Always glad to see a gummi post! Hope things are well!
The simple truth is that government has no idea what Earth's 'optimum' temperature even is, and the idea that they could get and keep the planet there with enough money and power is just insanity. Anybody who's not on board with nuclear energy isn't serious about solving the 'carbon crisis', and I think we're starting to see the attitudes of the 'leaders' show itself -- you must sacrifice to prevent possible future humans from possible hardship.
or simply ask them what the temperature was in the high Chilean desert in the year 807, or at the south pole in 1273. They don't know? Neither does "science". It is a guess as to what it was using silly proxies that can be, and is, manipulated for political ends. And yet these proxies are used to "prove" global warming. We only have halfway decent measurements for a century and only in limited areas not worldwide using uncalibrated thermometers. Yet the "scientist" can claim warming to the hundreth of a degree? Give me a break.
Climate change is only about power/authority. Like Covid and Ukraine, just an excuse for powers that be to grift and assume authority over people’s lives. Those pushing this garbage have no more concern for the planet or for unborn human generations than our current politicians showed for kids, lower income workers, or small business during Covid; and no more concern than proponents of fueling the Ukraine conflict have for the 250,000 dead Ukrainian / Russian males (with a smattering of Donetsk civilians thrown in). All of these fake crises are generated by the powers that be for their own benefit. They don’t give a damn about ultimate outcomes for people, nor for good policy.
The politicians and the WEF freaks will continue to push climate change. They don't care about climate change but they want the control mechanism and the grift on ESG. Yes, reality will slap them in the face, but we have to stop pretending they are just dumb instead of nefarious.
Alex Epstein’s stuff is good, but non-technical. Follow Tony Heller on YouTube and Rumble for a technology analysis of some of the scientific fraud being perpetrated on behalf of the climate change agenda.
> But if you shut down the American well, the supply will just be replaced by a Russian well which has nowhere near the same environmental production standards as in the US.
Turns out you can substitute "steel plant" for "well" in that sentence and it's still perfectly accurate. :-\
Regardless of the reasons why, Earth's climate is clearly changing and humanity must adapt. Since the US is a major polluter and consumer, I think the onus rests on the US to mitigate our own impact. Same goes for China. Once the US and China have sorted themselves out, each should start supporting regions that aren't as lucky.
Went and read the entire Michael Shellenberger thread referenced above on twitter. Have a few comments, ok, nine comments:
1.) He makes a solid point regarding nuclear energy and countries should definitely build more nuclear plants in places safe from conflict, hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc. Countries with functional safe nuclear plants, looking at you Germany, need to stop decommissioning them! Small nuclear plants can be built faster, so let's build those.
2.) Shellenberger doesn't seem up to date on battery energy storage technology and how this directly offsets the intermittency of solar/wind.
3.) He's worried that wind turbines kill birds? Well yes, yes they do. Know who kills the most birds each year, year after year, decade after decade? Fluffy the house cat and feline co-conspirators! Know what else kills birds? Airplanes and places airplanes congregate like airports. There are specific bird reduction tactics in place at airports. These measures improve airline safety as well as bird safety. Wind farms should use similarly effective tactics.
4.) Shellenberger uses 10-20 years for a solar panel's lifespan. Try 20-30 years with a gradual decline in effectiveness.
5.) Shellenberger is also displeased by humanity's need to manufacture a shit ton more solar panels. He doesn't like mining and frankly, I don't blame him. Mining is a messy business known for environmental degradation and not properly cleaning up after itself. Humans need to be better mine owners and we also need to recycle all the valuable minerals mined. Think the atom in, to usable atom out ratio is currently 100:92 - shout out to Redwood Material's JB Straubel.
6.) Shellenberger wants to save all the Earth's species. This is an idealistic goal. And, as sad as it is, sorry, it isn't going to happen. Earth is already experiencing a die off of way too many species and we can't save them all. Many insect species go extinct before scientists even realize it's happening. Agree we should try to save or relocate endangered species, and if that's not practical, we should at least save their DNA. Fact: Homo sapiens are a fundamentally messy, invasive species and not necessarily good at consistently trying to share Earth with other species.
7.) After humanity is on a clear path to abundant, sustainable renewable energy, we need to steadily decrease global fossil fuel use. Earth has a finite quantity of dinosaur juice and what remains should be targeted toward specialized purposes where we haven't yet invented amenable substitutes. (If you want a good scare, go look up what year the US depletes all our known reserves at the current rate of withdrawal.)
8.) And conflict? Once humanity has abundant renewable energy sources that are widely distributed around the planet, no more oil wars are needed! And no need for wars over scarce fresh water either, as each country will be able to afford their own desalination plants.
9.) Thing is, humanity has a GOOD CHANCE of being able to mine, process, innovate, adapt, manufacture enough solar panels, manufacture enough wind turbines, manufacture enough battery storage units and manufacture enough electric vehicles to AVOID the most horrific effects of this climate experiment we're all participating in each day. I say we go for it!
Is the solar/wind/battery storage/electric transport/recycle plan perfect? No.
Is there a better plan? Doubtful.
Will the climate continue to change? Yes.
Will there be millions of climate refugees? Yes.
And humanity will just have to accept what happens and adapt as soon as possible. Just as we've always done before.
I think they've done enough already. Bush's solar credits which allowed for a 30% tax deduction on solar systems helped, and is still helping, get more homes outfitted with solar. That's a good idea that more should be taking advantage of. The majority of these systems may be worthless at night (mine's not) but still, 5 hours/day x millions having them would reduce emissions substantially.
Always glad to see a gummi post! Hope things are well!
The simple truth is that government has no idea what Earth's 'optimum' temperature even is, and the idea that they could get and keep the planet there with enough money and power is just insanity. Anybody who's not on board with nuclear energy isn't serious about solving the 'carbon crisis', and I think we're starting to see the attitudes of the 'leaders' show itself -- you must sacrifice to prevent possible future humans from possible hardship.
or simply ask them what the temperature was in the high Chilean desert in the year 807, or at the south pole in 1273. They don't know? Neither does "science". It is a guess as to what it was using silly proxies that can be, and is, manipulated for political ends. And yet these proxies are used to "prove" global warming. We only have halfway decent measurements for a century and only in limited areas not worldwide using uncalibrated thermometers. Yet the "scientist" can claim warming to the hundreth of a degree? Give me a break.
Climate change is only about power/authority. Like Covid and Ukraine, just an excuse for powers that be to grift and assume authority over people’s lives. Those pushing this garbage have no more concern for the planet or for unborn human generations than our current politicians showed for kids, lower income workers, or small business during Covid; and no more concern than proponents of fueling the Ukraine conflict have for the 250,000 dead Ukrainian / Russian males (with a smattering of Donetsk civilians thrown in). All of these fake crises are generated by the powers that be for their own benefit. They don’t give a damn about ultimate outcomes for people, nor for good policy.
The politicians and the WEF freaks will continue to push climate change. They don't care about climate change but they want the control mechanism and the grift on ESG. Yes, reality will slap them in the face, but we have to stop pretending they are just dumb instead of nefarious.
not even mentioning that co2 is a requirement for life, plants use it. but if you really believe its a problem then reduce the deforestation!
Alex Epstein’s stuff is good, but non-technical. Follow Tony Heller on YouTube and Rumble for a technology analysis of some of the scientific fraud being perpetrated on behalf of the climate change agenda.
> But if you shut down the American well, the supply will just be replaced by a Russian well which has nowhere near the same environmental production standards as in the US.
Turns out you can substitute "steel plant" for "well" in that sentence and it's still perfectly accurate. :-\
Well done, EPA. Outstanding.
Regardless of the reasons why, Earth's climate is clearly changing and humanity must adapt. Since the US is a major polluter and consumer, I think the onus rests on the US to mitigate our own impact. Same goes for China. Once the US and China have sorted themselves out, each should start supporting regions that aren't as lucky.
Went and read the entire Michael Shellenberger thread referenced above on twitter. Have a few comments, ok, nine comments:
1.) He makes a solid point regarding nuclear energy and countries should definitely build more nuclear plants in places safe from conflict, hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc. Countries with functional safe nuclear plants, looking at you Germany, need to stop decommissioning them! Small nuclear plants can be built faster, so let's build those.
2.) Shellenberger doesn't seem up to date on battery energy storage technology and how this directly offsets the intermittency of solar/wind.
3.) He's worried that wind turbines kill birds? Well yes, yes they do. Know who kills the most birds each year, year after year, decade after decade? Fluffy the house cat and feline co-conspirators! Know what else kills birds? Airplanes and places airplanes congregate like airports. There are specific bird reduction tactics in place at airports. These measures improve airline safety as well as bird safety. Wind farms should use similarly effective tactics.
4.) Shellenberger uses 10-20 years for a solar panel's lifespan. Try 20-30 years with a gradual decline in effectiveness.
5.) Shellenberger is also displeased by humanity's need to manufacture a shit ton more solar panels. He doesn't like mining and frankly, I don't blame him. Mining is a messy business known for environmental degradation and not properly cleaning up after itself. Humans need to be better mine owners and we also need to recycle all the valuable minerals mined. Think the atom in, to usable atom out ratio is currently 100:92 - shout out to Redwood Material's JB Straubel.
6.) Shellenberger wants to save all the Earth's species. This is an idealistic goal. And, as sad as it is, sorry, it isn't going to happen. Earth is already experiencing a die off of way too many species and we can't save them all. Many insect species go extinct before scientists even realize it's happening. Agree we should try to save or relocate endangered species, and if that's not practical, we should at least save their DNA. Fact: Homo sapiens are a fundamentally messy, invasive species and not necessarily good at consistently trying to share Earth with other species.
7.) After humanity is on a clear path to abundant, sustainable renewable energy, we need to steadily decrease global fossil fuel use. Earth has a finite quantity of dinosaur juice and what remains should be targeted toward specialized purposes where we haven't yet invented amenable substitutes. (If you want a good scare, go look up what year the US depletes all our known reserves at the current rate of withdrawal.)
8.) And conflict? Once humanity has abundant renewable energy sources that are widely distributed around the planet, no more oil wars are needed! And no need for wars over scarce fresh water either, as each country will be able to afford their own desalination plants.
9.) Thing is, humanity has a GOOD CHANCE of being able to mine, process, innovate, adapt, manufacture enough solar panels, manufacture enough wind turbines, manufacture enough battery storage units and manufacture enough electric vehicles to AVOID the most horrific effects of this climate experiment we're all participating in each day. I say we go for it!
Is the solar/wind/battery storage/electric transport/recycle plan perfect? No.
Is there a better plan? Doubtful.
Will the climate continue to change? Yes.
Will there be millions of climate refugees? Yes.
And humanity will just have to accept what happens and adapt as soon as possible. Just as we've always done before.
Thank you and that is all.
I think they've done enough already. Bush's solar credits which allowed for a 30% tax deduction on solar systems helped, and is still helping, get more homes outfitted with solar. That's a good idea that more should be taking advantage of. The majority of these systems may be worthless at night (mine's not) but still, 5 hours/day x millions having them would reduce emissions substantially.
"To understand these questions let’s consider two extreme positions:
*We do nothing and adapt to whatever happens
*We do everything, regardless of other considerations"
This is a false dichotomy. Doing nothing is not an extreme position.