Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Global Warming
 This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
drm
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Location: The Dalles, OR
drm
Member
PostTue Apr 04, 2017 8:25 am 
As to subsidies, my understanding is that so far Trump has not called for ending subsidies to solar and wind. And the market competitiveness of these is now that doing such would not kill them, though it would slow down their growth. An interesting factor is that some of the windiest states are also very conservative. Texas produces more wind power than California and the Dakotas and Wyoming could compete too if more transmission was available. They are pretty sunny too. So we may be approaching a bipartisan consensus on renewable energy, at least at the state level. From what I've read, the most immediately damaging thing in the recent executive order was getting rid of regulations that control methane leaks from drilling rigs.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostTue Apr 04, 2017 9:34 am 
Pull the subsidies.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
drm
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Location: The Dalles, OR
drm
Member
PostTue Apr 04, 2017 2:45 pm 
Government subsidies lead to two things: corruption and innovation. Some innovations would probably have happened anyway, slower, like the transcontinental railroad. Not sure about the internet.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostTue Apr 25, 2017 2:05 pm 
Al Gore’s New Group Demands $15 Trillion To Fight Global Warming
Quote:
A group of executives who want to fight global warming has published a new report calling for countries to spend up to $600 billion a year over the next two decades to boost green energy deployment and energy efficiency equipment. The Energy Transitions Commission’s (ETC) report claims “additional investments of around $300-$600 billion per annum do not pose a major macroeconomic challenge,” which they say will help the world meet the goals laid out in the Paris agreement. ETC is made up of energy executives, activist leaders and investment bankers, including former Vice President Al Gore, who would no doubt get a piece of the trillions of dollars they are calling for
Not a challenge ....other than to those who'll actually do the paying.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
drm
Member
Member


Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1376 | TRs | Pics
Location: The Dalles, OR
drm
Member
PostWed Apr 26, 2017 12:59 pm 
Well, if you accept the conclusions of the National Academy of Sciences and every other science academy about global warming, then spending a half percent of global GPD, and not all by governments, on a new energy infrastructure, is a valid enterprise. Given that this would be for infrastructure for providing energy services, my guess is that the majority of that expense would not be government spending.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostMon May 01, 2017 10:24 am 
It would just come from ratepayers, the same people who would otherwise be taxed. We're not forcing you to pay more in taxes, just charging more on your energy bill.... is still money out of pocket for the payers.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
joker
seeker



Joined: 12 Aug 2006
Posts: 7953 | TRs | Pics
Location: state of confusion
joker
seeker
PostMon May 01, 2017 10:59 am 
As drm's post implied, the conclusions to which he refers include pretty huge societal costs among the consequences of the purchase and use of the energy at issue. I for one and good with requiring the consumers of said energy (including myself) to pay a bit extra to go at least a small way toward attaching some of the actual burden of the consumption to the act of consuming, especially if the proceeds will go toward mitigating the future costs of such consumption. I'm with Arthur Cecil Pigou on this one...

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostMon May 01, 2017 11:13 am 
Costs per kilowatt hour on Solar continue to drop. They are now on par with wind and half that of coal. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-15/world-energy-hits-a-turning-point-solar-that-s-cheaper-than-wind Remind me again why the USA has spent over a trillion dollars and 500,000 lives in mid-east wars to ensure the flow of cheap oil ?

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostMon May 01, 2017 11:47 am 
Another interesting article http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/05/what-if-climate-scientists-are-guessing-wrong.html
Quote:
There is, they reckon, about a 10 percent chance of a temperature increase exceeding 6 degrees Celsius, or 11 degrees Fahrenheit. That would be a civilizational catastrophe, orders of magnitude more dangerous than the likely warming scenarios, and potentially on a scale that could threaten human life. Even if the likely scenarios were completely harmless, the far-right tail alone is horrific enough to justify significant steps. After all, they argue, people do not accept a 10 percent likelihood of a fatal car crash or terrorist attack. Wagner and Weitzman are economists well versed in climate science who bolster their case with a rigorous analysis of both science and probability

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
thunderhead
Member
Member


Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Posts: 1511 | TRs | Pics
thunderhead
Member
PostTue May 02, 2017 10:28 am 
Quote:
Remind me again why the USA has spent over a trillion dollars and 500,000 lives in mid-east wars to ensure the flow of cheap oil ?
Because solar is just becoming cost comparable a decade and a half later, and then only when the % of renewable generation stays beneath the easily integrated value(say 10-20% before you start running into increasingly problematic integration problems in most markets... because storage is even more expensive) and then again you don't try to power cars or aircraft with it. Solar and wind, despite becoming cost competitive in small %s in some markets, is not close to ready to take on the entire load in most markets.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
joker
seeker



Joined: 12 Aug 2006
Posts: 7953 | TRs | Pics
Location: state of confusion
joker
seeker
PostTue May 02, 2017 11:38 am 
Yeah, intermittence is still a big issue. W/o a big dose of nuclear in the mix, we're a ways from dramatic reductions of reliance on carbon for electricity. And if we don't apply what's commonly called the "social cost of carbon" to carbon-based sources, then nuclear doesn't look so attractive in price.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostTue May 02, 2017 11:47 am 
I'd be interested to see if the comparison of the competitive nature of green to classical sources is using prices artificially raised by mandates and requirement. Then as noted we have the cost of maintaining full load capacity on all standard sources so we're really paying for two full infrastructures instead of one.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostTue May 02, 2017 12:36 pm 
The 1 trillion or so spent on Afghanistan/Iraq wars works out to about $2800 per US citizen. That's a considerable subsidy of oil based energy.

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostTue May 02, 2017 12:44 pm 
Inovation in energy storage is progressing as well, the intermittent nature of solar and wind will be come less of a show stopper as inovation makes improvements. These are at "Silicon Valley Tech" price point now, but in 5 years if battery capacity and pricing trends continue as they have the last decade, it will become attractive purely on economic terms. https://www.tesla.com/powerwall

Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostTue May 02, 2017 1:41 pm 
Great. Let's pull the subsidies, and prove it...so we can be sure we are actually helping the earth rather than harming it.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Global Warming
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum