Climategate II

[billvon 3,079]

>Of course that is not a good goal

Agreed. And thus, in my opinion, it is worth some effort to try to reduce the odds of that happening by having alternatives to fall back on _before_ we get to that point.

For a long time we had none. It was petroleum or nothing. Nowadays we're slowly making progress. We have a few production electric vehicles, a few pluggable hybrids, quite a few ethanol-capable vehicles, one natural gas vehicle etc. The quicker we make those real options the more insulation we have if oil does become scarce.

[brenthutch 444]

My bad. I knew it was a poor analogy. Props to you for catching it. Again the margin of error for many of the AGW models is greater than the predicted temperature change

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Of course that is not a good goal

Agreed. And thus, in my opinion, it is worth some effort to try to reduce the odds of that happening by having alternatives to fall back on _before_ we get to that point.

For a long time we had none. It was petroleum or nothing. Nowadays we're slowly making progress. We have a few production electric vehicles, a few pluggable hybrids, quite a few ethanol-capable vehicles, one natural gas vehicle etc. The quicker we make those real options the more insulation we have if oil does become scarce.

Ok
To a point I agree

but the alarmists are using AGW to push agendas, not science
You wish to make this simple, Science is PROVING it is not.

Scarce oil will happen. But not for a few generations. To say otherwise is only fear mongering IMO

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

>Of course that is not a good goal

Agreed. And thus, in my opinion, it is worth some effort to try to reduce the odds of that happening by having alternatives to fall back on _before_ we get to that point.

For a long time we had none. It was petroleum or nothing. Nowadays we're slowly making progress. We have a few production electric vehicles, a few pluggable hybrids, quite a few ethanol-capable vehicles, one natural gas vehicle etc. The quicker we make those real options the more insulation we have if oil does become scarce.

Society has seen this movie before. In the 1800s whale oil was the predominate source for lighting. As whale oil got more and more expensive it was supplanted by kerosene, which was replaced by gas which in turn was replace by electricity. No government programs were required.

[billvon 3,079]

>but the alarmists are using AGW to push agendas, not science

So are the deniers (abolishing the EPA, making sure they are not responsible for the problems their coal mines/oil wells cause, ensuring that alternatives cannot compete with their cash cows etc etc.) But again, the science doesn't support either extreme - it does not prove that our emissions will "turn the planet into an oven," nor does it prove that there will be no effects from CO2 emissions.

>Scarce oil will happen. But not for a few generations.

Well, I disagree on the timeline, but yes, it will indeed occur. I hope when that happens the changeover is as easy as deciding to buy an electric car and a solar power system.

[dks13827 3]

Hello !!!!!!!!!!??????????????????

They keep finding more oil and gas, all the time, sorry for the sad news.

It used to be that energy, natural resources, oil, coal, gas, and nuclear, were good things that helped everyone have a better and longer life.

[dks13827 3]

News alert !!! Electric cars get their energy from somewhere, typically coal, gas, or nuclear plants.
Does not appear from thin air.

[billvon 3,079]

>They keep finding more oil and gas, all the time, sorry for the sad news.

Yep. And they always will. But those finds are getting smaller and lower yield, because there is a finite amount of oil out there, and we've used up most of the easy to get to high quality low cost oil. Production peaked in the US around 1970, and it will peak worldwide eventually.

>It used to be that energy, natural resources, oil, coal, gas, and nuclear, were good
>things that helped everyone have a better and longer life.

It still is. The energy is great. It's the cost of generating it that we are more aware of nowadays.

[billvon 3,079]

>News alert !!! Electric cars get their energy from somewhere, typically coal, gas, or
>nuclear plants.

Or solar, as in my case.

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

Hello !!!!!!!!!!??????????????????

They keep finding more oil and gas, all the time, sorry for the sad news.

It used to be that energy, natural resources, oil, coal, gas, and nuclear, were good things that helped everyone have a better and longer life.

Anti humanity self loathing liberals, its not their fault it is how gaia made them.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>but the alarmists are using AGW to push agendas, not science

So are the deniers (abolishing the EPA, making sure they are not responsible for the problems their coal mines/oil wells cause, ensuring that alternatives cannot compete with their cash cows etc etc.) But again, the science doesn't support either extreme - it does not prove that our emissions will "turn the planet into an oven," nor does it prove that there will be no effects from CO2 emissions.

>Scarce oil will happen. But not for a few generations.

Well, I disagree on the timeline, but yes, it will indeed occur. I hope when that happens the changeover is as easy as deciding to buy an electric car and a solar power system.

Well. other than the time line positions, we, for the most part, agree.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

News alert !!! Electric cars get their energy from somewhere, typically coal, gas, or nuclear plants.
Does not appear from thin air.

That is gotcha that is not oft brought up huh

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

>News alert !!! Electric cars get their energy from somewhere, typically coal, gas, or
>nuclear plants.

Or solar, as in my case.

Lets talk about how CO2 will (or will not) make the planet "have a fever"

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

I hope when that happens the changeover is as easy as deciding to buy an electric car and a solar power system.

Well, there you go deciding on what technology should be applied, long before it or the competing technologies are well developed. I happen to think that hydrogen fuel cells (or perhaps natural gas powered) fuel cells will be a strong candidate. It is a bad idea to have tax money used to institute industrial policy based on such an unwarranted decision on the technology.

Much better to have an award for meeting a particular challenging objective that is well defined, like the X prize competition did for orbital flight. Much better that than just funding stupid tax credits for crappy alternative vehicles.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[billvon 3,079]

>Well, there you go deciding on what technology should be applied

?? I haven't. I said "I hope it's as easy as buying an EV." It might indeed be an EV and solar. But it also might be a biodiesel car with locally grown rapeseed oil. It might be an ethanol car running on cellulosic ethanol. It might be a natural gas car running on biogas.

Or it might be a combination of all four. Which one isn't as important as having options other than petroleum. Ramping up early is critical so that we _have_ those options when we need them.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

>t is not a question of how expensive I want a product, it is what the market
>determines the value of that product to be.

Then no problem. Let the market set the price of oil. Oil gets scarce, prices climb, people can't afford to drive, demand goes down. Problem solved.

That’s correct. But that’s when new technologies come in to fix it. Technologies improve and we move on to something else. So when oil gets more expensive, alternatives become more competitive. The demand for the alternative becomes greater and the demand for the oil becomes less.

At that point, the price of the oil comes down. And as for the competitor, we don’t know. Perhaps the competitor will itself be finite in amount (i.e., a car charged off the electrical grid) and the price of THAT fuel will increase. Or, if the resource is of greater availability (like solar) then it may cause production of the solar cells to increase, lowering the price, and further lowering the cost of both oil AND solar.

The problem that people like me have with it is that governmental policies are attempting to do this artificially. They are driving down the cost to the end-user, but the cost is actually high because of the subsidies. Then they drive up the cost of oil, which sucks because there’s still no alternative. Price ceilings were counterproductive, and price floors also cause shocks. Inflating the price of oil also creates black markets.

As oil becomes more and more expensive on its own accord, the opportunity for alternatives expands. Maybe we’re ten years from a breakthrough. Or thirty years. We won’t know until that critical mass is hit.

But I appreciate your thinking on this.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

>Well, there you go deciding on what technology should be applied

?? I haven't. I said "I hope it's as easy as buying an EV." It might indeed be an EV and solar. But it also might be a biodiesel car with locally grown rapeseed oil. It might be an ethanol car running on cellulosic ethanol. It might be a natural gas car running on biogas.

Or it might be a combination of all four. Which one isn't as important as having options other than petroleum. Ramping up early is critical so that we _have_ those options when we need them.

">I would choose the $1 electric equilivant.

How would you charge your gas powered car with the electric equivalent? "

How soon we forget

[billvon 3,079]

>How soon we forget

I fear you did not understand my question.

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

>How soon we forget

I fear you did not understand my question.

Im sorry I did not see a question.

[billvon 3,079]

>The problem that people like me have with it is that governmental policies are
>attempting to do this artificially.

I know you have that issue, and I actually agree that supporting an alternative in a big way is a mistake - because it causes artificial market forces that potentially give an artificial (and perhaps completely unsupportable) boost to one technology over another.

However, I think there is value in supporting technologies that have merit in a small way, sufficient to gain them entry into the market. Competition is good for the market overall, and thus supporting alternative technologies just enough to get them market acceptance (i.e. get them over the barriers to entry) has, in my opinion, a lot of value. Such incentives have allowed solar-PV and hybrid vehicles to gain market share here in the US, and that's a good thing overall (IMO.)

If such technologies do not pan out even when they are commercially viable options, then give up on them, and let the market decide against them without artificial support.

[ShcShc11 0]

Quote

Quote

>Of course that is not a good goal

Agreed. And thus, in my opinion, it is worth some effort to try to reduce the odds of that happening by having alternatives to fall back on _before_ we get to that point.

For a long time we had none. It was petroleum or nothing. Nowadays we're slowly making progress. We have a few production electric vehicles, a few pluggable hybrids, quite a few ethanol-capable vehicles, one natural gas vehicle etc. The quicker we make those real options the more insulation we have if oil does become scarce.

Ok
To a point I agree

but the alarmists are using AGW to push agendas, not science
You wish to make this simple, Science is PROVING it is not.

Scarce oil will happen. But not for a few generations. To say otherwise is only fear mongering IMO

Cheap oil is however over.

[billvon 3,079]

>Im sorry I did not see a question.

"How would you charge your gas powered car with the electric equivalent?"

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

>Im sorry I did not see a question.

"How would you charge your gas powered car with the electric equivalent?"

To which I pointed out a vehicle called a plug in hybrid. A car that can run on gas or electricity. How did I misunderstand you query?

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Of course that is not a good goal

Agreed. And thus, in my opinion, it is worth some effort to try to reduce the odds of that happening by having alternatives to fall back on _before_ we get to that point.

For a long time we had none. It was petroleum or nothing. Nowadays we're slowly making progress. We have a few production electric vehicles, a few pluggable hybrids, quite a few ethanol-capable vehicles, one natural gas vehicle etc. The quicker we make those real options the more insulation we have if oil does become scarce.

Ok
To a point I agree

but the alarmists are using AGW to push agendas, not science
You wish to make this simple, Science is PROVING it is not.

Scarce oil will happen. But not for a few generations. To say otherwise is only fear mongering IMO

Cheap oil is however over.

Really?

http://mises.org/daily/2940

[billvon 3,079]

>To which I pointed out a vehicle called a plug in hybrid. A car that can run on gas
>or electricity. How did I misunderstand you query?

By your assertion that that question somehow conflicted with having lots of options.

I'll rephrase it as a scenario.

Guy on the street today: "I'm not worried about oil scarcity. If gas gets expensive I'll just buy something else. The market rules!"

Gas gets expensive. Fast forward 10 years.

GOTS: "Hey, gas is expensive. I think I will switch my source of fuel. Hmm, can't charge my Ford SUV with electricity, and gas is expensive enough that I have to switch to some other fuel or stop driving. So I guess I'll be buying a new car. Oh Mr. Dealer!"

Now we have three possible outcomes.

================
Outcome 1. We'll call this the "no evil liberal incentives" option. There are no incentives for hybrids/alternatives/electrics and never have been. All cars are gas or diesel - at least until 10 years in the future, when companies are scrambling to provide alternatives.

Dealer: "Gee, mister, I wish I could help you. But we just started trying to build those cars. Come back in three years, maybe we'll have something. In the meantime there's a bike store across the street."
================
Outcome 2. We'll call this "business as usual." There are the current hybrid/PHEV/alternative options, all of which were trashed when Sarah Palin was elected in 2018.

Dealer: "Well, wish I could help you. But we have that one PHEV model and you wouldn't believe the demand for it. I can put you on a waiting list; we're getting more shipments in all the time, and in a year or so there's a spot on the list. And if you give me your phone number you might be lucky - someone might cancel. Or we have two E85 vehicles that you can have today."
================
Outcome 3. We'll call this "evil liberal incentives" option. Incentives are continued throughout the entire time.

Dealer: "Well, we have quite a demand for those things, but we have six PHEV vehicles on the floor, two CNG and a handful of E85 compatible vehicles. I can get you into this compact one today, or we have a midsize that we can order for you. Can't get you a deal, though, sorry."
================

Choosing outcome 3 gives people the freedom of choice to buy the vehicle they want, instead of forcing them to go with gas powered vehicles. Option 2 isn't bad; it just means some delay before they ramp up production. I am glad we won't have to deal with option 1.