The TRUE cost of carbon-based fuels

[HelenaHandbag]

So, no one has the guts to address the issue at all? What is suggested is there is a $40 per ton tax on carbon. So, you burn a ton of coal, you pay an extra $40 for the electricity it generates. However, this tax does not stay in DC. It is returned to every citizen on a per capita basis. So, if you are someone that uses very little fossil fuel, you make a profit on that tax and it's refund. If you are a profligate user of fossil fuels, you pay out the nose.

Seems like a very conservative type of solution. Rewarding those who are frugal and careful with their money, penelizing those who are foolish, through the free market mechanism.

How much are you going to pay for breathing?

 

[bripat9643]

So, no one has the guts to address the issue at all? What is suggested is there is a $40 per ton tax on carbon. So, you burn a ton of coal, you pay an extra $40 for the electricity it generates. However, this tax does not stay in DC. It is returned to every citizen on a per capita basis. So, if you are someone that uses very little fossil fuel, you make a profit on that tax and it's refund. If you are a profligate user of fossil fuels, you pay out the nose.

Seems like a very conservative type of solution. Rewarding those who are frugal and careful with their money, penelizing those who are foolish, through the free market mechanism.

Why would anyone believe that sending more money to Washington would solve any problem? If the $40 is painless, then it will have no effect on consumption. If it has an effect, that means turds like are happy inflicting financial pain on the poor and the middle class.

Of course, we always knew you didn't give a shit about the poor.

 

[bripat9643]

How To Save The Climate In One Simple Step - YouTube

Unprovable damages with imaginary costs, all to give the Feds a huge pile of money.......money that they'll give back. Promise.

No thanks.

You've hit on the true motive behind the AGW scam.

 

[Crick]

Why do you pay additional taxes on gasoline?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on new tires for your car?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on many large appliances?

Because there is a significant cost to the purchase and consumption of these items and that cost needs to be addressed.

 

[skookerasbil]

How To Save The Climate In One Simple Step - YouTube

Philosophy is gay.


Bottom line is........what are the real costs?


Obviously.......the world prefers fossil fuels by faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar!!!! They will dominate the energy market for decades from now.


Why?



Because they allow world economies to be competitive........its comes down to "costs" in the real world. The proof is everywhere, and most notably in Germany where they have ramped up coal imports and nat gas imports while the people have said, "FUCK YOU!!" to renewables. Why? Because they are too expensive.......period. The German people loved the idea of renewables until they started getting their electric bills!!

 

[whitehall]

Russia just signed a 30 year deal with China to supply fossil fuel while Barry Hussein and his followers babble about gigantic batteries and windmills. The world still runs on fossil fuel while Saudi princes get richer and the American middle class gets poorer.

 

[skookerasbil]

Lets not forget........there are two questions that all on the left never want to answer?


1) At what cost?


2) As compared to what?



One will notice that idiots like Crick ONLY discuss things like "gasoline" in a vacuum. Everyone and their brother knows there are costs attached to fossil fuels.......but the ONLY question that is relevant is, "What are the costs compared to renewables?".

That is where the whole AGW argument gets nuked!!!







Only genius' like Mammooth and Crick think world economies are giddy about paying more for energy!!!! That's why they are k00ks. In the real world however, people want to pay less for energy. World leaders don't give a rats ass about costs in theory......and lets face it, anybody in power who does gets freight trained.


Think about it......think about several people sitting at a conference table making decisions about energy so a country can compete in the world market. Now look at the EIA graph above. Only two idiots would sit at that table and advocate, "Hey....lets choose the blue...I say we go with the expensive option.........". That'd be Mamooth and Crick.......and guess who'd get tossed out of the room???!!!


Factual graphs with real numbers don't matter to them ( or any other AGW nutter for that matter )........the fantasy is everything.

 

[Crick]

Philosophy is gay.

You are a bigot and one of the stupidest people I've ever had the misfortune to come across.

 

[Rotagilla]

So, no one has the guts to address the issue at all? What is suggested is there is a $40 per ton tax on carbon. So, you burn a ton of coal, you pay an extra $40 for the electricity it generates. However, this tax does not stay in DC. It is returned to every citizen on a per capita basis. So, if you are someone that uses very little fossil fuel, you make a profit on that tax and it's refund. If you are a profligate user of fossil fuels, you pay out the nose.

Seems like a very conservative type of solution. Rewarding those who are frugal and careful with their money, penelizing those who are foolish, through the free market mechanism.

Statists think every problem can be solved by allowing the government to collect more taxes from working people to "redistribute".
Of course this new bureaucracy will need to be staffed by (more) unionized government employees.

No..Government is big enough and too corrupt to give more money for more harebrained schemes and scams.

 

[bripat9643]

Why do you pay additional taxes on gasoline?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on new tires for your car?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on many large appliances?

Because there is a significant cost to the purchase and consumption of these items and that cost needs to be addressed.

Wrong, we pay them because sleazy politicians decided taxing them would be a good way to generate revenue for government boondoggles and to use for buying votes.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Only country to meet Kyoto goals. Wind and solar prices dont come down with market penetration either, ask UK and Germany. YOu have a solution in search of a problem that doesnt exist. Your air and water are cleaner and improving steadily yr by yr.

 

[Dot Com]

Why do you pay additional taxes on gasoline?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on new tires for your car?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on many large appliances?

Because there is a significant cost to the purchase and consumption of these items and that cost needs to be addressed.

these are termed "(negative) externalities" associated w/ carbon-based fuels and you'll NEVER see a denier bring it up either because:

A) they DON'T know what the term means

or

ii) they DO know what it means &, for good reason , don't want to go there

 

[bripat9643]

Why do you pay additional taxes on gasoline?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on new tires for your car?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on many large appliances?

Because there is a significant cost to the purchase and consumption of these items and that cost needs to be addressed.

these are termed "(negative) externalities" associated w/ carbon-based fuels and you'll NEVER see a denier bring it up either because:

A) they DON'T know what the term means

or

ii) they DO know what it means &, for good reason , don't want to go there

The so-called "externalizes" are mostly a figment of liberal imagination. If they exist, they are a small fraction of what the libturds claim they are.

 

[RollingThunder]

Why do you pay additional taxes on gasoline?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on new tires for your car?

Why do you pay additional taxes (disposal fees) on many large appliances?

Because there is a significant cost to the purchase and consumption of these items and that cost needs to be addressed.

these are termed "(negative) externalities" associated w/ carbon-based fuels and you'll NEVER see a denier bring it up either because:

A) they DON'T know what the term means

or

ii) they DO know what it means &, for good reason , don't want to go there

The so-called "externalizes" are mostly a figment of liberal imagination. If they exist, they are a small fraction of what the libturds claim they are.

Your idea that you have a functioning brain is mostly a figment of your imagination, Pookie.

 

[Dot Com]

What an idiot &/or Tool bripat is!!! Externalities are a figment? oil spills are externalities, smog is an externality, water table contamination is an externality, subsidies to Big Oil are an externality, etc... They are costs not paid-for by the generator of the negative consequences of their actions. Oftentimes, these costs are swallowed by the taxpayers you dolt. Still stand by your zany pronouncement?

 

[whitehall]

Carbon ain't your enemy. The freaking world is carbon based. Animals and humans are carbon based. Volcanoes spew more noxious stuff into the environment that a lifetime of SUV traffic. Passenger jets burn a gallon of relatively dirty fossil fuel per second of flight. They carry about 35,000 gallons per plane and there are about 10,000 passenger jets in the air all the time. What does the jet set environmental elite intend to do about jet fuel exhaust that we can see in the sky from almost anywhere in the Country? Battery powered planes? Ignore it because we need to get around in jets in order to spread the word about the evils of fossil fuel. Meanwhile the monstrous wind mills are killing every magnificent eagle that blunders into the air stream. Barry Hussein gave the windmill industry a 30 year permit to kill eagles and condors and hawks and every other protected bird species but the whining environmentalists think my Ford V-8 F 150 is the enemy.

 

[bripat9643]

these are termed "(negative) externalities" associated w/ carbon-based fuels and you'll NEVER see a denier bring it up either because:

A) they DON'T know what the term means

or

ii) they DO know what it means &, for good reason , don't want to go there

The so-called "externalizes" are mostly a figment of liberal imagination. If they exist, they are a small fraction of what the libturds claim they are.

Your idea that you have a functioning brain is mostly a figment of your imagination, Pookie.

That must be your conception of wit. Unfortunately, you failed to dispute the point I made.

 

[bripat9643]

What an idiot &/or Tool bripat is!!! Externalities are a figment? oil spills are externalities, smog is an externality, water table contamination is an externality, subsidies to Big Oil are an externality, etc... They are costs not paid-for by the generator of the negative consequences of their actions. Oftentimes, these costs are swallowed by the taxpayers you dolt. Still stand by your zany pronouncement?

Smog has been reduced by 80%. The remaining emissions are to diffuse for anyone to notice. I haven't heard read anything about fossil fuels contaminating the water table. There have been a few oil spills, but the damage is greatly over-estimated by the eco-nutburgers. BP paid $20 billion for the Gulf oil spill and Exxon spent many $billions cleaning up after the Exxon-Valdez. The costs are invariably swallowed by the consumers, not the tax-payers, but you don't give a rat's ass about either.

 

[RollingThunder]

The so-called "externalizes" are mostly a figment of liberal imagination. If they exist, they are a small fraction of what the libturds claim they are.

Your idea that you have a functioning brain is mostly a figment of your imagination, Pookie.

That must be your conception of wit. Unfortunately, you failed to dispute the point I made.

You didn't "make a point", little retard, you just said something stupid and clueless. "Externalities" are as real a part of the economic equation as 'labor costs'. They aren't something political, as you ignorantly and insanely assume. And BTW, learn to spell, moron. It's the 'externalities' are significant and important, not your "the externalizes are mostly a figment of liberal imagination".

Externality
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In economics, an externality is the cost or benefit that affects a party who did not choose to incur that cost or benefit.[1]

For example, manufacturing activities that cause air pollution impose health and clean-up costs on the whole society, whereas the neighbors of an individual who chooses to fire-proof his home may benefit from a reduced risk of a fire spreading to their own houses. If external costs exist, such as pollution, the producer may choose to produce more of the product than would be produced if the producer were required to pay all associated environmental costs. If there are external benefits, such as in public safety, less of the good may be produced than would be the case if the producer were to receive payment for the external benefits to others. For the purpose of these statements, overall cost and benefit to society is defined as the sum of the imputed monetary value of benefits and costs to all parties involved.[2][3] Thus, unregulated markets in goods or services with significant externalities generate prices that do not reflect the full social cost or benefit of their transactions; such markets are therefore inefficient.

Air pollution from motor vehicles is an example of a negative externality. The costs of the air pollution for the rest of society is not compensated for by either the producers or users of motorized transport.

 

[bripat9643]

Your idea that you have a functioning brain is mostly a figment of your imagination, Pookie.

That must be your conception of wit. Unfortunately, you failed to dispute the point I made.

You didn't "make a point", little retard, you just said something stupid and clueless. "Externalities" are as real a part of the economic equation as 'labor costs'. They aren't something political, as you ignorantly and insanely assume. And BTW, learn to spell, moron. It's the 'externalities' are significant and important, not your "the externalizes are mostly a figment of liberal imagination".

The externalities associated with the use of fossil fuels are about 5 orders of magnitude smaller than quacks like you make them out to be. They are a political issue, just as every economic issue becomes a political issue, because there's always an army of quacks who use fake facts to justify their agenda. The real data indicates that the externalities of fossil fuel use are insignificant compared to the benefits.