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 > General Discussion > We got it wrong on warming, says IPCC

We got it wrong on warming, says IPCC

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 37
  7. 38
  8. 39
  9. Page 40
  10. 41
  11. 42
  12. All
Rhank you, Luciferase,

Of course we switch from coal to gas or thorium-based nuclear power, if that is genuinely feasible. I'm sceptical about a carbon tax UNLESS it means that power companies can't jack up their prices, otherwise we pay for emission, you and I, and they don't.

And of course any revenue from a carbon tax should go EXCLUSIVELY into research into renewable energy and subsidies for genuine start-ups, and into massive tree-planting, &c., with nothing going into yet another bureaucracy.

Actually these three options (switch to natural gas, develop thorium-nuclear, tree-planting) are future-neutral in the sense that if there is global warming, no real warming OR actual cooling, they don't aggravate the situation. And of course, they may not be the only options by any means.

Cheers :)

Joe
www.firstsources.info
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 2 October 2013 8:29:18 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
"And of course any revenue from a carbon tax should go EXCLUSIVELY into research into renewable energy and subsidies for genuine start-ups, and into massive tree-planting,"

Nup, revenue goes to income tax cuts, pensions, export industry compensation. Nationalize the grid (thank you states) and consumers gravitate to cheapest suppliers to it, which will be those blending nuclear (bought wholesale) and renewables most efficiently, while paying for grid service separately.

Planting trees? Haven't we covered that? forgedaboudit. Put the money where it does the most carbon reduction, a domestic emissions scheme seguing into an international one in time.

Now, ill get my people to talk to your people and we'll have it up and humming in 25 years.
Posted by Luciferase, Wednesday, 2 October 2013 9:11:41 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
Luciferase,

I watched a program on Sunday on this - the London Array offshore wind farm. Massive wind turbines off Kent in Britain...very impressive technology. The program showed a special ship constructing them .

http://www.londonarray.com/

What have we got?

A bunch of deniers with a second-rate plan.
Posted by Poirot, Wednesday, 2 October 2013 9:36:36 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
Luciferase,

Your 'solution', what to do with the revenue from a carbon tax, is frankly appalling. Surely, if CO2 is a problem, then whatever revenue earned to mitigate it should go to mitigating it ?

As for Poirot's half-witted praise of wind-farms, sure let's have wind-farms, they're beautiful, but let's not forget that they are incredibly expensive and create a huge amount of CO2 emission in their construction. What, you thought the Good Fairy made wind-towers, Poirot ?

Cheers :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Thursday, 3 October 2013 8:17:13 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
Loudmouth,

"As for Poirot's half-witted praise of wind-farms, sure let's have wind-farms, they're beautiful, but let's not forget that they are incredibly expensive and create a huge amount of CO2 emission in their construction. What, you thought the Good Fairy made wind-towers, Poirot ?"

Excuse the heckling from the "Duh, what's that, and where's my peanuts?" seats....as far as Joe's concerned "The "denial" is settled.

Luciferase,

I was mainly impressed because they were out in the sea catching the greatest amount of wind.

Funnily enough, Joe's always going on about how clever we are and how our wonderful intelligence is going to help us have energy by devising amazing technology.

Of course, he's not genuine at all. The moment someone highlights incredible technology, he's the first to shower it with derision.
Posted by Poirot, Thursday, 3 October 2013 8:45:19 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
"The moment someone highlights incredible technology, he's the first to shower it with derision."

Not really, Poirot:

" .... sure let's have wind-farms, they're beautiful, but let's not forget that they are incredibly expensive and create a huge amount of CO2 emission in their construction."

And the ones built out in the sea: do you think they rest on cushions of air ? On more concrete and steel platforms, Poirot. Thousands of tons o it. Concrete and steel are, to your surprise no doubt, made using huge amounts of energy.

Let's have wind-farms and solar arrays too. Thorium reactors too, if that technology is feasible. But let's not pretend that their construction is emission-free.

On the other hand, tree-planting is not only emission-free, more or less, but removes CO2 from the air. I'm puzzled why you and Luciferase are so hostile to it.

Cheers :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Thursday, 3 October 2013 9:14:55 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 37
  7. 38
  8. 39
  9. Page 40
  10. 41
  11. 42
  12. All

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