Obama may play God

[gsvol]

I have heard using sulfur particles inserted into the upper atmosphere as one approach.

Maybe that's what Chavez was smelling at the UN.

I'm still not buying into the idea that the folks who think there is no way that man's greenhouse gas emissions can cause an impact on the climate will be afraid of the impact geoengineering, unless it isn't an impact on climate they are worried about...

Two words; "ICE AGE."


I don't think there is anyone saying that man's use of fossil fuels isn't having any affect at all but most objective analysis is saying that effect is minimal and we are in no danger of catastrophe because of it.

Many of the urgently needed drastic measures to overcome the problem, don't match the need to even address the problem at all, they are knee jerk overreactions.

Several ill advised policies are still in effect now and they want initiate even more programs that don't make sense if you look at the big picture.

John Holdren

BTW, I don't believe for a moment these radical environmental activist don't have a secret agenda either.

 

[TennTradition]

Two words; "ICE AGE."

This flies in the face of almost every single argument against anthropogenic global warming I've heard...."man can't hold a candle to the sun", "the earth will take care of herself", "man is just a drop in the bucket, the earth will do what it wants". So, man can't contribute to harmful warming, but can cause an ice age?

I'm not advocating high-atmosphere sulfur seeding, but you can control a program to avoid slipping into an ice age I would think.

 

[gsvol]

This flies in the face of almost every single argument against anthropogenic global warming I've heard...."man can't hold a candle to the sun", "the earth will take care of herself", "man is just a drop in the bucket, the earth will do what it wants". So, man can't contribute to harmful warming, but can cause an ice age?

I'm not advocating high-atmosphere sulfur seeding, but you can control a program to avoid slipping into an ice age I would think.

The Earth has never had catastrophic global warming, it has many ice ages that could (and probably will at some point) be far more devastating to civilization in the future.

In theory if man can indeed through geoengineering cause the Earth to to cool, what theory says he can stop that trend at will????

And back to my question, 'how does cap and trade solve the problem?'

I understand how it addresses the problem, but my question is how does it solve the problem.

And another thing, how does the American family prosper if he is saddled with an energy bill that increases his bill by about $4 or $5,000 annually, not including everything else that will increase in price because of the energy tax on all the goods produced???

Just take for instance food in the supermarket and the anticipated price increases because California, where much of the nations food originates, has mandated that all semis entering that people's republic will have to have expensive 'scrubbers' on their engine exhausts, they will be passing that cost along to you, the days of dollar a head cabbage may be a thing of the past.

Guilt may now be assuaged by advocating for environmental controls.

Best of all, total redemption is available for those who care enough to become 'carbon neutral.'

By making the environment the new religion, all those higher feelings may be directed and manipulated by the state. And all that money, formerly called tithing, may now be directed towards supposed efforts by the government to 'save the planet.' In other words, God can't save the planet, only man can.

 

[TennTradition]

You can't stop something at will, but you can cease practices that will die out over a 3-4 year period. If you need to act faster than that, then you can also seed albedo-lessening particles into the atmosphere to counteract what you've done. Again, I'm not really into this, so I don't want to defend it - but that is the principle.

As to how a cap and trade *solves* the problem, I assume you mean a US cap and trade, independent of other actors? If so, then it doesn't solve it. It is a necessary but not sufficient step to solving the problem - in theory (if a problem exists, of course). There must be other actors....principally among the world's largest emitters.

As to the cost of a cap and trade mechanism, it will be a lot. I don't think there's any way around that if you act quickly. Technology will significantly reduce that cost with time, so a ramping up approach will help. I've often wondered if the US will ever really do anything. We don't stand to face as many economic losses because we can afford to irrigate, dike, etc. as necessary to fend of the "costs" of global warming. This administration, if given 8 years, will put a lot in motion if allowed to have both houses of Congress. I haven't seen the analysis of how much it is predicted to cost us if we don't act vs. how much it will cost us to act. But, I would say that we would benefit by not acting, potentially at the cost of others. That's a hard sell.

 

[gsvol]

You can't stop something at will, but you can cease practices that will die out over a 3-4 year period. If you need to act faster than that, then you can also seed albedo-lessening particles into the atmosphere to counteract what you've done. Again, I'm not really into this, so I don't want to defend it - but that is the principle.

But in principle, if a cooling trend could be achieved, then what if the cooling trend went out of control??

As to how a cap and trade *solves* the problem, I assume you mean a US cap and trade, independent of other actors? If so, then it doesn't solve it. It is a necessary but not sufficient step to solving the problem - in theory (if a problem exists, of course). There must be other actors....principally among the world's largest emitters.

Settiting aside the other actors, how would cap and trade do one whit to lessen our own CO2 production?

As to the cost of a cap and trade mechanism, it will be a lot. I don't think there's any way around that if you act quickly. Technology will significantly reduce that cost with time, so a ramping up approach will help. I've often wondered if the US will ever really do anything. We don't stand to face as many economic losses because we can afford to irrigate, dike, etc. as necessary to fend of the "costs" of global warming. This administration, if given 8 years, will put a lot in motion if allowed to have both houses of Congress. I haven't seen the analysis of how much it is predicted to cost us if we don't act vs. how much it will cost us to act. But, I would say that we would benefit by not acting, potentially at the cost of others. That's a hard sell.

I hope like hell this administration isn't around for eight years.

Who are the 'others' it would cost?

 

[TennTradition]

The residence time of these particulates is so short (4 years compared to 100 years with CO2) that I don't see curbing that trend as being a significant hurdle. You can essentially counteract this trend by seeding an equal amount of carbon black into the atmosphere.

As for how cap and trade would be effective - I think that a cap and trade system can curb emissions. You must be honest and effective when assigning permits, but you control the emissions through the cap if you honesty assign permits. The trade finds the optimal places to make those emissions cuts (given the external constraints of intervention, of course...it's not optimal in an unregulated sense).

As for what 'other' it would cost....I would say any nation not able to afford the cost of building dikes, desalinating water, irrigating crops in regions where drought *could* occur (of all predictions, the regions that will see increased/decreased rainfall is predicted at no better than a coin flip by the current models, which is readily admitted by the scientists that make the models), etc.

 

[hmanvolfan]

Is Barry playing God or just undermining the US business community in the world economy by giving up oversight of American business to the rest of the world?
Obama's G20 plan kisses off Declaration of Independence

 

[TennTradition]

Is Barry playing God or just undermining the US business community in the world economy by giving up oversight of American business to the rest of the world?
Obama's G20 plan kisses off Declaration of Independence

Eek...that's just one take on it, but that one take doesn't sound too good, does it?

 

[gsvol]

The residence time of these particulates is so short (4 years compared to 100 years with CO2) that I don't see curbing that trend as being a significant hurdle. You can essentially counteract this trend by seeding an equal amount of carbon black into the atmosphere.

As for how cap and trade would be effective - I think that a cap and trade system can curb emissions. You must be honest and effective when assigning permits, but you control the emissions through the cap if you honesty assign permits. The trade finds the optimal places to make those emissions cuts (given the external constraints of intervention, of course...it's not optimal in an unregulated sense).

As for what 'other' it would cost....I would say any nation not able to afford the cost of building dikes, desalinating water, irrigating crops in regions where drought *could* occur (of all predictions, the regions that will see increased/decreased rainfall is predicted at no better than a coin flip by the current models, which is readily admitted by the scientists that make the models), etc.

All around the mulberry bush, pop goes the weasel.

There is no way that involving Wall Street in the price I pay or energy is going to be to my benefit or that of the third world or anyone else!!!

Period!

 

[TennTradition]

OK....good to know.

 

[gsvol]

Is Barry playing God or just undermining the US business community in the world economy by giving up oversight of American business to the rest of the world?
Obama's G20 plan kisses off Declaration of Independence

That's what I've been saying was going on all along.

Barry, savior or wolf in sheep's clothing.

It’s a clean sweep.

Obama’s proposals have been turned down by every foreign government and international body he’s approached — from Pyongyang to Brussels, and assorted points in between.


An opportunity to nip this wild thorn in the bud.

Everyone can gripe or take action.

"It is easier to resist in the beginning than in the end."
Leonardo Da Vinci