SageBrush
Posts: 4222
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

(Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 9:04 am

This article
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -and-india

should be required reading by all, and forced reading for all the bozos who think a $10 a month surcharge to the electricity bill to curb global warming is too much.

I have not read the source article yet but I expect to see resource wars not included. Even so, they estimate $50 a ton CO2 in the US and a global impact of $400 a ton.

So e.g.,
a kWh of electricity produced from coal emits ~ 2.2 lbs of CO2
> 900 kWh causes $50 of domestic and $400 of global damage
That works out to 5.5 cents a kWh domestic cost and 44 cents a kWh global cost.

NG is not too far behind those numbers.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
03/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
11/2018: 56.16 Ahr, 30k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

Oilpan4
Gold Member
Posts: 571
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: (Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:41 am

Yeah good luck selling that to people.
If they aren't willing to pay $10 per month reading that article isn't going to encourage them to pay $400 per month.
This idea is dead on arival.
2011 white SL leaf with 2014 batt.
Chargers: Panasonic brick moded for 240v, duosida 16a 240v and a 10kw setec portable CHAdeMO
Location: 88103

SageBrush
Posts: 4222
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: (Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 12:12 pm

Oilpan4 wrote:Yeah good luck selling that to people.
If they aren't willing to pay $10 per month reading that article isn't going to encourage them to pay $400 per month.
This idea is dead on arival.


You completely misunderstood the article.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
03/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
11/2018: 56.16 Ahr, 30k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

Oilpan4
Gold Member
Posts: 571
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: (Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 12:37 pm

I understand the article and find most of it agreeable.
I was responding to this:
SageBrush wrote:
(The article I was not taliking about)

should be required reading by all, and forced reading for all the bozos who think a $10 a month surcharge to the electricity bill to curb global warming is too much.

The bozos you refer to are 68% of registered voters. Your post seemed to suggest that if people read that article they would be open to spending more to fix global warming.
Nope, I read, understand and agree with most of it and I like most voters still only open to paying $1 per month to fix global warming.
2011 white SL leaf with 2014 batt.
Chargers: Panasonic brick moded for 240v, duosida 16a 240v and a 10kw setec portable CHAdeMO
Location: 88103

SageBrush
Posts: 4222
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: (Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 1:51 pm

Oilpan4 wrote:I understand the article and find most of it agreeable.

Oh ?
What do you disagree with and why ?

How can you possibly "agree" with the article while not having a clue about climate sensitivity ?
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
03/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
11/2018: 56.16 Ahr, 30k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

iPlug
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 6:47 pm
Delivery Date: 25 Apr 2016
Location: Rocklin, CA

Re: (Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 2:42 pm

Afraid I agree with Oilpan4's impression that most Americans are unwilling to pay more than next to nothing. Would be a much easier problem to fix if this was mostly about education.

It's not even predominantly about politics. Most of my liberal friends, family, and colleagues believe in AGW, would say they think it is a serious problem, but their personal choices show they care little about it. :(

Sagebrush, afraid you and some significant numbers on these and similar boards who were the hybrid, plug-in, BEV, and household early adopters of efficiency, conservation, etc. are but rare birds in this country who know AND truly show more than lip service level interest.
'19 Model 3 SR+ (own), '19 Leaf SV (leased), '12 Plug-in Prius (sold 3/19), '16 Leaf SV (prior lease), 11.43kW Solar PV (16MWh/yr real production), 20.5 SEER/13.0 HSPF ducted air-source heat pump, 3.70 UEF heat pump water heater, Induction Cooktop

SageBrush
Posts: 4222
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: (Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 3:24 pm

iPlug wrote:Afraid I agree with Oilpan4's impression that most Americans are unwilling to pay more than next to nothing. Would be a much easier problem to fix if this was mostly about education.
It is not just an Oil-y impression, it is a sloppy summary of the latest polls:

About:
80 - 90% of progressive voters will pay today to curb AG
50% of independents
20% of repukes
Close to no trumpers

It adds up to a minority willing to pay today to curb AGW.
HOWEVER, and this is the point of this thread, outside of trumpers it is very unusual to find a person who is against paying today and recognizes the costs involved in business as usual. Trumpers stand out from the rest as the group with an ideology of irrationality.

It would go like this:
Trumper: I'm going to jump off a cliff because Obama says it is a bad idea and I've been promised money after I jump by Trump.
Bystander: You are going to die
Trumper: Can you prove it ?
Bystander: Not until you jump, but the evidence is overwhelming
Trumper: I am going to jump off a cliff

For the others it goes something like this:
AGW denialist: I'm going *that* way
Bystander: bad idea; you will fall off a cliff.
AGW denialist: If there was a cliff, Fox News would have told me. I'll be fine.
Last edited by SageBrush on Sat Jun 22, 2019 10:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
03/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
11/2018: 56.16 Ahr, 30k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

User avatar
Nubo
Posts: 5185
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:01 am
Delivery Date: 31 Oct 2014
Location: Vallejo, CA

Re: (Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 6:22 pm

You'd need some iron-clad proof that the monies collected were being used to ameliorate climate change effects. That's the real nut because the public views these kind of "sin taxes" as pure money grabs and for good reason. They usually are. Tying your share to the "real effects of Carbon pollution" is too far of a stretch for most people outside of ivory towers. How is my share of the taxes possibly getting to all of the people actually harmed, in a proportionate manner?

I'm not a big fan of punitive taxation as a means to influence public behavior. It's too easy for government to become addicted to the cash flow and thus the very behaviors they initially sought to curb.

I'm much more in favor of government spending my tax money on research, especially that research which private enterprise deems unlikely to benefit them in the short term. Research that will often fail but in the end may provide the technology to truly make fossil fuels obsolete. Until then, humanity will consume all of the fossil fuels it can, until it can't and no legislative body is going to stop it.
I noticed you're still working with polymers.

LeftieBiker
Moderator
Posts: 12226
Joined: Wed May 22, 2013 3:17 am
Delivery Date: 30 Apr 2018
Location: Upstate New York, US

Re: (Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 6:33 pm

You'd need some iron-clad proof that the monies collected were being used to ameliorate climate change effects. That's the real nut because the public views these kind of "sin taxes" as pure money grabs and for good reason. They usually are. Tying your share to the "real effects of Carbon pollution" is too far of a stretch for most people outside of ivory towers. How is my share of the taxes possibly getting to all of the people actually harmed, in a proportionate manner?


You don't let the government keep it. You put it into a return loop that directly funds zero emission public transportation, including free public transportation for the poor and working poor.
Scarlet Ember 2018 Leaf SL W/ Pro Pilot
2009 Vectrix VX-1 W/18 Leaf modules, & 3 EZIP E-bicycles.
PLEASE don't PM me with Leaf questions. Just post in the topic that seems most appropriate.

johnlocke
Posts: 353
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:47 pm
Delivery Date: 14 Dec 2015
Leaf Number: 300582

Re: (Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

Sat Jun 22, 2019 10:04 pm

LeftieBiker wrote:
You'd need some iron-clad proof that the monies collected were being used to ameliorate climate change effects. That's the real nut because the public views these kind of "sin taxes" as pure money grabs and for good reason. They usually are. Tying your share to the "real effects of Carbon pollution" is too far of a stretch for most people outside of ivory towers. How is my share of the taxes possibly getting to all of the people actually harmed, in a proportionate manner?


You don't let the government keep it. You put it into a return loop that directly funds zero emission public transportation, including free public transportation for the poor and working poor.

How do you plan to stop the government from keeping it? Taxes on gasoline were supposed to be used to fund road repairs. How did that work out? Legislators will siphon off funding for their pet projects or "pressing public needs" every time. Even funds specifically earmarked will be raided. You can't control how or what the government spends money on. They just take it out of one pot and put it in another. If they provide additional funding for something, someone will figure out how to reduce the initial funding amount.

If you really want to reduce emissions, increase the subsidies for wind, solar, and energy storage. Make grid battery storage mandatory for utilities and encourage retirement of "peaker plants". Change that calculation of utility rates from installed base cost to net operating costs. Force utilities to close marginal facilities that exist to raise base cost.
2016 SV, New battery at 45K mi.
Jamul, CA
San Diego East County

Return to “Website/Forum Discussions”