-
I fear most of us are going to be around long enough to reap the "benefits" like warmer summers.
Originally Posted by jads57
Isn't reinventing the wheel we all know as school? Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
08-31-2022 01:55 PM
-
In the US I don't think the politicians are dim.. just dishonest,self serving, greedy little bastards unfit to lead and not to be trusted with our money or the power of government.
As for the populace, if Covid didn't teach you how dim they are, nothing will. Was really disappointed to learn any optimism on this front was misplaced.
And climate change.. I don't deny climate change. Not even a little. What I deny is that we should be unilaterally spending $100's of billions to suit a political narrative that has no measurable way points (there is no accountability for results) or outcomes and is not mirrored in places like India and China. It's not about doing all we can or making the left feel good about themselves. It's about running the business of our economy. If the math says we won't see a solid result we should be spending the money on mitigations. We're just chumps being abused by a political class looking for talking points.
-
For the record, once again, I have not argued that humans are not responsible for temporal changes in the earth. I have argued that the history of the universe details changes in the environment from the primordial separation of land masses to periods of climatic variation recorded over millions of years. So, what I am arguing is that today's prevailing Science cannot be immortalized and etched in stone(as all good scientific information) and it represents, only, the best guesses of, perhaps, the best minds in Science today. But, let us not forget the lesson of Galileo and heliocentricity and the dogma of the Roman Catholic church that dominated free thought throughout the centuries and stifled Science. . . which is certainly the case with many world governments today. Also, Christian's contention that only those with advanced degrees in Science should comment about topics scientific contravenes and ignores the concept of Western Intellectual Thought that took Europe from the Dark Ages of witches, gods, and the "Four Humors" of medicine to the Age of Enlightenment. I couldn't disagree more.
Marinero
-
I wasn’t taught like this… science and maths were in their own boxes separate from current events. Maybe things have changed Originally Posted by RJVB
I fear most of us are going to be around long enough to reap the "benefits" like warmer summers.
Isn't reinventing the wheel we all know as school?
-
if the US doesn’t take the lead in renewables and energy storage, someone else will. You can sell this stuff to the world. Business opportunity, right? So, investing massively in these technologies is an excellent idea. In the same way as the US taxpayer invests in NASA, and in fact, Space X. Silicon Valley wouldn’t have been a thing if not for initial government funding. Originally Posted by Spook410
I’m actually quite a lot more optimistic than a lot of people. Big tech challenges ahead though; investment very important. But as I understand it we’ve already avoided the worst case scenarios because of, for example, the plunge in the cost of power generated by renewables. Fossil fuels are going to die, it won’t be instant and it won’t be tomorrow, but they know it and are trying to eke things out for as long as they can.
The war in Ukraine adds another reason for Western Europe to transition as it has no domestic oil or gas.
mitigation is essential because cc is locked in now. Best to emit less too.
Carbon capture is in its infancy, but biological processes look pretty promising.Last edited by Christian Miller; 08-31-2022 at 02:40 PM.
-
Well, I guess we can just go on like they do in "places like that", as if tout va très bien Madame la Marquise. We'll probably end up facing all of the consequences sooner rather than a bit less and later. Originally Posted by Spook410
And unilaterally.
As a species.
-
But our children/grandchildren will. Originally Posted by jads57
-
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
By all means, let them.
If addressing global warming were a good and viable business plan then we would see this being addressed in the business community. Since we only see business responding to government subsidies, it's probably not an independently profitable enterprise.
Government underwriting is a horrible and wasteful way to influence the marketplace. Political agendas serve the party. Not real world positive outcomes.
-
The $400 Billion the US just put in the budget won't change the outcome. Do you really think it will change what India, China, Russia, or Africa will do? I don't. Originally Posted by RJVB
-
Well, fine. You wouldn’t have a tech industry is it wasn’t for government investment and public sector research. That’s a fact, just look into the history of the internet to pick one example. Originally Posted by Spook410
And it’s not like the fossil fuel industry isn’t receiving public investment either. The business community lobbies hard for public investment (tax breaks, subsidies etc) whether or not you approve of it.
(Also quite a few of those Teslas parked on my street you know.)
TBF: this is the wrong discussion to be having anyway. We need to get off fossil fuels fast. Knowing humankind, advances in technology is the only way we are going to do this that I can see. Encouragingly the tech is moving in the right direction and the past decade has seen real progress. Tipping points can happen very quickly - the next few years will be interesting.Last edited by Christian Miller; 08-31-2022 at 04:18 PM.
-
-
Originally Posted by Spook410
Yes I do
(Maybe not Russia, but that’s another story…)
-
Megadrought in Southwest US worst in a millennium Originally Posted by jads57
The drought in the Western U.S. could last until 2030
-
Government underwriting is why we have tubes in our amps. Originally Posted by Spook410
Government underwriting is why we have solid state devices that get be used in our amps
Government underwriting is why we have an interstate highway system
Government underwriting is why we have jet engines
Government underwriting is why China is so successful
Government underwriting is why I managed to buy a Campellone.... oh wait, no, not that time
I really don't know why we are talking about this, especially here. I live in Nocal, the last 5 years if anything have shown us that there is a climate problem-horrific fires every year etc. And I think by now it is an accepted scientific thesis. Hard to see how the government would benefit from this, but easy to see why some in government would deny it.
-
^^Good points.
It is a complete straw man that only government action can force the economy to address climate change.
MOST businesses are not stupid. Even petrobusinesses know the handwriting is on the wall and are hedging their bets, to some extent.
(Articles recently have pointed out that car companies are quite comfortable with phasing out ICE vehicles. They see higher profit margins and already are planning for the transition.)
Certainly any business that would invest in waterfront property in the SE coast or water-starved properties in the desert SW needs their collective heads examined.
Getting back to guitars, many companies have made decisions on what products to use and techniques that are pro-environment. Not because they are goody-two-shoes, but because they realize there’s no long-term benefit in being wasteful and stripping the environment of resources.
-
Hmm.. if you think DARPA and government underwriting are the same thing, you don't understand how DARPA works or what it is for.
And we would have had Internet regardless. Most of that tech came from Xerox. So did Windows.
The government mandated the use of OSI for Internet protocols. (for those not informed on such things.. TCP/IP has always been the protocol. Govt thought OSI would be better and made it the law and spent billions.. spectacular failure when the market told them to pound sand)
And war time R&D and government underwriting are two different things. If you told those working on global warming succeed or you and/or your family will be shot or captured, you would get a different outcome.
Electric cars? Hydrogen is arguably better and should not be commercially suppressed by a corrupt and unaccountable political system available to the highest bidder.
To those who like to say 'look at what we got from govt research!'.. you have to compare the actual cost of government investment in a benefit/waste balance. If you get velcro for $100M, you wasted your money.
Government is very rarely the answer. Free markets actually work in the real world.
-
It appears your chart does not include the cost of batteries and controls to make wind and solar viable. So the chart is a bit deceptive. Guessing the source was someone promoting green energy. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
Also.. the $400B the US is spending won't generate the lithium we're not going to have for those batteries. It's mostly money to move off of fossil fuels to 'green' sources that already exist using current technology. Might actually raise the price as it generates artificial demand and stifles the need for real R&D.
It won't change anything and it won't make solar/wind cheap enough for China, India, and Africa where they will continue to burn what they have and what they can get.Last edited by Spook410; 09-01-2022 at 01:50 AM.
-
I have no intent in getting involved in the overall discussion, but China does have a significant renewable energy plan. They are already producing a huge amount of energy via hydro, wind, and solar, but it’s still a relatively small percentage since their energy needs are so massive. Originally Posted by Spook410
Guest post: Will China’s new renewable energy plan lead to an early emissions peak? - Carbon Brief
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkLast edited by ThatRhythmMan; 08-31-2022 at 11:18 PM.
-
They also, THROUGH GOVERNMENT UNDERWRITING, have cornered the market in battery minerals, because they saw this coming 10 years ago. Originally Posted by ThatRhythmMan
Which we didn’t, because we were too busy fighting culture wars.
We have a system where ideally the government and private enterprise works together. Not one or the other.
But really I’d rather get back to guitars!
-
As for the green energy.. China relies heavily on coal. This will not change anytime soon. They are not part of any of the wishful accords the US and Europe like coming up with. So they will keep burning what is at hand. Same with India. Same with Africa. Same with Russia. Same with all emerging markets.
Then there's lithium. It's not China you have to worry about. It's Peru, Chile, and Argentina. That's were like 40% of the planets accessible lithium is and Chile and Peru in particular are train wrecks when it comes to tapping this resource. There isn't going to be nearly enough.
Finally, it appears all the European and UK investment will now be focused on keeping the lights on and their people warm. I know you were warned about dealing with Putin's Russia.. doesn't matter now. It's very painful and I'm genuinely sorry you have to go through it. It will get better. I hope the US can help especially in the near term. I'm happy to pay more for LP here so we can send more to you.Last edited by Spook410; 09-01-2022 at 02:16 AM.
-
It doesn’t help that European governments made poor strategic decisions. Take for instance decommissioning nuclear power plants in Germany (tbf you do have to get the Uranium from somewhere but it would be less of pressing issue than relying on piped Russian gas.) This is a wake up call as I see it, terrible though the Ukraine war is, and as hard as this winter will be, I’m glad Putin has shown his hand. Energy policy is a national security issue now. Who wants to be beholden to a warmongering dictator? Originally Posted by Spook410
China operates differently to the US and Europe. They will have a long term plan in place because that’s how they operate. They can build and change infrastructure very quickly. I’m not privy to CCP policy though. Internationally they do the ‘China makes its own rules’ thing - domestically, no idea what their energy policy is going forward. They are world leaders in Molten Salt reactor technology though (while we pump money into the pipe dream of Fusion.). I think they will see that as the future but honestly I have no idea. And as corrupt as it is if there’s one thing I expect the Chinese to do better than anyone, it’s build infrastructure quickly. They are very very good at it.
In any case we have no control over China. We do have control over what we do, and a 50% reduction in global emissions while not as good as 100% is still worth doing. This isn’t a binary thing. <br>
Remember - the next few decades are going to suck, but it’s a matter of degree, and we have some influence over this.
OTOH what the graph I posted doesn’t reflect is the cost of change over from existing energy infrastructure to new, so if you already have a bunch of coal fired power stations it’s obviously cheaper to carry on with those. (EDIT: I see you made this point above.)
It may be helpful to repurpose existing infrastructure for a smooth change over. It may surprise you but there are very smart people out there working on those very things to repurpose mine shafts and so on
What the graph DOES reflect is the total cost over lifecycle, so it is a good comparison of like with like in the long term. Given that, investment to encourage building of new infrastructure seems a good policy judging from historical precedent, after which I’m sure a few Good American Capitalists will make out like bandits on the profits of an energy infrastructure with very low marginal costs while simultaneously claiming it was all down to their genius and acumen. ;-)
So I’m not saying there aren’t bottlenecks and tech issues as well as political ones (not least lobbying and obstructionism by states like Saudi Arabia). The big one for non nuclear alternatives is energy storage; global lithium (which is much greater than currently exploited lithium) is a limited resource but lithium is not as necessary for national grid storage for as it is perhaps for cars and laptops. Energy density isn’t such an issue as I understand it. Sodium is one option. No shortage of that, and a natural by product of the desalinisation we’ll need to be doing. Lithium recycling is also starting to come in.
There are some technologies it will be very hard to replace; flying for one; we may need to find a way to offset air travel. But as I say I’m optimistic. It’s going to suck on some levels, but this a problem we can tackle with the right combination of grit, smarts and can-do attitude. Or you could give up, I suppose. But attitudes like that didn’t storm the beaches of Normandy or put a man on the moon.Last edited by Christian Miller; 09-01-2022 at 05:19 AM.
-
Anyway, I’ll leave these videos here. If this guy doesn’t at least provide some food for thought (for both sides of the aisle), I’m scarcely going to do any better.
So, it turns out that whatever noises politicians make to appease their base, money talks.Last edited by Christian Miller; 09-01-2022 at 04:58 AM.
-
Isn't the best business model the one where you keep riding your wave until you run into the ground (or wall), and then start up something new that will ride the next wave? Originally Posted by a spook
There are a few hydrogen-powered car models already. Or rather, EVs that get their energy from fuel cells rather than batteries (using H as fuel in an ICE is not impossible but also not really an option). Yes, use of fuel cells would indeed be a greener solution, provided we can produce the H required using renewable energies and distribute it globally in a safe way using ditto energies. It's certainly not demand from the market that is going to drive that development; the existing fuel cell cars cost about the price of a Monteleone.
-
Cool thread.
I’m happy to hear that modern Porsches are failure prone. Going forward, I will not lust after them as badly.
And I’m glad to learn that climate change isn’t a thing. Although that one is harder to swallow.
-
Ironic isn't it that the price of guitars, especially vintage, is probably one of the purest examples of free enterprise and the law of supply and demand at work. And yet, people are arguing about climate change and government intervention in the free market. Originally Posted by bluejaybill
I would be happy if the government would give me a $7500 rebate to buy an EG (electric guitar). Heck, I'd order it today.
Reply With Quote
Incoming or better going to get
Today, 11:25 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos