or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Global warming becomes even harder to deny...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Global warming becomes even harder to deny... - Page 2

post #41 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Is it possible to get the data that was used to construct these graphs? Surely is it published somehere.

Just curious, Chris, since you've never actually definitively stated your position: do you think that this planet is older than, say, a million years?

It makes a difference. If we're going to have a serious discussion we're going to need to know just what constitutes 'good evidence' in your eyes.

Ta.
post #42 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
I suggest you do more research. And I can't verify or challenge your figures right now.... How do you define a pipe dream by the way?

I need to do more research because you can't challange my figures - sorry, but that is a joke.

Pipe dream:

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/SecondPage.html

scroll down to "solar"
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #43 of 278
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
Who would've thought 100 years ago that today we'd be communicating over these "internets"....wirelessly from our couches in our living rooms via portable laptop computers in front of our 42" LCD screens while watching overseas newschannels in real time?

Beware technological optimism. Just because technology keeps doing more and more amazing things is not a good reason to suppose it will solve every puzzle or solve it fast enough for us.

Now, I'm not totally sold on the idea that Peak Oil = Doomsday, and that there's nothing we can do about it. We're already weathering a pretty hefty increase in the price of crude oil now better than some people would have thought.

But there are potential dangers in our current dependence on oil, and I'd even say some chance of some of the more dire Peak Oil predictions coming to pass. Need for solutions does not automatically produce solutions. Need for fast solutions does not automatically produce rapid progress towards solutions. Need for solutions does not automatically produce completely desirable solutions.

Suppose getting off oil is as difficult as curing cancer? Cancer is a problem we've been working on for a long time now, and while we've made progress, it's been slow progress. In most cases it's far more accurate to say we've made progress in treating cancer, as opposed to curing it. Many of those treatments are very unpleasant and involve ugly trade-offs, like drugs with unpleasant side effects, or having parts of your body hacked away which you might otherwise have preferred to keep.

Suppose oil hits $250 per barrel next month. How many people will have solar panels on their roofs the month after that? How many people will have hydrogen powered cars in a month, and how many hydrogen fueling stations will be in place for those drivers to use, and how many solar-powered hydrogen production plants will be operating and at what capacity?

If we try to go the ethanol route, how much valuable farm land will be switched from feeding hungry mouths to feeding hungry cars? How much rain forest will be destroyed to plant sugar cane for ethanol production? How quickly would corn ethanol lobbyists who want to sell lots of corn get out of the way of the US using a far more efficient sources of ethanol like sugar cane?

You mention the internet and wifi as some of the amazing things technology has produced for us. Well, stop and think about how long such technologies have been in development. You could go back to the early 90s, even mid 80s, and find lab demonstrations and pilot projects for much of what we enjoy today.

Imagine that for some bizarre hypothetical reason the world had suddenly NEEDED to have wifi internet access in every home, and needed to have it BADLY, in, say, 1992. How far do you think that technology would have been rushed along by 1993? How widely available do you think it could have been?
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #44 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by thuh Freak
I don't think you're qualified to make such a statement. The people who study this as their livelihood think the opposite. To them, the evidence is strong enough to favor global warming. Even if they are wrong about the conclusions, the evidence is on their side. Obviously, there is evidence and theories against global warming, but I don't think theres more against than for.

The thing is that it boils down a statement that anyone can make. It's not difficult to comprehend. We know the Earth warms and cools over thousands of years. Why are we now concerned that the earth appears to be warming over say, 50-100 years?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #45 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
You know, there is so much nonsense in what you post defending what every day becomes more indefensible that it's a waste of time to even address your lame excuses.

How ironic that you posted a thread entitled Gorebot when it's pretty clear that you're a big time apology propagandist. A REPUBLIBOT.

Orginally posted by SDW2001:

Quote:
But as usual, most here on AI will dismiss these criticisms as seg did preemptively in his opening post.

Don't bother responding, just dismiss my argument as nonsense and be on your way.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #46 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
Because it would cost money in terms of research and infrastructure, and it would force many people to rethink.

People don't like to think, and even less, they like to rethink.

Unless it's really forced upon them. Which is gonna happen somewhere between the US adopting proper units and the UK adopting proper English.

That's stupidity. It's not a question of rethinking, it's a question of replacing fossil fuels with cheap, abundant and safe alternatives. It will take decades for us to ween ourselbves from oil, a notion I fully support by the way. But it's going to take a long time.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #47 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by SDW2001
The thing is that it boils down a statement that anyone can make. It's not difficult to comprehend. We know the Earth warms and cools over thousands of years. Why are we now concerned that the earth appears to be warming over say, 50-100 years?

Because this time, it affects us, and this time, we have the technology to possibly minimize its effects?
post #48 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
I need to do more research because you can't challange my figures - sorry, but that is a joke.

lol No, but your reading comprehension skills seem to be. I didn't say you needed to do more research because I couldn't "challange" (it's spelled challenge by the way) your figures. I asked you to do research on where the technologies are NOW, and where there'll be shortly, not a couple of years ago like most of the quotes from that website you linked to.

Besides, a "little" point you and the politically or financially motivated naysayers seem to be missing. I am not suggesting solar or other technologies will replace fossil based fuels completely. I don't think we need to. The technologies are coming that will enable us to lessen or even stop our contribution to the problem if we so chose to. We will have market driven options.

Unfortunately for the defeatists, winger politicians and whiners the solution is not either or. Just as you don't amputate a limb because of a pulled muscle, one does not need to become a hermit to lessen or neutralize his or her carbon footprint.

All in all, it appears to me that it is you who is -waiting- for a pipe dream when you can easily get off your ass now and make better choices instead of telling others that they have no choice but to wait for fusion to happen if indeed "there is a problem" to begin with.

Have fun paying exorbitant prices for your electricity and gas bills a couple of years from now while I drive a faster and cleaner car that I plug to an outlet in my fully or almost energy independent home.
post #49 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
Beware technological optimism. Just because technology keeps doing more and more amazing things is not a good reason to suppose it will solve every puzzle or solve it fast enough for us.

Fair enough. The problem with popular perception is that since we don't have the technologies to change everything today and cut our dependency of oil immediately, everything else is a "pipe dream" or unchecked optimism.

What we have right now, technology is moving very quickly by the way, are ways for each of us to make a contribution to solving the problem. If not completely now, very soon. The "problem" will still be there, but why not try to contribute to lessen it if we have market driven products that will save us money to begin with??

By the way. The cancer analogy is interesting because cancer figures have JUMPED in recent years. Do you not think there is a relation between those figures and a more polluted air, water supply,food supply and widespread availabitly and adoption of household chemicals?

My father died of cancer August 16th of last year. He suffered horribly from a very rare form of cancer that ultimately resembled the flesh eating bacteria. He is my hero because he fought it till the very end.

I wish more of us showed a desire for a better and healthier life. I won't wait for circumstances to prove me right or wrong. I'll do my part and hope others do theirs because we share the same planet and because there will be a lot of very cool products that will make those choices easier. Market based capitalism. Those are the new greens.
post #50 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
one does not need to become a hermit to lessen or neutralize his or her carbon footprint.

Neutralizing your footprint is impossible. If you use less, the resulting lower price makes other people use more.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #51 of 278
It doesn't "make" them use more. People use how much they need.
post #52 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Placebo
It doesn't "make" them use more. People use how much they need.

Yeah - that was why consumption skyrocketed when the prices were low in the 80s... Any why it dropped during the oil crisis, because people use what they need. Maybe there is a limit to how much an individual will use, but not a society or an industry.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #53 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Neutralizing your footprint is impossible. If you use less, the resulting lower price makes other people use more.

Yeah, I like how you forgot the lessen part. What lower prices? You really think energy prices are gonna come down and not go up in the future?? You are a handful of contradictions.

I don't know. If I'm producing more energy than I need...and I make use of the technologies already available (and that keep improving almost on a monthly basis)...I could prove you wrong easily. I'm working on that. The harder part would be to plant enough trees to offset the CO2 I breathe out.

Quote:
Maybe there is a limit to how much an individual will use, but not a society or an industry.

Oh brother. Or is it bother? Now you seem to be whining we can't solve the problem 100%. It's all or nothing to you apparently.

So the bottom line is you don't believe global warming is man made and even if it were, you'd rather take the side of the people who will cover their ears and cover their eyes and do nothing about it because...well...it's a lost cause anyways. Got it.

I hope you don't have kids, because in reality, we're just borrowing the planet from them right now. I trust that you will make good choices once you become aware that you actually have them in the future. Unless of course you choose to remain an irresponsible, unhealthy polluting machine forever.
post #54 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
Yeah, I like how you forgot the lessen part. What lower prices? You really think energy prices are gonna come down and not go up in the future?? You are a handful of contradictions.

I don't know. If I'm producing more energy than I need...and I make use of the technologies already available (and that keep improving almost on a monthly basis)...I could prove you wrong easily. I'm working on that. The harder part would be to plant enough trees to offset the CO2 I breathe out.

Oh brother. Or is it bother? Now you seem to be whining we can't solve the problem 100%. It's all or nothing to you apparently.

So the bottom line is you don't believe global warming is man made and even if it were, you'd rather take the side of the people who will cover their ears and cover their eyes and do nothing about it because...well...it's a lost cause anyways. Got it.

I hope you don't have kids, because in reality, we're just borrowing the planet from them right now. I trust that you will make good choices once you become aware that you actually have them in the future. Unless of course you choose to remain an irresponsible, unhealthy polluting machine forever.

I give up - you are impossible.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #55 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
I give up - you are impossible.

Awwww. Better luck next time.
post #56 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
Awwww. Better luck next time.

Luck has nothing to do with it when you refuse to understand what I am saying.

Maybe Dogbert will have more success with you than I have had:

45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #57 of 278
I just want to stink less. Everything else is irrelevent.

how much do you want to stink?
post #58 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Luck has nothing to do with it when you refuse to understand what I am saying.

Maybe Dogbert will have more success with you than I have had:


So basically, your point is: "since chances that your good intentions and efforts will actually make any discernible difference are incredibly low, might as well not try".
post #59 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
So basically, your point is: "since chances that your good intentions and efforts will actually make any discernible difference are incredibly low, might as well not try".

That's the republican strategy for November.
post #60 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
So basically, your point is: "since chances that your good intentions and efforts will actually make any discernible difference are incredibly low, might as well not try".

Not incredibly low, zero. The only way you could make it non-zero is to implement a global totalitarian state that controlled consumption.

My point is that we should put our effort to figuring out how to deal with global warming as it happens, instead of hoping for a technological solution, and instead of blaming people for CO2. Otherwise, we will have spent all our time trying to stop the oncoming train, and none of our time figuring out how to get off the tracks.

There is nothing particularly bad about buying a Prius, but there isn't anything particularly good about it either. All it does is make the driver feel superior, it does not actually help reduce global CO2, or help the human race at all.

A hummer driving scientist who is working on ways to live with global warming is helping the situation a whole lot more than the prius driving environmentalist that keys his car.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #61 of 278
Actually the severity of global warming is mediated by current and future fossil fuel consumption. So our best solution is prevention of worsening global warming -- which is what everyone is more or less arguing for...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #62 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by hardeeharhar
Actually the severity of global warming is mediated by current and future fossil fuel consumption. So our best solution is prevention of worsening global warming -- which is what everyone is more or less arguing for...

go back and read the cartoon...
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #63 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
go back and read the cartoon...

Ahem. I am saying we need to work quickly to make fossil fuels non-fungible, that is make their use obsolete internationally...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #64 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by hardeeharhar
Ahem. I am saying we need to work quickly to make fossil fuels non-fungible, that is make their use obsolete internationally...

And how do you propose doing that?
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #65 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Luck has nothing to do with it when you refuse to understand what I am saying.
Maybe Dogbert will have more success with you than I have had:

It is obviously you who doesn't get it...or doesn't want to get it. It's funny how symbolic of your arguments a... cartoon... is. A pretty silly one at that too.
Quote:
My point is that we should put our effort to figuring out how to deal with global warming as it happens, instead of hoping for a technological solution, and instead of blaming people for CO2.

Well, wasn't "hope for fusion plan for coal" your best suggestion? Last time I checked, fusion was a technology. You're all over the place now. Sorry to see you so confused. I wonder what those "Hummer driving scientists" will be working on if it's not technological solutions.
Quote:
A hummer driving scientist who is working on ways to live with global warming is helping the situation a whole lot more than the prius driving environmentalist that keys his car.

that one takes the prize. Wow.

Yeah, comparing a scientist to an average Joe is so accurate. By the way, a scientist working on global warming sounds like an environmentalist to me. So I guess both are environmentalists, but one of them just happens to be smarter with his money and a law breaker at the same time right?.

I'm sure the "Hummer driving scientist" enjoys his gas fill-up days of $150-$170(at current prices in CA). Why the zealous insistence that there is just one way to go about it?

By the way, did it occur to you that a Prius owner these days may just be an average person wanting to save some money on gas?? The horror! That can't be true!
Why you have to label them as "environmentalists" and even criminals to boot is beyond me. Pretty absurd and extremist of you.

Sales of hybrids will account for 4% of all sales within the next couple of years....that's gonna be a lot of SUV "keying" "environmentalists"!!
post #66 of 278
The World Cup is a communist plot designed by people who want to destroy our glorious American sports.
post #67 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
The World Cup is a communist plot designed by people who want to destroy our glorious American sports.

What you talking \\'bout Moe? Baby killing, torturing, raping, murdering, eating low I.Q. foods, these are the glorious sports of the slack-jawed redneck American.
post #68 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
The World Cup is a communist plot designed by people who want to destroy our glorious American sports.

Coooooool!
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #69 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
The World Cup is a communist plot designed by people who want to destroy our glorious American sports.

post #70 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
It is obviously you who doesn't get it...or doesn't want to get it. It's funny how symbolic of your arguments a... cartoon... is. A pretty silly one at that too. Well, wasn't "hope for fusion plan for coal" your best suggestion? Last time I checked, fusion was a technology. You're all over the place now. Sorry to see you so confused. I wonder what those "Hummer driving scientists" will be working on if it's not technological solutions.

that one takes the prize. Wow.

Yeah, comparing a scientist to an average Joe is so accurate. By the way, a scientist working on global warming sounds like an environmentalist to me. So I guess both are environmentalists, but one of them just happens to be smarter with his money and a law breaker at the same time right?.

I'm sure the "Hummer driving scientist" enjoys his gas fill-up days of $150-$170(at current prices in CA). Why the zealous insistence that there is just one way to go about it?

By the way, did it occur to you that a Prius owner these days may just be an average person wanting to save some money on gas?? The horror! That can't be true!
Why you have to label them as "environmentalists" and even criminals to boot is beyond me. Pretty absurd and extremist of you.

Sales of hybrids will account for 4% of all sales within the next couple of years....that's gonna be a lot of SUV "keying" "environmentalists"!!

You continue to not understand my central point: it is much better to have scientists working on ways to live with global warming than it is to have scientists working on ways to conserve energy.

Trying to save money on gas is fine if that is what you want to do, but it will do nothing to help global warming. Global warming is unstopable due to supply and demand - conservation lowers prices, which then cause increased consumption.

It doesn't even save any money to buy a hybrid car, because the extra cost of the car is more than you will pay on gas until gas goes above $9/gallon.

I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you, but feel free to fail to comprehend as always.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #71 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
And how do you propose doing that?

Fund a massive international research initiative into advancing alternate energy sources. If we can get off of fossil fuels in one or two decades, we will be better off than trying to fix the developing problems associated with global warming after another half century of fossil fuel use.

You know the appropriate poor richard's saying...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #72 of 278
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Neutralizing your footprint is impossible. If you use less, the resulting lower price makes other people use more.

fun·gi·ble (from dictionary.com/WordNet ® 2.0)
adj: of goods or commodities; freely exchangeable for or replaceable by another of like nature or kind in the satisfaction of an obligation. n: a commodity that is freely interchangeable with another in satisfying an obligation.

Okay, now that were sure everyone knows what "fungible" means...

To say that oil is fungible is not the same as to say that demand for oil is totally inflexible and that demand essentially cannot be reduced. Those are two different things. That oil is fungible only means that it's difficult or impossible to target, say, totalitarian Middle Eastern regimes, to feel the pain if and when you reduce consumption of oil. That has no bearing on whether reduction of total overall consumption of oil is possible or not.

Gallon for gallon, barrel for barrel, it probably is difficult to reduce oil consumption through conservation alone. But what justifies your seeming certainty that every single drop of fuel you save driving a Prius instead of a monster SUV will be consumed by someone else, at just the same rate you'd have been consuming it yourself? That would imply, conservely, that every single gallon of gas you pump into your car is a gallon of gas that someone else suddenly has to do without in an immediate, not just long-term consumption, sense.
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #73 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
Gallon for gallon, barrel for barrel, it probably is difficult to reduce oil consumption through conservation alone. But what justifies your seeming certainty that every single drop of fuel you save driving a Prius instead of a monster SUV will be consumed by someone else, at just the same rate you'd have been consuming it yourself? That would imply, conservely, that every single gallon of gas you pump into your car is a gallon of gas that someone else suddenly has to do without in an immediate, not just long-term consumption, sense.

Yes, every gallon of gas that you pump into your car is one that somebody else has to do without. You can see this in action every day in the decisions people make: do I drive on this picnic? Do I buy this SUV? Do I keep the plant open for a 3rd shift? For some people and industries, the price of oil helps them make those decisions, and when you have enough people and industries in the mix, the market is very fluid.

Another way of thinking of it is on the production end - the oil industry (including OPEC) is currently pumping at 100%. OPEC has the power to make prices go up by restricting supply, but has no power to make prices go down once they are pumping at full capacity (and they have stated that they would prefer lower prices/higher production). That oil goes somewhere, and production is the ONLY factor that determines how much oil is burnt (well, production minus the oil used in the plastic industry, and cheese whiz production).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #74 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
You continue to not understand my central point: it is much better to have scientists working on ways to live with global warming than it is to have scientists working on ways to conserve energy.

Oh boy. So your argument here is that scientists aren't working on ways to live with global warming. Great. I'm sure you got this from good sources. How about we work on both so we have options like I've been saying all along?? If not work on both...I suggest they better become engineers because we're sure gonna need a massive amount of levees worldwide.

Maybe you didn't get the oh...6 or 8 times I have said in this thread that there are options available and not to just conserve energy, get healthier, but to become independent....or even energy producing as some are starting to do.
Quote:
Trying to save money on gas is fine if that is what you want to do, but it will do nothing to help global warming. Global warming is unstopable due to supply and demand - conservation lowers prices, which then cause increased consumption.

So using less fossil fuels will do nothing to lessen global warming. Got it. Funny how you refer to supply and demand but then not apply it to emerging technologies that will also benefit from supply and demand. Including hybrid and/or electric cars. Typical.

In the real world, not yours apparently, higher prices affect people's spending patterns. Here's that word again...when that happens, and there are options, we all benefit.

Quote:
It doesn't even save any money to buy a hybrid car, because the extra cost of the car is more than you will pay on gas until gas goes above $9/gallon.

Rubbish. They aren't that expensive to begin with unless you're shopping for something for under $20k. With your logic it would seem nobody would buy higher priced cars either...including your environmentalist scientist who drives a Hummer. You know, the one who got his car keyed by the environmentalist Prius driving te-rro-rist?
Quote:
I don't know how much simpler I can make this for you, but feel free to fail to comprehend as always.

Judging from all the comments you're getting I think it's pretty clear that you are the obtuse one here. My offer for your reading comprehension skills kit is still up. Let me know where to send it.

Speaking of the world cup....how dare those environmentalist Germans try to conserve energy by using solar energy in their stadiums and facilities?? Stupid suckers.
post #75 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by hardeeharhar
Fund a massive international research initiative into advancing alternate energy sources. If we can get off of fossil fuels in one or two decades, we will be better off than trying to fix the developing problems associated with global warming after another half century of fossil fuel use.

Mods, please delete this post. It makes too much sense. Thank you.

Man, it's not that f-ing difficult. Like some wise man said earlier....we can make things like that happen when we make use of our options. We can vote both politically and with our wallets.
post #76 of 278
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Yes, every gallon of gas that you pump into your car is one that somebody else has to do without.

Not that I buy the argument that this is true, but let's suppose for the moment that you're right. Even then, doesn't driving a more efficient vehicle, burning half the gasoline to accomplish the same amount of travel still make sense, since, if the same gas is going to get burned by someone else anyway, it could then be put to more productive use by that other person?

Just how much justification can you try to put forward that sheer gratuitous wastefulness doesn't matter?
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
We were once so close to heaven
Peter came out and gave us medals
Declaring us the nicest of the damned -- They Might Be Giants          See the stars at skyviewcafe.com
Reply
post #77 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
Just how much justification can you try to put forward that sheer gratuitous wastefulness doesn't matter?

Every gallon of gas we waste is a gallon that the Chinese DON'T get to use.

It's our patriotic duty!
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #78 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by shetline
Not that I buy the argument that this is true, but let's suppose for the moment that you're right. Even then, doesn't driving a more efficient vehicle, burning half the gasoline to accomplish the same amount of travel still make sense, since, if the same gas is going to get burned by someone else anyway, it could then be put to more productive use by that other person?

Just how much justification can you try to put forward that sheer gratuitous wastefulness doesn't matter?

I agree that your argument makes sense - save gas to save money, or save gas so that others can use it more productively (although, I'd say that there is just as big a chance that it will be used for towing BillyBobs pontoon boat to the lake), but don't think that by economising you are lowering global CO2 production. If you look back in the thread I think that you will find that I was not trying to justify waste, I was just trying to point out that global warming is unstopable - so spending all your time trying to get people to conserve is really the wrong track if you want the human race to survive. It is not that conserving is bad, it just isn't where you want to spend your time if you are worried about global warming.

hardehar - I agree with you about the big research push for alternatives, but I don't think that the alternatives will amount to a significant percentage of energy production even if we do that. In the unlikely event that they displace coal, oil and natural gas - great, but we need an additional plan in case they can't.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #79 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by Gilsch
Rubbish. They aren't that expensive to begin with unless you're shopping for something for under $20k.

break even point for a honda civic hybrid is $9.60 per gallon of gas:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...sts-usat_x.htm

and that does not even count battery replacement, which is outside the "total cost to own" 5-year window.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #80 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
break even point for a honda civic hybrid is $9.60 per gallon of gas:
and that does not even count battery replacement, which is outside the "total cost to own" 5-year window.

If I want to buy a Civic Hybrid because of the cost of gas...the cost of my time in traffic...I'll shop around and pay what I want to pay and then get a big grin when at the end of the month I KNOW for a fact I saved money compared to a more expensive gas guzzling SUV I could've opted for. Funny how you didn't mention the Prius(that you seem to have chosen as your target in your posts) from that article because it wasn't convenient to the argument you're fab er trying to make.
Quote:
Edmunds.com's assumptions in the study paint a "worst-case scenario," says Honda spokesman Andy Boyd. A less-aggressive approach would require hybrid Accord be driven only 17,000 miles a year before it becomes thriftier than the standard Accord.

Quote:
The Ford Escape hybrid not only gets great gas mileage, but has lower maintenance requirements fewer oil changes and brake-pad replacements, for example meaning fewer trips to the dealer, says Bryan Olson, hybrid Escape marketing manager. "I tell people to think of the value of your time."

Quote:
n the unlikely event that they displace coal, oil and natural gas - great, but we need an additional plan in case they can't.

It appears to me you're the only one claiming nothing's being done (or that we're saying nothing should be done) in that regard for some bizarre reason.

No one is saying we can turn back global warming for sure... but we can reduce it and lessen its impact and avoid having to deal with the catastrophic consequences 20 or 30 more years of burning fossil fuels and dirty energy production/consumption without doing anything, will bring us. Time to take those blinders off.

Why it is so difficult for you to get it is a mystery.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Global warming becomes even harder to deny...