Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Tesla Motors' started by gavine, Oct 5, 2016.
Caelus lands massive oil discovery in Alaska
why isn't it good?
Need to keep hydrocarbons in the ground. Discoveries like this drive the prices down which is bad for the planet and bad for renewable energy and EVs.
Or this, which I posted in the Climate Change thread:
If you believe in math, like I do, and think 2+2 = 4, then this article sums it up quite nicely. It's simple math. Another great article by Bill McKibben.
Recalculating the Climate Math
Because of the reasons @gavine explained: if humans keep burning fossil fuels our planet's atmospheric temperature will continue to rise because of increased CO2 levels and extreme weather events will increase, polar ice will continue to melt and raise sea levels, and just as importantly (but less discussed) ocean acidity will continue to increase which means ocean organisms that use calcium carbonate to make shells will find it harder to survive (this is already happening), and many other reasons.
All that is basic chemistry and physics and is verified by massive amounts of real world data collected independently by thousands of researchers. It is not a "conspiracy" by China (as Trump claims) or anyone else and it has nothing to do with political ideology. It is actual data. Facts.
We have to stop burning fossil fuels.
That is not exactly massive. World uses 93M or more barrels of oil per day. The USA imports what, 9 million a day? 9 Billion barrels equals 1000 days of imports to the USA. Or this data which shows 325 Million barrels per month which is more than 10 MM/day in July 2016. U.S. Total Crude Oil and Products Imports
Sheesh - look at the OPEC number rising this year. Seems like either they need our help to buy their oil - or we really need a lot more oil than we talk about. The USA is most likely at "peak usage" right now - gasoline demand is at an all-time high. That is of interest.
We need to capture and pipe the excess methane from the current oil drilling rigs in the USA rather than flare it off. That burns roughly 20-30% of the energy being pulled from the ground - burned in place and never used. At least we should try to use it somehow.
Any new oil discovery just relaxes the group think of the USA to believe that oil will be here "forever". It won't. The rate of oil demand growth is easily outpacing the negative oil demand effects of EVs and hybrids and I would probably throw in renewables as well. Maybe it is all the trucks driving around selling and installing all the new renewables? Maybe it is all the guys commuting in to the EV production plants building the EVs? Something is causing the added demand.
In order to stop burning fossil fuel, we have to educate everyone - including religious leaders - that it is important to do it. I don't see this as an easy to reach world. I don't even see the Paris accords being met - only "talked about". I've heard that the accords include allowances for India and China to double their coal usage. Hardly helpful.
I guess you don't appreciate food, heat and lighting
How do we replace the enormous BTUs of NG and oil-based dwelling heating during winter world-wide? That's one thing that is not being solved by renewables just yet. Diaspora to move everyone to the equator isn't going to happen. Of course, the "proper solution" that is being bandied about is a carbon tax. A tax that will make all lives a bit more marginalized. Living in colder climates and heating homes will lower standards of living of the poor to some degree (yes, I know CPP includes a tax rebate to support them but I doubt it will be done equitably). Even the Amish use NG and Propane for home heating. And they don't get it rained down from the heavens - they buy it from oil/gas producers. Some use renewables to charge batteries and many use cell phones charged from said batteries. If we all could live small like the Amish, then we would "sort of" be living as the prior guy said - stop burning fossil fuels. But we would also have to crash the world economy and become a barter/labor-time trade culture like the same Amish. It would actually work - but so many people live lives of zero manual labor, are "out on disability" and just don't work at the same levels that it would be hard to accomplish without some major pain.
So when China burns Saudi oil, it doesn't make GHG. But if it's Alaska oil it does?
The solution for CO2 level reduction is a reduction in the need to emit it. Not the supply. We will come up with the supply if there is a need. Sort of like the war on drugs trying to stop production. Never worked.
I see it as a good thing since it will reduce the amount of money flowing into the middle eastern time bomb.
carbon based taxing is just another government sham. people need to heat their homes, light the night and have copious amounts of food. all a carbon based tax will do is take from the haves, lower their standards of living by confiscation of wealth.
I saw a Michael Mann talk about a week ago. He said that the only way to lower CO2 emissions is through government-led carbon taxation. He said volunteerism (ie. buying EVs, adding solar to a home, taking advantage of the tax credits for such) is at such a small level it cannot make much of a dent. It can only happen through top-down policy change.
CPP is only for Electricity generation. I look at CPP as being actually "Anti-EV". It pays no attention to gasoline/oil demand. it is only for the "Clean Power Plan" of how we generate electricity. Meaning, convert coal to something else. Michael Mann also finds that the energy losses during NG gas procurement,flaring, piping, etc. equates to about the same CO2 dispursion as coal power plants. One thing that is a benefit is less labor and mess with coal plants. Instead of mountain-top clearing to find coal, you have small patch drilling or rigs in the gulf for NG.
CPP works even better if nobody converts to EVs and the demand for electricity is lessened. This would mean that fewer dirty power plants are needed and a "success" according to the CPP. It should not be CPP. It should be a CPD - Clean Power Demand program. CPP is yet another short-sighted plan that only affects one area that is controlled by one body of government (EPA) that does not truly effect how consumers make intelligent choices.
FACT SHEET: Overview of the Clean Power Plan | Clean Power Plan | US EPA
The upper class has a warped sense of reality. We think that mandating $10k worth of safety features on a car is a good thing for Everybody. We think 105°F is a lethal temperature. We think that manufacturing should be done in other countries. We think that the most beautiful and rich ecosystems are great places to build houses, but the desert should be left untouched.
Solve the technology in an AFFORDABLE manner and people will flock to it. If you solve it by reducing the standard of living for the lower and middle classes, WHICH IS THE CURRENT PLAN in place, we are being elitist swine. Lip service to ecology while we jet first class to Paris for the weekend while demanding the peasants work that weekend to pay for their higher energy bills and transportation costs.
What some do not understand, is this is how revolutions have started in the past. The rich act in defiance of the proletariat, and proletariat uses force of arms.
Ever wonder why the second Amendment was written, and why today there is a major policy push to void it? That is the reason. Federal donating of APCs, heavy MGs, and other combat assault hardware to police was considered clever until the public found out.
I didn't say we have to stop burning all fossil fuels today. What we need to do is replace fossil fuel energy with sustainable (renewable) energy sources. We can do that. It will take many decades. But it is possible. Solar, wind, and batteries will work everywhere. Obviously poor countries cannot afford to make that transition yet. But if the wealthier countries lead the way (as Western Europe is currently doing) then the costs will come down and over time the poorer countries will be able to take advantage of that.
Your attitude seems to be that it is impossible to stop burning fossil fuels. You have a fixed mindset that denies the possibility of technological progress and denies that rapidly rising atmospheric CO2 levels are a problem. You are welcome to your opinion, but you are not welcome to your own facts. There is one set of facts, and they prove that rising CO2 comes from human activities and we know exactly which activities are responsible. We can modify our behavior to reduce and then eventually eliminate those sources.
I know why the 2nd amendment was written. There is no vast movement to nullify it. And the Federal government is not trying to turn local police forces into armies of occupation.
I think you should read hillary's comments on the second amendment. why do local police depts. need heavily armored assault vehicles? I refer you to the quasi martial law that was imposed by an out of control law enforcement community subsequent to the boston marathon fiasco.
you've put a lot of words into my mouth to advocate your version of the way it is. please cease and desist from making any more such implications.
This excitement goes right up there with new coal discoveries. What IS exciting is to see wind/solar farms that weren't there before.
Not all military surplus should be released, even to local jurisdictions supposedly skilled in its usage. Tanks, armored personnel carriers, etc do not belong in a free society.
>Obviously poor countries cannot afford to make that transition yet. [ecarfan]
Poor countries actually are the best place to do this. Examples: Setting up cell phones rather than going landline. Or renewable energy electric systems replacing ancient inefficient power networks instead of the usual expensive upgrading.
Are you going to read the article I posted or not? Here:
I didn't respond to the points made in the article I responded to the comments made regarding the article.
You are welcome to clarify your position regarding anything I wrote in my post.