Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Educated" opinions on climate change - Part 4 27

Status
Not open for further replies.
luddites of the world unite, good grief.

intelligence and the application of it, ie technology, or tool using, is our evolutionary advantage. you might as well say that lions are meant to kill prey, or that gasselles shouldn't run so fast.

it is a different question to pose, are we smart enough to see the on-coming train (if it exists) ?
 
Greg, you make a great point about the unemployment rate in Australia. My original point was that Germany, which has invested quite a bit into renewable energy, is doing relatively well these days. So the myth that renewable energy programs bring massive unemployment is just that, a myth. If the US or Australia brought in similar programs there would strong benefits.

Further to this, a carbon tariff on countries that make cheap products but pollute will bring jobs back to North America. The case and point is steel from China, which does not have our standards on pollution control. However, a carbon tariff will make things fair and suddenly local steel (from North America) will become affordable and steel from China more expensive, bringing jobs back to us. Who would have thought that the United Steel Works would have united with environmental groups, but that is exactly what happened with the Blue Green Alliance:


Many people lost their manufacturing jobs due to outsourcing in the last decade. A carbon tariff can bring many of those jobs back.
 
Speaking of Australia, here is a comment on Global warming to interest al but the religious disciples of AGW:
AGW a "religion"?
See here:
But for some more AAGW (anti AGW) the SIpps article "No heat build up in the oceans = no global warming (man made or otherwise) plus the observation that the signature of AGW predicted in ocean temperature history has not been found.

JMW
 
Excuse me but isen't the production of raw virgin steel a very carbon intencive process?
The only short cut is to recycle which is what we presently do in the modern mini mills.

The truth of what killed the big mills in this country is the unions, and labor costs.
Does anyone actually believe labor costs are going to decrease here?
 
So the assumption is other countries can't devaluate there currencys also?

And with so many unemployed in other countries don't think they won't.
 
how do you do that these days ? long ago, when there was a gold standard as a universal currency benchmark, you could; but these days it's all market determined, so you change the rate by changing the demand/supply (printing it, increasing/decreasing interest rates) ...
 
Well cranky, guess you'll just have to write to all the central banks and market traders and ask them why they didn't.

Oh, I got the date wrong, it has taken 7 years to reduce the exchange rate by 25%. In another 7 years if present trends continue the cost of labor in the USA will have dropped by 50%, in world terms (less any pay rises). Is that really what you want?







Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
 
Can we get back to Global Warming. I have been wondering what it would take for the IPCC to reverse its position. Ten more years of cooling, 20, 30, something else?

HAZOP at
 
No.
20 -30 years of cooling is a mere bagatelle.. a transient excursion.
Remember when they discovered "global chilling"?
The idea that here were mechanisms at play actually cooling the planet down was quickly interpreted to mean that global warming was far worse than anyone had suspected and that the full effects were being "masked" by global chilling.

I suspect the IPCC will only reverse itself when woolly mammoths once again roam in the streets of North American cities and every home in the southern states has its own glacier.

They have too much invested in AGW to be able to extract themselves and thus are now firmly in denial.

JMW
 
The IPCC will reverse itself as soon as there is more money to made by the fears from chilling than by the fears from warming.


Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
 
and we'll need more money to fix the chilling, 'cause we'll have less time to fix the problem and today's actions have made the problem worse !

it'll be win-win for a small segment of society, and lose-lose for the bulk of us tax-paying slobs
 
Perhaps the IPCC 2014 report will back off a bit from their 90% probability to say 85%. However what we really need is a study of the IPCC member pensions and when they become vested.

HAZOP at
 
The IPCC 2007 Executive Summary moved global warming due to anthropogenic greenhouse gases from "likely" to "very likely" So I should change 90% to very likely, and 85% to not quite so very likely.

HAZOP at
 
Let's consider wind energy.
It is subsidised. Heavily.
But, the calculations are possibly based on the apparent contribution to the overall energy generation rather than te true contribution which effectively means it is more expensive than declared.

A case in point is Denmark.
Nominally 19% of energy generating capacity is wind power.
However, it is claimed the actual contribution is around 5%.
The true cost of wind energy should be amortised over the actual energy contribution and not the nominal capacity.
Small wonder they are now considering building huge polders to act as reservoirs so they can use available energy to fill them and then draw down the energy as hydro-electricity when the demand is high. This of course, is an added cost.


Taxes and charges on electricity for
Danish household consumers make their electricity by far the most expensive in the European
Union (EU)1.
Click to expand...

How about Texas?
TEXAS: 8,200 megawatts of installed wind power capacity.
According to ERCOT, just 708 megawatts can be considered reliable. Less than 1% of its needs.

Hmm. So how can Germany be faring any better?

JMW
 
josephv, with all respects, the vidio is misleading. Presently our choises are not to spend money, or not to spend money. We also have choices on how much to spend, and what to spend it on.

The problem lyes on the fact that the prevaling decisions are to forget the simple things, and only do the most life style distructive things.

It not that anyone would strongly object to most of the simple things. It's that not all ideas are even being consitered. Like the decisions have already been made, and no one asked if there are other ideas.

That is why I object to any climate change requirments. I don't like things cramed down upon me without proper debate.
 
maybe they have a lot more hot air ? maybe, possibly as a side effect of beer and bratwurst, they have a much more reliable supply of wind ??

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

EngineerRam
  • Locked
  • Question
Decoupling of Buyer's and Seller's Agents Fees - Real Estate - Implications on Engineering Industry
Replies
11
Views
638
IRstuff
IRstuff
271828
  • Locked
  • Question
Article on AI implementation in work flows
Replies
8
Views
428
IRstuff
IRstuff
geotechguy1
  • Locked
  • Question
Changes to the iron ring ceremony 4
2
Replies
31
Views
715
Sparweb
Sparweb
JohnRBaker
  • Locked
  • Question
How will the COVID-19 pandemic change the face of business... 7
2
Replies
27
Views
221
kissymoose
kissymoose
ash060
  • Locked
  • Question
FL Engineers - Collaspe result in changes
Replies
14
Views
178
-
?

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top Bottom