(Some of) The Cost of Carbon Emissions

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
powersurge said:
I like to think what will happen decades from now... Just consider my points..

If we burn all the potential fossil fuels, Walt Witman's Jayne's Hill aka High Hill and a few other points on former Long Island will remain above the new ocean level.

1979-USGS-jayneshill.JPG


https://news.nationalgeographic.com/energy/2015/09/150911-antarctic-ice-sheet-sea-level-rise-burning-fossil-fuels/
 
The sea lee has risen 300 feet since the last ice age covering a land area the size of current day Asia and Europe and it's going to rise more.

Maybe we should do what the people who promote for profit global warming are doing.
Like al gore. He buys beach front mansions with natural gas heated pools and Flys all over the world in a chartered fuel guzzeling private jet.
He don't seem to be that worried about it.
So neither should any of us.
 
Oilpan4 said:
Flys all over the world
What an idiotic argument. Are you going to discount scientific conferences about AGW because the attendees arrived by plane ? Or because they arrived by EV but used dirty grid power ? Or because they were exhaling CO2 ?
 
Oilpan4 said:
The sea lee has risen 300 feet since the last ice age covering a land area the size of current day Asia and Europe and it's going to rise more.

Fires are natural. Burning down your house isn't smart.

Sea level was stable from Roman times to the Industrial Revolution.
 
WetEV said:
Oilpan4 said:
The sea lee has risen 300 feet since the last ice age covering a land area the size of current day Asia and Europe and it's going to rise more.

Fires are natural. Burning down your house isn't smart.

Sea level was stable from Roman times to the Industrial Revolution.
And billions of people did not live on the coasts.
 
WetEV said:
Oilpan4 said:
The sea lee has risen 300 feet since the last ice age covering a land area the size of current day Asia and Europe and it's going to rise more.

Fires are natural. Burning down your house isn't smart.

Sea level was stable from Roman times to the Industrial Revolution.

Then over the same time span at the end of the last ice age the sea levels may have risen up to 100 feet. That doesn't prove anything.
 
SageBrush said:
WetEV said:
Oilpan4 said:
The sea lee has risen 300 feet since the last ice age covering a land area the size of current day Asia and Europe and it's going to rise more.

Fires are natural. Burning down your house isn't smart.

Sea level was stable from Roman times to the Industrial Revolution.
And billions of people did not live on the coasts.
Personal problems.
Live on the coast you are at the mercy of the seas, this has only been a fact of life for as long as man has lived on the coast.
The fact that it's now billions of people as opposed to thousands or hundreds of thousands is a flaw of human nature.
 
Oilpan4 said:
SageBrush said:
WetEV said:
Fires are natural. Burning down your house isn't smart.

Sea level was stable from Roman times to the Industrial Revolution.
And billions of people did not live on the coasts.
Personal problems.
Live on the coast you are at the mercy of the seas, this has only been a fact of life for as long as man has lived on the coast.
The fact that it's now billions of people as opposed to thousands or hundreds of thousands is a flaw of human nature.
It also just happens to be a very large chunk of modern civilization. Do you think you are going to be spared mitigation taxes or disaster taxes ? Do you think your way of life is going to continue on as before with civilization in upheaval ?

Just HOW stupid are you ??!
 
As changes in geography happen, (in decades or 100s of years), we will just move.... Man has been doing this forever. First place to move from? New Orleans.

I really want to understand why current politicians are so invested in forcing entire world to spend our tax dollars to MAYBE stop some worldwide changes in our topography... In the distant future...

I KNOW that our politicians are not that idealistic..... They would be getting some $$$$ deals NOW...

Just like they are willing to make drastic changes in our country's demographics TODAY, without regard to what THAT will do to our society in the future.

Did I tell you I do not trust our current government??
 
...some worldwide changes in our topography...

I get the impression that you are ignorant of, or downplaying the severe consequences of climate change in the near future. Changing topography is our last concern. People dying of heat waves, and climate refugees are in the news now. The big one is ecosphere disruption. Think undying germs and dying crops. There is no Horseman of topography, there are famine, disease and war.
 
roussir said:
...some worldwide changes in our topography...

I get the impression that you are ignorant of, or downplaying the severe consequences of climate change in the near future. Changing topography is our last concern. People dying of heat waves, and climate refugees are in the news now. The big one is ecosphere disruption. Think undying germs and dying crops. There is no Horseman of topography, there are famine, disease and war.

I think you are the one that needs to wear a tin foil hat against alien mind control rays.... lmao!!

No... you have to be pulling my leg?????
 
SageBrush said:
This article
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/oct/01/new-study-finds-incredibly-high-carbon-pollution-costs-especially-for-the-us-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.

Since the actual article has been discussed very little I'll comment on it.

I think it is an interesting article on a particular study that has a novel way of looking at the problem.

This is the an earlier paper that is referenced quite a bit in the paper this article is based on.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature15725

It gets a little mathy in some spots but the big takeaway is that there is evidence for an ideal window of temperature for productivity and a sharp decline once you warm past a certain threshold. Projected warming will move some very large economies past that ideal point and close to the inflection point where the sharp decline occurs.

I think it is a reasonable way of showing that we have an economic interest in reducing warming (by reducing GHG emissions) and that it is in our long term economic interest to do so.

I think it is also important to note that these types of studies is that there are a LOT of assumptions that go into them with large ranges of uncertainty and conclusions with a lot of qualifiers... there is no way to really test this sort of thing it is just an educated guess based on what has happened in recent times.

Personally, I trust the IPCC as the general consensus of the scientific community and think that we should base our policy actions on what they say just like we do with the CBO or other agencies. I have no problem with a price on carbon that is used to directly address this issue rather than being funneled into other pet projects or as a Trojan horse for implementing particular social policies. Since that price does not currently exist I just pay my utility an extra $.013 / kWh to offset whatever my solar array doesn't cover with renewables. I imagine most people have the option to do so...

As far as some of the criticisms are concerned. I am sympathetic to the posters who come on here and point out the hypocrisy involved in climate scientists flying half way around the globe to climate conferences being praised while the media mock rural folks for driving pickup trucks and not getting passports. I think a little less "virtue signaling" and a little more "just doing the right thing" would go a long ways here. I think the social media wars where people take turns posting the latest study that supports their world view with the most hyperbolic statement about it is not particularly productive. The whole "the world is going to end in 12 years" nonsense that was in the news recently showed us as much. That does not, however, justify inaction... you should still do the right thing even if the most vocal proponents of that action may sometimes be hypocrites or incompetent.
 
golfcart said:
This is the actual paper that much of the conclusions are based on.
This is the correct article:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0282-y.epdf?referrer_access_token=ls3geUg2nCQwBDoTopTVqdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Ms70oz073vBeHQkQJXsJbet9ktyjsQdPqCCIa29L3j_Z62qqSNtgRbDx-utkH-sN5kSrf0h2q_0h2lACDGQbvqGSc0ZnKiiIW8tg8HEnAUN-slJtjjFUjk0PkgC91fHpAQvWkyzSei_474Y05KcrNth58XViELq_fGvcdzsKxCLIT8gDKpI9wfZga7xTW5TjxpSZxMhpApqqSarWsCBlBqYxBFlqPB4Lbn51U6pnRCF3FJ-ZYdQMHuywxgdVKrLK_8__JDzwpXKTtFJ_2MvZfegHUap3ESEb0tGFHDh04lIZcYa792XX9VRUMHM8-8yTHAYFudQ7tDZMpTo5uIBwwb&tracking_referrer=www.theguardian.com
 
SageBrush said:
golfcart said:
This is the actual paper that much of the conclusions are based on.
This is the correct article:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0282-y.epdf?referrer_access_token=ls3geUg2nCQwBDoTopTVqdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Ms70oz073vBeHQkQJXsJbet9ktyjsQdPqCCIa29L3j_Z62qqSNtgRbDx-utkH-sN5kSrf0h2q_0h2lACDGQbvqGSc0ZnKiiIW8tg8HEnAUN-slJtjjFUjk0PkgC91fHpAQvWkyzSei_474Y05KcrNth58XViELq_fGvcdzsKxCLIT8gDKpI9wfZga7xTW5TjxpSZxMhpApqqSarWsCBlBqYxBFlqPB4Lbn51U6pnRCF3FJ-ZYdQMHuywxgdVKrLK_8__JDzwpXKTtFJ_2MvZfegHUap3ESEb0tGFHDh04lIZcYa792XX9VRUMHM8-8yTHAYFudQ7tDZMpTo5uIBwwb&tracking_referrer=www.theguardian.com

Perhaps I wasn't clear, the one I posted was the older study that laid out the methodology for the effects of temperature on economic production. The article you linked to is specific to the guardian article but references the one I posted in many places. I felt like the one I posted did a better job of explaining the nuts and bolts of how they link temperature to productivity which is why I said "much of the conclusions are based on". If you want to show that the U.S. has "self interested" reasons to reduce GHG then I think that is a good one.

Either way it is good to have both available. I'll edit my original post to be more clear.
 
SageBrush said:
Nubo said:
powersurge said:
...We, as a country, love to say "yes" to all of our idealistic goals such as "..."no children in cages"...

Such a high bar.
For a Repuke it is more along the lines of "no white children in cages."

So you had to get racial... With that comment.. If you are white, then you are reprehensible. If you are non white, then you are low life racist.. I always get my money's worth with your comments...

Those who want to control you will always try to get you by the base of your snarkles by using your idealism (with "the children")..... Yeah I strap "children" to my back and get in for free, with everything for free. forever... because of the "Children"...
 
Unless I missed something here (and I may have) there is no need to be talking about caging children regardless of race, in this topic. If you are talking about immigration here, that's another topic...
 
LeftieBiker said:
Unless I missed something here (and I may have) there is no need to be talking about caging children regardless of race, in this topic. If you are talking about immigration here, that's another topic...

I think that in today's "hot" climate of so many social and other political problems we need to stop arguing meaningless points that have no relevance to our daily lives. Arguing about carbon dioxide is pointless, because no matter what we at a local level wish to do, this is a global issue. NO, THE WORLD WILL NOT END IN 12 YEARS..... As our lovely AOC keeps on telling us..

Plus it is a political plaything for crooked politicians to base their power on.
 
Back
Top