 
     |
| Carbon dioxide hysteria (Page 54/170) |
|
Valkrie9
|
APR 27, 07:38 PM
|
|
Gary Potter
4 months ago
' The threat of environmental crisis is the international disaster key to unlock the new world order. '
~ Mikhail Gorbachev
TheEnzson
1 year ago
' If you really think I'm going to watch 2 hours of JBP and DM on my free Monday evening after a hard day at work, you're absolutely damn right ! '
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
APR 27, 07:50 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by cliffw:
Really ? You can't do much worse. That is my opinion from checking your, ..., I could say your BullZhit. I don't think you are lying. I think you believe in every thing you think.
Before I tell you the real difference between Cat 1 and Cat 5 is, I need to ask our other ClimatoloJESTER what he thinks.
rinjselberg, can you answer the question ?
Is this a request you will also not answer ?
|
|
I was born 40 miles from the Okefenokee swamp, lived less than a quarter mile from the Tejar Bayou and have watched rockets go up from my backyard. I know what a hurricane is.
|
|
|
cliffw
|
APR 27, 08:36 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by williegoat:
I know what a hurricane is. |
|
Finally, a voice of experience. Let's see if our Forum ClimotoloJESTERS can answer the question.
I don't feel bad for them Googleing there their time away. Trying to be WOKE.
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
APR 27, 09:17 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by cliffw:
Finally, a voice of experience. Let's see if our Forum ClimotoloJESTERS can answer the question. I don't feel bad for them Google'ing their time away. Trying to be WOKE. |
|
I think of my interest in the climate "thing" as a rooting interest. Not really all that different than my habit of following one of Major League Baseball's National League franchises, namely the St Louis Cardinals. I'm a fan of the climate researchers, and aside from a few outliers, I think most of them are onboard with the advisability of the entire world going in for climate mitigation, and for the United States to take a leading role.
The first and most obvious arrow in the climate mitigation "quiver" is a reduction in the quantity of human-attributable greenhouse gas emissions.
After that, any of the schemes to plus up the natural processes that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and then the more avant-garde concepts that have been advanced and are even being tested for Direct Carbon Capture—using artificially engineered chemical or biochemical ways to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and sequester it in some way(s) so that it does not go back into the atmosphere.
Beyond that are the even more radical ideas for blocking some of the sun's energy from warming the planet, like injecting haze-inducing particles or chemicals into the atmosphere, and even that idea that I posted about catapulting dust from the moon's surface into orbit around the earth to block some of the sun's energy from reaching the earth.
The consensus view of the IPCC is for a "full court press" to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and Direct Carbon Capture.
The idea of blocking some of the sun's energy comes with a very high risk factor, in this way: If one or more planetary "sun shields" were to be used to keep the planet from overheating as a substitute for reducing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, the world becomes dependent on the sun shield(s) and if for any reason the sun shield(s) could not be maintained, then the planet would be back on the global warming trajectory, but with an even larger greenhouse effect than before the sun shield(s) were implemented.
The consensus view of the IPCC is that every fractional degree Celsius (the science-preferred temperature scale) of climate mitigation is valuable. The more that greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced, the less dependent the world becomes on Direct Carbon Capture.
The alternatives, of climate adaptation, cannot be ignored. But successful climate mitigation would make the world less dependent on climate adaptation. The climate adaptation idea—for one example—of shifting human populations and agriculture northwards to higher latitudes, as the Arctic continues to warm and permafrost or tundra regimes thaw out, may seem to certain partisans like a "no-brainer"—but it's hardly that.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 04-27-2023).]
|
|
|
|
randye
|
APR 27, 09:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
APR 28, 09:00 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by randye:
|
|
LOL... so true. I mean, honestly... how nonsense is this?
The government is basically saying... "Ok, we think you're destroying the environment... so if you're going to do it, we want our cut."
|
|
|
|
ray b
|
APR 28, 09:11 AM
|
|
THE NUT CON PLAN IS TO LIE ABOUT IT
and do nothing until far to late
to max the return to BIG OIL
WHAT A CLEVER PLAN !
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
APR 28, 09:27 AM
|
|
| quote | | We estimate the macroeconomic impacts of carbon taxes on GDP and employment growth rates using 30 years of data on carbon taxation in various European countries. We find no evidence for a negative impact on employment or GDP growth but rather find a zero to modest positive impact. We also find a cumulative emissions reduction on the order of 4 to 6 percent for a $40/ton CO2 tax covering 30% of emissions. Reductions would likely be greater for a broad-based U.S. carbon tax since European carbon taxes typically do not cover those sectors with the lowest marginal abatement costs. |
|
"The Macroeconomic Impact of Europe’s Carbon Taxes"
Gilbert E. Metcalf and James H. Stock; MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research; January 2023.
https://ceepr.mit.edu/wp-co...CEEPR-WP-2023-02.pdf
 [This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 04-28-2023).]
|
|
|
|
ray b
|
APR 28, 11:00 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by randye:
|
|
randye is the poster boy for THAT
a complete and total DUPE for BIG OIL
who never will admit supporting traitors rebels and lying scum on 1-6
|
|
|
cliffw
|
APR 28, 12:18 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by [b]rinselberg:[/B]
I think of my interest in the climate "thing" as a rooting interest. Not really all that different than my habit of following one of Major League Baseball's National League franchises, namely the St Louis Cardinals. I'm a fan of the climate researchers, and aside from a few outliers, I think most of them are onboard with the advisability of the entire world going in for climate mitigation, and for the United States to take a leading role. |
|
Oh my. You must have smoked too much brown acid. Please, don't smoker the Green Acid.
| quote | Originally posted by [b]rinselberg:[/B]
The first and most obvious arrow in the climate mitigation "quiver" is a reduction in the quantity of human-attributable greenhouse gas emissions. |
|
Wow. You can never make a snowflake happy.
| quote | Originally posted by [b]rinselberg:[/B]
... the schemes to plus up the natural processes that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and then the more avant-garde concepts that have been advanced and are even being tested for Direct Carbon Capture—using artificially engineered chemical or biochemical ways to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and sequester it in some way(s) so that it does not go back into the atmosphere. |
|
Schemes indeed.
| quote | Originally posted by [b]rinselberg:[/B]
Beyond that are the even more radical ideas for blocking some of the sun's energy from warming the planet, like injecting haze-inducing particles or chemicals into the atmosphere, and even that idea that I posted about catapulting dust from the moon's surface into orbit around the earth to block some of the sun's energy from reaching the earth. |
|
Those are beyond bat zhit crazy.
| quote | Originally posted by[b]rinselberg
The consensus view of the IPCC is for a "full court press" to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and Direct Carbon Capture. |
|
Ah yes. Go in for the kill and laugh all the way to the bank. People all over the Earth should not even give your thoughts even a consideration considering you will not admit where the UN IPCC gets it's funding.
| quote | Originally posted by[b]rinselberg
The idea of blocking some of the sun's energy comes with a very high risk factor, in this way: If one or more planetary "sun shields" were to be used to keep the planet from overheating as a substitute for reducing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, the world becomes dependent on the sun shield(s) and if for any reason the sun shield(s) could not be maintained, then the planet would be back on the global warming trajectory, but with an even larger greenhouse effect than before the sun shield(s) were implemented. |
|
I have an idea more possible. Everyone go outside and hold an umbrella, .
| quote | Originally posted by[b]rinselberg
The consensus view of rinselberg is that every fractional degree Celsius (the science-preferred temperature scale) of climate mitigation is valuable. The more that greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced, the less dependent the world becomes on Direct Carbon Capture.
The alternatives, of climate adaptation, cannot be ignored. But successful climate mitigation would make the world less dependent on climate adaptation. The climate adaptation idea—for one example—of shifting human populations and agriculture northwards to higher latitudes, as the Arctic continues to warm and permafrost or tundra regimes thaw out, may seem to certain partisans like a "no-brainer"—but it's hardly that.
|
|
My, you sure make my mission hard. You are trying to get rid of fossil fuels and I am trying to get rid of Fossil Fools
I know a sure fire way to mitigate half of your Demon CO2 from the atmosphere. If you want to hear it, just ask.
|
|
|
|