply removes those headwaters along with the entire watershed from the face of the earth.

Hydroelectric is not a good option, as seen in California recently.

Hydroelectric is one of the best options in the world as has been seen for decades.

Maybe we can change over in five or ten years as the technology for batteries and solar panels gets better and cheaper.

Wow! You're most optimistic than even a lot of ardent greenies are. But that's good, I like your attitude. So you must agree with the point of this video then, that it's a bad idea to pump up investment in fossil fuels when the changeover is on the verge of happening, no?

 

[FanthatSpark]

Is Tesla's unlimited energy formula out there?