Vaccine

dad4 said:
Run out of oil? How? We know how to turn coal into crude.

Coal liquefaction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

If our goal is to cook ourselves, we have plenty of fuel for the oven.
Click to expand...

The question is the cost. You could solve climate change tomorrow by declaring the socialist Bolivarian revolution and reducing everyone (except the elites of course) to Venezuelan type poverty. The left has a grain of truth when they say the problem is capitalism. Yup...it's the system that made the West vastly better off than what it was like in preindustrial London or Paris...it's a problem that everyone is not poor anymore and wants to consume and that the third world wants it too. But you can't even get people to switch to GMO locally grown food without complaining let alone give up their Starbucks. Giving up planes, meat, hot showers, single family homes and shooting the dogs simply isn't going to happen. Once you get to a certain level of energy exhaustion, you effectively get there too.

There's also the other solution: you could wipe out Thanos style a good chunk of the population. But people don't seem to want to go there either.
 
Kicker 2.0 said:
Interesting how CA ban single use plastics, yet will require every single student to wear a single use plastic mask instead of a cloth one…..5x a week/per student. That’s a LOT of waste that can’t be recycled.
Click to expand...
My favorite is the paper straw in the big disposable plastic cup.

Most of the "green" measures are pure tokenism. About the only thing that has a chance is population control/reduction, but the odds of that happening are slim to none. I will wait to for the next global cooling period. I mean its only been 50 years since we were worrying about that.
 
Grace T. said:
The question is the cost. You could solve climate change tomorrow by declaring the socialist Bolivarian revolution and reducing everyone (except the elites of course) to Venezuelan type poverty. The left has a grain of truth when they say the problem is capitalism. Yup...it's the system that made the West vastly better off than what it was like in preindustrial London or Paris...it's a problem that everyone is not poor anymore and wants to consume and that the third world wants it too. But you can't even get people to switch to GMO locally grown food without complaining let alone give up their Starbucks. Giving up planes, meat, hot showers, single family homes and shooting the dogs simply isn't going to happen. Once you get to a certain level of energy exhaustion, you effectively get there too.

There's also the other solution: you could wipe out Thanos style a good chunk of the population. But people don't seem to want to go there either.
Click to expand...
You ignore the small changes. Drive a small car instead of a large one. Eat chicken instead of beef. Let people build homes close to work. Buy 2 new shirts per year instead of ten.

There is a lot you can do without moving to a sod house and eating crickets.
 
dad4 said:
You ignore the small changes. Drive a small car instead of a large one. Eat chicken instead of beef. Let people build homes close to work. Buy 2 new shirts per year instead of ten.

There is a lot you can do without moving to a sod house and eating crickets.
Click to expand...
The biggest contribution you could have made is to not have children. But you went ahead and did it anyways. So don't tell me it's an emergency if you didn't act like it.
 
Grace T. said:
The biggest contribution you could have made is to not have children. But you went ahead and did it anyways. So don't tell me it's an emergency if you didn't act like it.
Click to expand...
If every woman limited herself to having only one daughter the population crisis would be over in one generation.
 
espola said:
If every woman limited herself to having only one daughter the population crisis would be over in one generation.
Click to expand...

a. it would collapse the social welfare pyramids of both the eastern and western states (which is why his demand is so often coupled with a demand for socialist revolution), or sacrificing the old people (which isn't a fashionable thing since covid since we've turned the expectation on having children having to sacrifice for old people)
b. it brings economic and societal strains that have the potential for collapsing society (see China).
c. How you going to enforce it? Parenting licenses? Your authoritarian streak is showing.
d. If you truly cared about the environment, and don't want to put an authoritarian licensing scheme in place, again why you having children and telling me this is an emergency....you have to make up for the third worlders that are having multiple children.
e. It's a global problem....see COVID....the population "crisis" isn't in the west.
f. How many kids does dad4 have?
 
Grace T. said:
The biggest contribution you could have made is to not have children. But you went ahead and did it anyways. So don't tell me it's an emergency if you didn't act like it.
Click to expand...
Changing the topic and attacking the person?

What a surprise.

The question you keep ducking: if we do not voluntarily limit CO2 emissions, what will prevent CO2 levels from growing above 900 ppm?
 
dad4 said:
Changing the topic and attacking the person?

What a surprise.

The question you keep ducking: if we do not voluntarily limit CO2 emissions, what will prevent CO2 levels from growing above 900 ppm?
Click to expand...

I answered you. You are just to dense to see it. They'll eventually be a tech solution. Otherwise, because of the time problem, if there isn't, we have a lot higher priorities to worry about and we are doomed anyways, so why worry?

Again, if it's an emergency, why'd you have children. That's not an attack (and you know it). It's pointing out that your call for minor sacrifices isn't sufficient because something is important to everyone (like having children was to you, which was the WORST thing you could do to the environment). Seem to recall it was the same the COVID lockdown veto....something is important to everyone....and then again with Arizona tournaments.
 
Grace T. said:
I answered you. You are just to dense to see it. They'll eventually be a tech solution. Otherwise, because of the time problem, if there isn't, we have a lot higher priorities to worry about and we are doomed anyways, so why worry?

Again, if it's an emergency, why'd you have children. That's not an attack (and you know it). It's pointing out that your call for minor sacrifices isn't sufficient because something is important to everyone (like having children was to you, which was the WORST thing you could do to the environment). Seem to recall it was the same the COVID lockdown veto....something is important to everyone....and then again with Arizona tournaments.
Click to expand...
p.s. I'd also point out that there is an imperfect tech solution in place....nuclear energy that can at least supplement the renewables. But Germany is taking a step backwards and shutting down its reactors, which on top of everything else makes them more dependent on the Russians. Government by feeling instead of facts. If part of your solution isn't nuclear, then again you aren't acting like it's an emergency. Yeah I know the downsides, but I'm not the one claiming "emergency".
 
Grace T. said:
a. it would collapse the social welfare pyramids of both the eastern and western states (which is why his demand is so often coupled with a demand for socialist revolution), or sacrificing the old people (which isn't a fashionable thing since covid since we've turned the expectation on having children having to sacrifice for old people)
b. it brings economic and societal strains that have the potential for collapsing society (see China).
c. How you going to enforce it? Parenting licenses? Your authoritarian streak is showing.
d. If you truly cared about the environment, and don't want to put an authoritarian licensing scheme in place, again why you having children and telling me this is an emergency....you have to make up for the third worlders that are having multiple children.
e. It's a global problem....see COVID....the population "crisis" isn't in the west.
f. How many kids does dad4 have?
Click to expand...

I was addressing the biology, not the politics.
 
Grace T. said:
I answered you. You are just to dense to see it. They'll eventually be a tech solution. Otherwise, because of the time problem, if there isn't, we have a lot higher priorities to worry about and we are doomed anyways, so why worry?

Again, if it's an emergency, why'd you have children. That's not an attack (and you know it). It's pointing out that your call for minor sacrifices isn't sufficient because something is important to everyone (like having children was to you, which was the WORST thing you could do to the environment). Seem to recall it was the same the COVID lockdown veto....something is important to everyone....and then again with Arizona tournaments.
Click to expand...
fusion and space mirrors?

I saw it. I just think it is looney tunes.

There are tech solutions, but they are more down to earth. Solar farms, off shore wind, nuclear, high voltage DC transmission. Things we actually know how to build.
 
dad4 said:
fusion and space mirrors?

I saw it. I just think it is looney tunes.

There are tech solutions, but they are more down to earth. Solar farms, off shore wind, nuclear, high voltage DC transmission. Things we actually know how to build.
Click to expand...

1. You have a serious lack of comprehension as to the scope of the problem and how massive it is. As I've said before, renewables, electric cars and "everybody just cut back" a little is a problem so long as India and China insist on industrializing, have their current population, the remainder of the world insists on catching up. It's not a static problem....it's a problem which gets worse as those countries, with their huge populations, advance.
2. Nuclear. I just pointed it out. We have it now. Don't tell me it's an emergency unless nuclear is part of the solution.
3. Solar farms. As others have pointed out, we have a storage issue (which is why they scream at us to cut back between 4 and 7 which means its not a viable solution for all our energy needs until the battery problem is fixed, which is one of the tech solutions that's needed).
4. Off shore wind. Get back to me when California and Martha's vineyard are prepared to do windfarms up and down their coast.
5. high voltage dc transmission. Yup absolutely! One of the tech solutions.
6. the biggest dilemma though remains consumption and how you translate everyone on the planet wanting to live like the first world. That leaves you with only a handful of solutions if you really want to reverse climate change: keep them poor, make everyone poor, or cut down the number of rich people consuming by reducing the number of people. Because you can't have that number of people consuming beef each day (or fish, or even chickens). This kinda reminds me of your controlling COVID with masks and indoor dining. It was never going to be that easy. The solutions which worked (for a while a least) were highly overarching and authoritarian and were hard to maintain for any length of time. Anything else was just a bandaid.
 
Grace T. said:
p.s. I'd also point out that there is an imperfect tech solution in place....nuclear energy that can at least supplement the renewables. But Germany is taking a step backwards and shutting down its reactors, which on top of everything else makes them more dependent on the Russians. Government by feeling instead of facts. If part of your solution isn't nuclear, then again you aren't acting like it's an emergency. Yeah I know the downsides, but I'm not the one claiming "emergency".
Click to expand...

New reactor designs in development avoid the need for a pressure vessel and thus most of the risk of off-site discharge of radioactive materials such as what happened at Chernobyl and Fukushima, or even the trivial emissions from Three Mile Island. Perhaps demonstrating safer operation will change the Germans' minds.
 
dad4 said:
You ignore the small changes. Drive a small car instead of a large one. Eat chicken instead of beef. Let people build homes close to work. Buy 2 new shirts per year instead of ten.

There is a lot you can do without moving to a sod house and eating crickets.
Click to expand...
They use the “all or nothing” like a crutch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top