header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy

 (Read 524011 times)

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37510
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4732 on: April 30, 2021, 10:06:14 AM »
because the cost/benefit is horrible

that would leave them with no money to redistribute 
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71533
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4733 on: April 30, 2021, 11:27:19 AM »
Maybe I'm just too "picky", I read crap like this stuff and just sigh and give up.

Biden's moonshot | TheHill
Biden's moonshot | TheHill

longhorn320

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 9325
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4734 on: April 30, 2021, 11:41:39 AM »
Maybe I'm just too "picky", I read crap like this stuff and just sigh and give up.

Biden's moonshot | TheHill
Biden's moonshot | TheHill
no one should be surprised by this
They won't let me give blood anymore. The burnt orange color scares the hell out of the doctors.

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71533
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4735 on: April 30, 2021, 11:46:52 AM »
The World Is Not Going To Halve Carbon Emissions By 2030, So Now What? (forbes.com)


 As I have argued in a previous column, the magnitude of the net-zero by 2050 challenge is equivalent to the deployment of a new nuclear plant every day for the next 30 years, while retiring an equivalent amount of fossil fuel energy every day. Emissions reductions for 2030 consistent with the IPCC view of the 1.5°C temperature target require a much great rate of deployment than one nuclear power plant worth of carbon-free energy deployment every day, because about half of the required emissions reductions are squeezed into the next 10 years.

The bottom line of this analysis should be undeniable: There is simply no evidence that the world is, or is on the brink of, making “rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society” that would be required for the deep decarbonization associated with a 1.5°C temperature target. Anyone advocating a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030 is engaging in a form of climate theater, full of drama but not much suspense. But don’t just take it from me, do the math yourself.



Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71533
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12184
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4737 on: April 30, 2021, 11:56:25 AM »
Maybe I'm just too "picky", I read crap like this stuff and just sigh and give up.

Biden's moonshot | TheHill
Biden's moonshot | TheHill
Was there a plan in there and I missed it?

(BTW that's a rhetorical question.)

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71533
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4738 on: April 30, 2021, 12:09:25 PM »
Was there a plan in there and I missed it?

(BTW that's a rhetorical question.)
I keep searching for some kind of outline plan and cannot find one, which I think is a clear sign there isn't one.

I do find pieces claiming to be a plan, but they are completely vague and without metrics.

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13092
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4739 on: April 30, 2021, 06:08:21 PM »
I just don't see any evidence at all that the issue moving forward is a lack of achievable targets. The American issue is we have two major parties and one of them is doesn't see it as a problem at all. The other party still has to win elections in a country where cheap gas and cheap meat are really important (among many other things). Any sort of plan has to deal with this reality.

longhorn320

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 9325
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4740 on: April 30, 2021, 06:54:29 PM »
I just don't see any evidence at all that the issue moving forward is a lack of achievable targets. The American issue is we have two major parties and one of them is doesn't see it as a problem at all. The other party still has to win elections in a country where cheap gas and cheap meat are really important (among many other things). Any sort of plan has to deal with this reality.
There will never be a plan other then redistribution of wealth
They won't let me give blood anymore. The burnt orange color scares the hell out of the doctors.

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 17672
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4741 on: April 30, 2021, 08:55:25 PM »
I just don't see any evidence at all that the issue moving forward is a lack of achievable targets. The American issue is we have two major parties and one of them is doesn't see it as a problem at all. The other party still has to win elections in a country where cheap gas and cheap meat are really important (among many other things). Any sort of plan has to deal with this reality.
Awesome, sounds great-- so let's see those achievable targets.  Let's see the PLAN.

I'll be waiting patiently over here by the beer taps.

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71533
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4742 on: May 01, 2021, 09:36:15 AM »
If Republicans were entirely aligned with the "plan", it would not alter the fact there is not "plan" beyond throwing money at it.  The impossibility of this goal is independent of whether we strive for it or not, even if we threw huge sums of money at it, UNLESS we deployed nuclear power on a large scale, and even that would take closer to 15 years.

And you'd still have the transportation sector which can't change that fast unless you pay everyone to trash their ICE vehicles.  And then we don't have enough batteries.

We might do "it" in 15 years with massive nuclear (and massive money).

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12184
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4743 on: May 01, 2021, 10:06:19 AM »
I have a plan. Not sure how effective it will be. However, it will IMHO reduce emissions based on simple economics.

Carbon tax. Design it to be revenue neutral, offsetting against some reduction in taxes elsewhere (I prefer the payroll tax as they would both be regressive taxes). Set the rate high enough to be noticeable, but not so punitive that it will ruin the economy. 

Let the market figure out how to reduce carbon usage to save money.  


Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71533
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4744 on: May 01, 2021, 10:25:11 AM »
That is an approach, but a plan would detail how much the carbon tax needs to be and how rapidly that will impact fossil fuel usage.

I'm not opposed to some carbon tax, but it would have to be "painful" in order to be even moderately effective.

The Effect of a Gasoline Tax on Carbon Emissions | NBER

Their preferred estimates imply that a 10 cent tax increase would decrease U.S. carbon emissions from the transportation sector by about 1.5 percent and decrease total U.S. carbon emissions by about 0.5 percent. To put this estimate in context, total U.S. carbon dioxide emissions increased by 1.1 percent annually between 1990 and 2007, so a 10 cent gasoline tax increase would approximately offset half a year of growth in total U.S. emissions.

Under Biden's Plan, Energy Prices Go Up, And That's The Point - American Energy Alliance
Under Biden's Plan, Energy Prices Go Up, And That's The Point - American Energy Alliance


A $20 per metric ton carbon tax equates to a 16.6 cent per gallon surcharge on gasoline. In 2022, the $50 per ton carbon tax would increase Canadian gasoline prices by about 42 cents per gallon or about 8 percent. The price of coal in 2022 would more than double with a carbon tax surcharge of about $100 per metric ton. Natural gas prices would increase by about 10 cents per cubic meter in 2022 compared to current prices of around 13 cents per cubic meter—about a 75 percent increase.
Canada expects the carbon tax to increase the demand for carbon-free electricity. In 2019, however, Canada generated 58 percent of its electricity from hydroelectric power, 15 percent from nuclear, and 7 percent from renewable energy. Only 18 percent of its electricity came from fossil fuels—coal, oil, and natural gas. The majority of Canada’s carbon dioxide emissions are not from the generating sector, but from the industrial sector, which is subjected to an Output-Based Allocations system (similar to cap and trade).
Those carbon taxes, which at $50 per metric ton seem rather large, are insufficient for the country to meet its emission-reduction targets under the Paris climate accord. Canada’s parliamentary budget officer says the country’s carbon tax would have to increase over the coming years to meet emission-reduction targets. Canada’s budget officer, Yves Giroux, estimates the tax will have to increase to $117 per metric ton by 2030 if it is applied to all industries. And, if the government caps the tax at $50 per metric ton for large industrial emitters, households and other sectors of the economy would have to cover the difference, requiring a tax of $289 per metric ton in 2030.




Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71533
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, and Environment
« Reply #4745 on: May 01, 2021, 10:59:42 AM »
A carbon tax would not be a one-time deal. It will continue and increase until the United States will no longer consume the fossil fuels currently supplying 80 percent of our energy. Yet that enormous change in the U.S. energy sector will result in only a miniscule change in temperature. According to Bjorn Lomborg, U.S. climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by just 0.031°C (0.057°F) by 2100. This is unnoticeable. Further, if all countries comply with their Paris accord commitments, he estimates the total temperature reduction to be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100. It will be a lot of pain for very little gain, as the energy necessary for modern life becomes more and more expensive for those who have it and less available to those in the world who are striving to use energy to lift themselves from poverty.

Lomborg is not an unbiased source, of course, so you might think the actual reduction would be 3-4-5x what he calculates.

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.