This is how republicans should handle global warming

[ScienceRocks]

Yes, we republicans must not only see "climate charge" as one of politics, but one of reality. This reality stares us straight in the face as it tells us that our planet goes through severe climate change on the scale of only a few hundred years can mean a lot. Our planet can warm or cool +-10c shown by geological data over the last million years. As little as -2c cooler than

We today could never support a population of our size on this planet, but that occurred 300 years ago! We republicans should focus our policies around safeguarding our food supply for all extremes. It is simply a good idea!

We should support
-Genetically modified grains, corns, fruits, ect. Less water to grow or higher ability to grow in any climate.
-Upgrade our energy infrastructure
*A high level of stable energy, Nuclear 40%, Hydro 20%, Wave 20%,
*More research into energy storage
*Yes, wind, solar, ect should be at least 20%

Our civilization should use our planet alot more. It is clean air and water for our children to live in a world that isn't as full of poison. Without relying on the middle east for our energy. We want a system that is energy independent here at home.

-Upgrade our infrastructure to be more efficient with the energy. Lot's of waste go on with the current system.

So the Republican platform should be to safeguard our food supply through all extremes of climate change and to make our country more energy independent.

We should move away from oil and coal. Republicans this is a sane policy of making sure our civilization survives through anything.

 

[Old Rocks]

That is a sane policy. Which stands not a chance with the present leadership,or lack thereof.

 

[skookerasbil]

Oh shit..........another k00k thread.


Like I say all the time.........the far left NEVER factos cost into anything!!! As if it is some inconvenience that should just be discarded!!


Thankfully..........their numbers as small or we'd all be fucked.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Global Warming?

Climate Change?

The Great Climactic Googly Moogly?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Oh shit..........another k00k thread.


Like I say all the time.........the far left NEVER factos cost into anything!!! As if it is some inconvenience that should just be discarded!!


Thankfully..........their numbers as small or we'd all be fucked.

We already know that the climate charges severely...Why not be ready?

 

[skookerasbil]

Hey Ray........Im ramping up my production of gay MSPAINT Photobucket Classics in preparation for election night. Dont want to display too much but heres one...............

 

[skookerasbil]

Oh shit..........another k00k thread.


Like I say all the time.........the far left NEVER factos cost into anything!!! As if it is some inconvenience that should just be discarded!!


Thankfully..........their numbers as small or we'd all be fucked.

We already know that the climate charges severely...Why not be ready?

Because shit costs money. Nobody has any money. Thats why.

Nobody in their right mind is going to agree to go and spend 20 trillion.........50 trillion...............76 trillion for green shit that is based upon unprovable shit.


Thats just the way it works s0n...........but I admire your idealism. Germany tried all that green crap hook, line and stinker and now they are running away from it faster than I can type!!

 

[skookerasbil]

LOL.........wait'll these green bills hit Germany in 2020

...............laugh..........my..................balls.................off...................

.Merkel will be long gone but for damn sure, the people will want her head.


As unsustainable as unsustainable can get.................. Green energy to hit Germans' bills: Vattenfall | Reuters

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We can't show how it works in a lab because there are too many other variables and none of our test so far have backed our theory, all we know for certain is that a wisp of CO2 is melting the ice caps and turning the oceans acidic

 

[skookerasbil]

Frank bro.........thesedolts think all we have to do is tax the rich and all dreams come true!!!







Where do people come up with this shit Frank????




These people...........they go through life like there are no such things as market realities. Its fascinating.

 

[ScienceRocks]

We can't show how it works in a lab because there are too many other variables and none of our test so far have backed our theory, all we know for certain is that a wisp of CO2 is melting the ice caps and turning the oceans acidic

Even if global warming is all bull shit. We still have to worry about climate charge. +-2c is huge and can happen in a few centuries as seen between 17th century and today.


Climate shifts do happen that can charge weather patterns.

 

[flacaltenn]

We can't show how it works in a lab because there are too many other variables and none of our test so far have backed our theory, all we know for certain is that a wisp of CO2 is melting the ice caps and turning the oceans acidic

Even if global warming is all bull shit we still have to worry about cllimate charge. +-2c is huge and can happen in a few centuries.


Climate shifts do happen that can that can charge weather patterns.

So this is like unto the parable of the 3 Litttle Pigs.. And this little pig should be a Mormon and hoard food stuffs for the apocalypse...

Look -0- I tend to understand the logic here. But faced with mortal danger -- I don't generally want to compromise on the current course of action.. So until you drop the fantasy of 20% from tidal power and 20% from wind/solar -- we're not gonna connect on a survival plan for BOTH of us.. Doesn't mean I'm preventing YOU from genetically engineering crops or living like a Hobbit.. By all means -- WE SHOULD have a plan..

But not one that is chosen to please everyone... One that WORKS would be preferable.

 

[ScienceRocks]

We can't show how it works in a lab because there are too many other variables and none of our test so far have backed our theory, all we know for certain is that a wisp of CO2 is melting the ice caps and turning the oceans acidic

Even if global warming is all bull shit we still have to worry about cllimate charge. +-2c is huge and can happen in a few centuries.


Climate shifts do happen that can that can charge weather patterns.

So this is like unto the parable of the 3 Litttle Pigs.. And this little pig should be a Mormon and hoard food stuffs for the apocalypse...

Look -0- I tend to understand the logic here. But faced with mortal danger -- I don't generally want to compromise on the current course of action.. So until you drop the fantasy of 20% from tidal power and 20% from wind/solar -- we're not gonna connect on a survival plan for BOTH of us.. Doesn't mean I'm preventing YOU from genetically engineering crops or living like a Hobbit.. By all means -- WE SHOULD have a plan..

But not one that is chosen to please everyone... One that WORKS would be preferable.

How about 50% nuclear, 20% hydro, 20% wave/tidal, 10% solar and wind? Wave power unlike solar and wind is very constant.

We're going to have to do something if we wish to move away from the middle east. Do we have a agreement?

 

[ScienceRocks]

What mixture would be reasonable for the future?

 

[flacaltenn]

Even if global warming is all bull shit we still have to worry about cllimate charge. +-2c is huge and can happen in a few centuries.


Climate shifts do happen that can that can charge weather patterns.

So this is like unto the parable of the 3 Litttle Pigs.. And this little pig should be a Mormon and hoard food stuffs for the apocalypse...

Look -0- I tend to understand the logic here. But faced with mortal danger -- I don't generally want to compromise on the current course of action.. So until you drop the fantasy of 20% from tidal power and 20% from wind/solar -- we're not gonna connect on a survival plan for BOTH of us.. Doesn't mean I'm preventing YOU from genetically engineering crops or living like a Hobbit.. By all means -- WE SHOULD have a plan..

But not one that is chosen to please everyone... One that WORKS would be preferable.

How about 50% nuclear, 20% hydro, 20% wave/tidal, 10% solar and wind? Wave power unlike solar and wind is very constant.

We're going to have to do something if we wish to move away from the middle east. Do we have a agreement?

I know it's often overlooked in the public discussion, but America IS ALREADY energy independent for it's electric grid. So this whole "screw the Arabs" thing is about transport fuels -- not electricity.. Converting transportation to grid supplied electricity is an extraordinarly bigger problem for grid infrastructure and management than a simple choice of WHERE the additional generation should come from.. That's why I prefer the choice of Hydrogen and Syn Fuels over direct conversion to electricity. Hydrogen can be manufactured with OFF GRID solar and wind. A perfect match to the job of turning sketchy sources into stored useful energy WITHOUT tons of additional infrastructure and redundancy. I have nothing against putting 10% of the grid into solar/wind, but beyond that, you cannot plan, contract and manage for quantities for which you cannot guarantee delivery.

I like what you were saying about preparing for agricultural contingencies a lot.. Makes total sense to have a plan to keep crop yields high enough in poor climate conditions. But THERE and in the widespread of nuclear power AND in radiation for food preservation -- those ANTI-SCIENCE lefties are your main problem -- not me..

I grew up on the beach with a surfboard under me. So don't yank my chain about the reliability of wave production.. You're talking to a former kid that would jump from a school bus if I saw adequate wave production on a specific day on the way to school. And the gigantic underwater Cuisinart fans that are being fielded for Tidal/Wave are anything but enviromental or reliable without GOBS of maintenance. Have you seen pictures of these beasts??? Go do an "image" search on google for Tidal and Wave Generation.

Truely Matthew... MOST of your problem is gonna be with the enviros. Not clear thinking pragmatic engineers. See what concessions you could get from them and I'll help build any reasonable "insurance" plan that hedges against climate change. I may be a CO2 skeptic, but I'm not crazy enough to believe the Ice Ages and Warming periods are all in our past..

 

[Old Rocks]

Whatever mixture would work. Two problems I see here. First, is that the Republicans are in no way going to propose any kind of preperations that would confirm that AGW exists. And anything that the President proposes will be shot down just because. Second, it that the more centralized power production is, the more vulneble communities are to the grid going down.

Not only is the ongoing climate change a danger to our food supply, but also to our infrastructure.

But, once again, nothing is going to be done to allieviate any of the consequences until there are enough catastrophes to make people demand the leaders do their job.

 

[flacaltenn]

Whatever mixture would work. Two problems I see here. First, is that the Republicans are in no way going to propose any kind of preperations that would confirm that AGW exists. And anything that the President proposes will be shot down just because. Second, it that the more centralized power production is, the more vulneble communities are to the grid going down.

Not only is the ongoing climate change a danger to our food supply, but also to our infrastructure.

But, once again, nothing is going to be done to allieviate any of the consequences until there are enough catastrophes to make people demand the leaders do their job.

I don't think Matthew stuck us with AGW as the motivation here. I'm certainly on board to "think ahead" to Climate Change mitigation. NOT in terms of chasing after boogeymen like Carbon reductions -- but in terms of SURVIVING swings in natural Climate variation. So if you can think beyond CO2 -- we've got a discussion.

Given that description of the problem -- it's food production, energy production, and basic infrastructure modification to cope with +/- 2 or even 4degC changes. Good excersize for ANY political persuasion ain't it? Even the ancient Egyptians understood that.

What you said about "centralized" versus de-centralized grid generation is important. We are too reliant on long haul delivery of power over limited wires. Handling variability of production as in wind and solar is better done within "grid sectors". Where you have limited interconnectivity to the grid. If you're GONNA adopt variable production sources, you should be responsible for the integration, switching and back-up of those sources without putting a burden on neighbors with different mixes and ideas.

For instance, take a refinery or an auto plant TOTALLY off grid except for the ability to RECIEVE power on a contracted basis. Work out the balance of demand and supply for worst case scenarios WITHIN that sector. And FORGET about supplying excess power back to the grid unless you can supply it ON DEMAND and reliably (like you could with Fossil or BioMass).. There are a BUNCH of new small scale self contained Nuclear generators coming out. These would provide the "Baseline" worst case generation and could be mixed well on a local scale with wind/solar/gerbil power.

No grid scale battery storage required -- No grid capacity expansions. No problems with pestering your neighbor for an emergency back-up of your silly wind farm just so you can make the dubious CLAIM that you are entirely powered by the wind.

 

[westwall]

Whatever mixture would work. Two problems I see here. First, is that the Republicans are in no way going to propose any kind of preperations that would confirm that AGW exists. And anything that the President proposes will be shot down just because. Second, it that the more centralized power production is, the more vulneble communities are to the grid going down.

Not only is the ongoing climate change a danger to our food supply, but also to our infrastructure.

But, once again, nothing is going to be done to allieviate any of the consequences until there are enough catastrophes to make people demand the leaders do their job.

I don't think Matthew stuck us with AGW as the motivation here. I'm certainly on board to "think ahead" to Climate Change mitigation. NOT in terms of chasing after boogeymen like Carbon reductions -- but in terms of SURVIVING swings in natural Climate variation. So if you can think beyond CO2 -- we've got a discussion.

Given that description of the problem -- it's food production, energy production, and basic infrastructure modification to cope with +/- 2 or even 4degC changes. Good excersize for ANY political persuasion ain't it? Even the ancient Egyptians understood that.

What you said about "centralized" versus de-centralized grid generation is important. We are too reliant on long haul delivery of power over limited wires. Handling variability of production as in wind and solar is better done within "grid sectors". Where you have limited interconnectivity to the grid. If you're GONNA adopt variable production sources, you should be responsible for the integration, switching and back-up of those sources without putting a burden on neighbors with different mixes and ideas.

For instance, take a refinery or an auto plant TOTALLY off grid except for the ability to RECIEVE power on a contracted basis. Work out the balance of demand and supply for worst case scenarios WITHIN that sector. And FORGET about supplying excess power back to the grid unless you can supply it ON DEMAND and reliably (like you could with Fossil or BioMass).. There are a BUNCH of new small scale self contained Nuclear generators coming out. These would provide the "Baseline" worst case generation and could be mixed well on a local scale with wind/solar/gerbil power.

No grid scale battery storage required -- No grid capacity expansions. No problems with pestering your neighbor for an emergency back-up of your silly wind farm just so you can make the dubious CLAIM that you are entirely powered by the wind.

All very good solutions. I have allways favored decentralisation of the grid. I am as self reliant as you can get with solar power. I built a cistern and excess solar power pumps water up into the cistern and at night the water falls back and powers a water wheel. It's OK for lights but would never power the fridge.

Wind is a joke. I looked into it quite long and hard and figured that with perfect wind conditions, the mill would pay for itself 7.2 years after it had fallen apart.

After 5 years the maintenance on them becomes prohibitive and their production plummets.