Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Dropline
Mountain climber
Somewhere Up There
|
|
Re global warming/climate change, we will adapt.
|
|
mouse from merced
Trad climber
The finger of fate, my friends, is fickle.
|
|
And keep eating lots and lots of popcorn...
|
|
bobinc
Trad climber
Portland, Or
|
|
Fastest way to get the biggest effect: a carbon tax levied at the pump and an adjustment in other taxes (income, sales, etc) to make it as revenue-neutral as possible.
|
|
snagglepuss
Mountain climber
|
|
Sadly, the more I read of these stubborn American opinions the more I'm convinced the problem will be addressed through generational turnover. The current crop of stubborn old American white dudes will fight change until they're dead. Every day there are fewer of them blocking the way to the future. That may be where hope lies. Look at the table of generational statistics posted earlier in this thread.
|
|
bobinc
Trad climber
Portland, Or
|
|
I think states have to institute the carbon taxes on their own in order to get anywhere quickly. This is what British Columbia did. It ain't gonna happen at the federal level. The gas tax there hasn't changed in over 20 yrs and it's primarily used to build new roads, as far as I know...
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
Sadly, the more I read of these stubborn American opinions the more I'm convinced the problem will be addressed through generational turnover.
Today's young people are more entitled... more pampered than any previous generation. Smart phones are a given for most kids over eleven. Kids doing yardwork are a rarity. They spend their free time glued to tiny screens.
You think they'l make the hard sacrifices to reverse global warming?
|
|
snagglepuss
Mountain climber
|
|
Robert,
One guy doesn't make a generation. Ask YC and he'll tell you his generation has dropped the ball on environmental issues.
|
|
snagglepuss
Mountain climber
|
|
EdwardT,
Believe it or not but "entitled and self-centered" is how the genX-ers characterize the stone-wallers of your generation and mine.
The difference is that some among the Xers have the energy and ambition to embrace new ideas and overcome huge challenges. The rest are more willing to follow and not just stone-wall.
|
|
snagglepuss
Mountain climber
|
|
Malemute,
No need for anything that drastic. LOL
Time will do the dirty deeds and it will do it dirt cheap!
|
|
bobinc
Trad climber
Portland, Or
|
|
DMT, the BC approach does also include carbon taxes on commercial and industrial operations. I haven't looked at the most recent data, but for the first several years (since I believe BC started on this in 2008), the overall GDP effect was negligible and the reduction in carbon-based fuel usage was around 15% vs the rest of CN.
|
|
bobinc
Trad climber
Portland, Or
|
|
No carbon tax on imported goods, at least not as of 2013, which is the date of the study I use as my main reference. Your question is a good one and motivates me to see if there is an update on this.
|
|
bobinc
Trad climber
Portland, Or
|
|
Yes, you are right on the trade dynamics. But in my view, we've got a lot of excuses for not doing things and I guess all of the voluntary ways to reduce carbon footprint look to me to be very insignificant. A very small sliver of the population has made significant changes in what they buy and how they get around. But everyone else does what is cheapest and most comfortable. Maybe there is no way around our usage of fossil fuels and/or accelerate development of alternatives, we should change the price signal on business as usual.
|
|
bobinc
Trad climber
Portland, Or
|
|
Sounds good to me. Last I checked, the embodied-energy database on various manufactured goods was looking better and better. I think that's a very important aspect to this whole thing since so much of what we consume comes from offshore.
|
|
snagglepuss
Mountain climber
|
|
Robert L,
It probably doesn't matter what motivates them. What matters is that some humans out of every generation are always driven to tackle the biggest problems. Usually before the next big unforeseen consequence hits the fan.
You seem very pessimistic and defeatist. How did you possibly ever climb anything with that attitude?
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
Carbon taxes are a challenge politically (good luck getting any congressional Republicans to vote for it) as well as competitively in a global economy (as DMT mentions)(e.g. if we have higher taxes than China we put ourselves at a disadvantage).
They are perhaps part of a plan to address the issue, but I think investing in renewable energy is the more feasible solution. If we lead the world in clean energy we not only enjoy the benefits of cleaner air we can sell that tech to other countries and it makes us more competitive globally.
|
|
bobinc
Trad climber
Portland, Or
|
|
BC has used some of the carbon tax revenue to improve things like public transportation. Unfortunately I can't stay in this discussion for longer this afternoon but will try to provide some more info/links to address your question later today/early tomorrow.
Here's at least a link to get started on, but note it likely has a pro-tax bias. There are a number of other studies out there.
https://www.carbontax.org/blog/2015/12/17/british-columbias-carbon-tax-by-the-numbers/
|
|
snagglepuss
Mountain climber
|
|
Robert L,
It sounds like you believe in yourself but not in anyone else?
Motivations matter on a moral and philosophical level, which is important. Generally speaking, motivators don't ever change. There are only a few strong human motivators. Does it matter if someone saves mankind to impress his dead parents? Does it matter if someone saves the world to get laid more? Does it matter if someone saves the world to get rich? Many will do selfish and/or evil things for the same motivations.
|
|
Jon Nelson
Boulder climber
Bellingham, WA
|
|
"I also think that people have little sense about how profound an effect that greenhouse gases have on our daily temperature."
Why is it warmer at night when it's cloudy?
Because the clouds act as a blanket.
Everybody knows this, but the public doesn't understand the reason,
which is
-the earth radiates infrared frequencies due to the black body effect
-water vapour in clouds is a greenhouse gas
-greenhouse gases absorb & emit infrared radiation
-a good portion of the emitted radiation goes back to the earth
So greenhouse gases cause the earth to retain heat
This isn't rocket science
It is a good point about the clouds, as the clouds are even more effective at warming us, but the blanket analogy is the wrong one. (This is an unfortunate byproduct of the term 'greenhouse'.) A campfire analogy would be a huge improvement.
The warming has essentially nothing to do with absorption by the clouds or gases. It occurs only because the gases and cloud particles radiate. So, they should just be called 'radiating gases', and the effect, the 'atmospheric radiation effect'. Oh well, too late now.
A blanket works by suppressing convection. But convection in the troposphere entirely determines the temperature of the clouds and gases, which then radiate and warm us. This warming can happen only if we do NOT have a 'blanket'.
It's OK though Malemute. I see the same mistake everywhere. Probably pretty hopeless to try and correct now...
|
|
BobSFrankNose
Social climber
Seattle
|
|
Serious questions, no agenda.
What percent of worldwide climate change is truly anthropogenic?
And, the remaining percent that is NOT anthropogenic is caused by . . . what?
What percent of our current climate change is cyclical, or caused by the sun, or anomalies like rotations?
What percent of the total anthropogenic climate change is the United States directly responsible for?
And, what percent of the percentage that the United States is directly responsible for (that which we can effect with our vote, passing laws, changing behavior) can be controlled or reduced by us?
A) If we completely stop our economy and live in the dark ages as a country?
B) If we try to lead the world in promoting and/or making this central to our ideology?
C) Ignore the fact that China and India (and a dozen others) add coal fired power plants and other significant problems faster than we could ever reduce our emissions.
What has come to fruition from the studies done in the ‘90’s that lead to Al Gore’s slide show called An Inconvenient Truth since the origins and the predictions and the time limits of events that should have happened?
Do you believe or consider evidence produced in Climate Gate emails that things may have been overstated or ‘messed’ with?
A) What percent of the climate Gate emails have you read and cross-reference on your own
B) What percent do you believe are real and not out of context . . . 1%, 10% 50%?
C) After reading and cross-referencing – did you reflect or re-see An Inconvenient Truth?
Do you/did you believe 'predictions and computer models' of catastrophes more than 'after the fact retrospective evidence' (current satellite data) now looking back on what really is happening?
Do you believe there was/is a profit or money motive for some in the world to embrace/promote climate change and suggest trading carbon credits, new untested and expensive industries, tax credits for exploring new options and the equalizing of nations and countries into a global community?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!