The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Climate: the problem that dare not speak its name > Comments

Climate: the problem that dare not speak its name : Comments

By Lyn Bender, published 13/8/2013

But how can we mitigate a problem, if we are in effect denying and avoiding it by ignoring it?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All
Climateguy links to reality drop and the mission is "destroy denial".

Fair dinkum arguing with alarmists and as the very polite Peter Lang says, doomsayers, is like arguing with petulant children whose sense of reality is non-existent.

A dose of no power for a week or 2 will not bring the alarmists to their senses because they have none to come to. But if the alarmists have their way that is what the rest of us will have to put up with.

The people promoting AGW and especially renewable energy should be sued.
Posted by cohenite, Wednesday, 14 August 2013 7:48:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Facing taxes, Spaniards tear down their solar panels
By: malterwitty
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/14/facing_taxes_spaniards_tear_down_their_solar_panels/

The Spanish government is in debt to its power producers to the tune of 26 billion euros, the results of years spent regulating costs.

To make up the difference, it’s imposing a levy on rooftop solar panels — effectively negating the economic benefit of generating clean energy.

The tax will more than triple the time it takes for consumers to recoup their investment in rooftop panels, reports Reuters. It will also prevent people from selling any extra energy they generate that way back to the grid.

Those who leave their panels up without connecting them to the grid, which is how the government will monitor and tax their energy production, face a fine of between 6 million and 30 million euros.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/coldest-arctic-summer-on-record-keeps-getting-colder/
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/global-sea-ice-area-far-above-normal-in-2013/
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/nasa-massively-tampering-with-the-us-temperature-record/
http://imgur.com/a/w5iuG
Posted by one under god, Saturday, 17 August 2013 7:03:37 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lyn, you state (correctly) that "governments need to be planning well into the future for infrastructure that will be impacted upon by a warming world, rising sea levels and more frequent extreme weather events". The cost of such infrastructure will be measured in the trillions of dollars and the best way to be able to afford such expenditure is to have an expanding, export-orientated economy that sells what the worlds wants to buy at present, including coal, iron ore and natural gas. But all of these exports, when used, produce greenhouse gases which, if you're a believer, will make the world warmer and hence will demand more money to mitigate against the resulting sea level rise and other impacts.
Something of a vicious circle, isn't it? So maybe the way around this problem is to actively work to stabilise global population (which should happen by about 2050) and to provide the technology and economic strength to the 3 or 4 billion people living in developing countries so that they don't make the energy-consuming mistakes that we've made as we've moved from developing to developed country status. In other words, Australia shouldn't waste billions and billions of dollars reducing its minor greenhouse gas emissions but instead strengthen its economy to be able to live in a warmer world while also helping developing countries do the same.
Posted by Bernie Masters, Monday, 19 August 2013 10:32:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bernie Masters,

You say: "The cost of such infrastructure will be measured in the trillions of dollars".

The cost of the proposed mitigation policies - like carbon pricing and renewable - exceeds any benefits of the proposed mitigation policies by a factor of at least 10. If the projected benefits are realised, the costs exceed the benefits by 10:1. If the benefits are not realised, the costs exceed the benefits by 10:0. The benefits can be realised only if Australia's mitigation policies, like ETS, are part of a global carbon pricing scheme. But this will not happen. the reasons are explained here: http://jennifermarohasy.com/2013/08/why-the-ets-will-not-succeed-peter-lang/

Sea level rise is often used as the example of the high cost of GHG emissions. But the global cost of projected sea level rise is negligible compared with global GDP growth. But reduceing GDP growth - as irrational mitigation policies would - would do significant harm to human well-being.

Global cost of projected sea level rise:

0.5 m in 2100 = $200 billion
1 m in 2100 = $1 trillion
"The economic impact of substantial sea level rise"
Anthoff, Nicholls and Tol (2010)
http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11027-010-9220-7.pdf
Posted by Peter Lang, Monday, 19 August 2013 10:58:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lyn & others;
Even the IPCC acknowledges that the earth has not warmed for 17 years.
Then on top of that there is not enough fossil fuels economically
available to cause the temperature rises the inaccurate models suggest.

I say inaccurate because they use too high a value for fossil fuels to
be burnt.

It really is as simple as that.
Have you not noticed that US oil consumption has fallen by some 15% ?
That is just one symptom.So it is not climate stupid it is energy stupid !
Posted by Bazz, Monday, 19 August 2013 3:30:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy