If the price of solar and wind becomes lower than the price of oil, NO ONE can stop it. Until that happens, I’d rather not be cold and hungry because of a bunch of socialist whack jobs spending us into oblivion, destroying the capital we have left and driving the country into economic ruin a la Venezuela and a host other worker’s paradises.
Also, all of these doomsday models are dependent on exponential growth of fossil fuel use. Last time I checked, these resources were limited. Oh! The same people that warn us about running out of fossil fuel are the ones screaming about global warming. They can’t have it both ways.
I did the math, at the present burn rate, CO2 will max out at 560ppm if we burn at that rate indefinitely. Further, any oil not burned here will be burned somewhere else. That is not stoppable either. So, top off your Hummer, turn up the thermostat and crack open a nice cold beer. Enjoy your life. Worrying will not change a thing.
Ossqss
5 years ago
It is not about the money. It is about the substitute energy needed. Per the IEA 2016 report, Wind, Solar, Tidal, and Geothermal energy constitute 1.3% of the global energy needs. 1.3%! There is no way that changes anytime soon. The referenced green energy numbers always touted are made up primarily of biofuels, meaning wood and dung, and burning that puts out as much or more CO2 than burning coal folks. There is No viable substitue for fossil fuels with out Nuclear considerations.
BTW, how do you think cutting down forrests and replacing them with millions of acres of wind turbines and solar panels will impact the climate?
What AOC is really saying is, Get Back in Your Cave.
Additionally, no data shows any statistically significant change in extreme weather at all. There is no climate change threat, including SLR which is not accelerating and has been happening for 20,000 years since the Laurentide Ice sheet made the great lakes.
I like it, a nobody blog that says the work of thousands of scientists around the world is wrong.
SMF
5 years ago
Here is a great sample of the stupidity about climate change and sustainable energy.
According to many, including Europe, biomass burning is ‘carbon neutral’.
What is biomass? It’s trees, freaking trees. Wood burning, you know, what our ancestors did.
Why is it carbon neutral? Because they said so.
Webej
5 years ago
[1] Cost/benefit analysis is the wrong discussion. You do life insurance even though the chances of your kids becoming orphans is very low. You do fire insurance even though the chances of a fire are less than 1 in a thousand. The ultimate costs of climate change are not possible to estimate at the moment, but there is a lot more chance that it will be catastrophic than that of your children becoming orphans.
[2] According to the World Bank, we are already spending $5Tr/year on fossil fuel subsidies and damages. (People forget that the fossil fuel industry has a lot of effects on people’s health globally and the environment, even without additional CO² greenhouse gas effects). If we put that kind of money (not to mention the trillions spend by OESO countries on defense, 85% of the global total) to work in research and development of sustainable energy, we could speed up the curve significantly.
[3] Sustainable energy has no fuel costs. It is a technology that is getting cheaper at an exponential rate. 2007 numbers are completely obsolete. Pricing and gains in sustainable energy keep upending “experts” with linear projections. Market forces are already dissing coal and selecting renewable. This trend will swell into a tsunami if we do not allow the oil industry to keep their lock on politics.
The chance of your children, _at_some_point_in_the_future, becoming orphans, on account of your death, is pretty darned high…….. It would, in fact, be more catastrophic if they didn’t..
Which is exactly why it’s hardly catastrophic: Because is highly unlikely to happen overnight, you have plenty of time to rearrange your affairs once your end is near.
Ditto climate change. The world has been much, much hotter in earlier periods. Without falling off some equilibrium, and ending up Venus. So, a runaway catastrophe is pretty darned unlikely. Instead, the worst that is likely to happen, is people from the Med having to schlep it to Scandinavia if they want to continue enjoying their current temps.. And the Beach Boys will be surfing Canada. With a few hundreds to thousand of years to get from here to there. Some catastrophe….
everything
5 years ago
Ehh, we don’t portend the cost of the other, carbon neutral would bankrupt us anyway, we need to keep pulling the black stuff out as fast as possible. The only way to make it work is a slow changeover, that’s what the carbon neutral nations did, now the greedy capitalist nations, no, change has to start at the top and that’s where all the crooks go!
KidHorn
5 years ago
The climate alarmist have been wrong all along. 10 years ago, I read an article that stated snow would be a rare occurrence in most of the US within 10 years.
We have record food production year after year. I don’t know of any place that we can’t live that we could live 20 years ago. When exactly are the bad consequences of climate change going to start?
The alarmist have nothing to back them up except computer models that have been consistently wrong.
No, their predictions have been remarkably accurate. I posted a link to an article showing this, but for some reason the post vanished. Maybe because it wasn’t a link to Scott Adams, creator of comic strip “Dilbert?” Because that passes for evidence here apparently, but other links don’t.
Politicians have lost all connections with reality – new green infrastructure, slave reparations, shiny new border fences, and new war efforts in Iran all cost big money. Currently with $22 Trillion debt building at additional $ 1 Trillion annually that works out to over $100,000 per taxpayer currently. To restore US finances will require about $ 2 trillion additional revenue annually to pay debt down over the next 25 years or so and zero the annual deficit. The data I found show currently about 9 trillion reported income for tax returns and 1 trillion revenue collected on 138 million taxpayers.
Looks to me like a 300% tax increase over current rates would be necessary just to bring the mess from the last 40 years of spending under control. I can’t believe that this is likely but it shows how deep the spending problem is. The last thing anyone should be considering is massive new spending programs for anything. Data here:
“Politicians have lost all connections with reality – new green infrastructure, slave reparations, shiny new border fences, and new war efforts in Iran all cost big money. “
The more you intend to steal, the more distractions you have to put up, in order to keep the dupes looking some other way…
ksdude
5 years ago
Here we go, the ***** is in the headlines, Again. This would all sound ludicrous if it wasn’t serious and had several people backing it. You do realize that eat less meat is cue for “eat insects”? That’s another one of their ideas. Do pigs fart? Do chickens fart? Are humans going to be required to where fart bags, or have a tube shoved up their rear that charges you everytime you fart? Problem is trying to convince 80% of the poplulation that dont even have $1000 for an emergency that the current system is superior is laughable. I don’t think it matters what comes next. People get fed up and many are going to vote for her and others like her. What’s even worse are people saying that will never happen. It already has. She’s in office.
Ron Cataldi
5 years ago
This data is over 10 years old, from before the time when Hillary Clinton was diagnosed with a brain disorder. Perhaps we should find out what “Dilbert” creator Scott Adams thinks about this issue?
Six000mileyear
5 years ago
The dinosaurs were victims of climate change. But the forces of nature were too great, so the weak dinosaurs perished while the others evolved.
Schaap60
5 years ago
I think it was Reagan who cautioned about government action: “Don’t just do something, stand there.”
lol
5 years ago
bush’s ineptitude and warmongering brought Obama ,Obama’s stunning incompetence brought us trump,now trump’s ?? what do even call it… bringing us……lol cortez…text book banana republic circle of life!
Casual_Observer
5 years ago
Trump has nothing to worry about once he gets past the special counsel Russia investigation. He literally doesn’t have to talk and let the likes of AOC and Bernie control the airwaves for 2020. Given how nutty the left have gone over everything, it wouldn’t be surprising if the reason the Fed stopped hiking and stopped withdrawing support is to prevent an MMTer from getting elected. In a world with capitalism with little competition vs outright socialism and unlimited money printing, there is only one choice.
The sooner we get an MMT’er into power the sooner this fiat money charade blows up. Seriously, there is no point dragging this out. For the sake of my children we need to take the pain today and start the rebuilding process as soon as possible.
Carl_R
5 years ago
The US will be bankrupt by 2040 and will have some new form of government by then anyway. What’s the harm in pulling bankruptcy forward 20 years? Some of us might not live to see freedom replaced by a dictatorship otherwise.
SMF
5 years ago
History, and even quite recent history, is rife with examples after examples from scientific and educated minds that never came to pass. Most great economic minds did not see the 2008 crisis coming up, while many of us saw the writing on the wall years before.
In my 4 decades of life, I’ve witnessed the following scares that never came to pass:
The population bomb,
Killer Bees,
pesticides,
WWIII,
Pandemics (Swine flu, Asian flu),
Ozone hole,
Peak oil,
Y2K
The end of the world has been predicted for decades, and yet we’re still here.
Jojo
5 years ago
Certainly less dangerous than Trump and McConnell!
Jojo
5 years ago
Sure, just screw it all. Let the planet fry for a while. Humans will be killed off, the planet will eventually recover and the universe will be a better place w/o us. Sheeze.
Brother
5 years ago
Is it factual we can make changes to Earth’s temperatures with Co2 reductions? I’m baffled by this mass assumption people put their belief’s in. Supposedly a tax is the cure to save the planet? The destruction of trillion dollar industries? All while people continue on with living the way they do. This has gone on to long.
themonosynaptic
5 years ago
AOC is trolling the right with the GND, which includes healthcare, income equality proposals and the kitchen sink.
From the above chart, it looks like Kyoto with the U.S. would save $630B and help reduce the impact of climate change (I know, you all think it isn’t happening, has always happened, Dilbert is a climate scientist, etc. – let’s agree not to go there).
Why would you be against that?
The obvious answer is that it will create winners and losers, and the biggest losers are Saudi Arabia, Russia, and other countries or organizations with unrecovered carbon assets. Unfortunately these losers are very rich and powerful, and are likely to spend a small fraction of their assets buying off politicians and swaying opinion in their favor.
I accept the science in the IPCC report (I know that makes me in the minority here, but that isn’t an argument I’m trying to start, so please don’t), but I also believe that the solutions are not that difficult and expensive, and also won’t require us to lower our standard of living. I think some smart policies around taxing energy (and using the taxes to lower income taxes so they are neutral for most people) would let the market step in with conservation and new technologies. Sure, Miami is going underwater, but that is already dialed in.
2banana
5 years ago
Between crazy Bernie and full-retard socialist AOC…
Trump landslide in 2020.
Greggg
5 years ago
WildBull
5 years ago
If only we could be more like Venezuela. AOC is dangerous.
WildBull
5 years ago
AOC does not know how to make a proper fist.
Stay Informed
Subscribe to MishTalk
You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.
Great book on this subject: link to theepochtimes.com
How well have climate models predicted warming? link to carbonbrief.org
If the price of solar and wind becomes lower than the price of oil, NO ONE can stop it. Until that happens, I’d rather not be cold and hungry because of a bunch of socialist whack jobs spending us into oblivion, destroying the capital we have left and driving the country into economic ruin a la Venezuela and a host other worker’s paradises.
Also, all of these doomsday models are dependent on exponential growth of fossil fuel use. Last time I checked, these resources were limited. Oh! The same people that warn us about running out of fossil fuel are the ones screaming about global warming. They can’t have it both ways.
I did the math, at the present burn rate, CO2 will max out at 560ppm if we burn at that rate indefinitely. Further, any oil not burned here will be burned somewhere else. That is not stoppable either. So, top off your Hummer, turn up the thermostat and crack open a nice cold beer. Enjoy your life. Worrying will not change a thing.
It is not about the money. It is about the substitute energy needed. Per the IEA 2016 report, Wind, Solar, Tidal, and Geothermal energy constitute 1.3% of the global energy needs. 1.3%! There is no way that changes anytime soon. The referenced green energy numbers always touted are made up primarily of biofuels, meaning wood and dung, and burning that puts out as much or more CO2 than burning coal folks. There is No viable substitue for fossil fuels with out Nuclear considerations.
BTW, how do you think cutting down forrests and replacing them with millions of acres of wind turbines and solar panels will impact the climate?
What AOC is really saying is, Get Back in Your Cave.
Additionally, no data shows any statistically significant change in extreme weather at all. There is no climate change threat, including SLR which is not accelerating and has been happening for 20,000 years since the Laurentide Ice sheet made the great lakes.
Here ya go, where is this report wrong?
I like it, a nobody blog that says the work of thousands of scientists around the world is wrong.
Here is a great sample of the stupidity about climate change and sustainable energy.
According to many, including Europe, biomass burning is ‘carbon neutral’.
What is biomass? It’s trees, freaking trees. Wood burning, you know, what our ancestors did.
Why is it carbon neutral? Because they said so.
[1] Cost/benefit analysis is the wrong discussion. You do life insurance even though the chances of your kids becoming orphans is very low. You do fire insurance even though the chances of a fire are less than 1 in a thousand. The ultimate costs of climate change are not possible to estimate at the moment, but there is a lot more chance that it will be catastrophic than that of your children becoming orphans.
[2] According to the World Bank, we are already spending $5Tr/year on fossil fuel subsidies and damages. (People forget that the fossil fuel industry has a lot of effects on people’s health globally and the environment, even without additional CO² greenhouse gas effects). If we put that kind of money (not to mention the trillions spend by OESO countries on defense, 85% of the global total) to work in research and development of sustainable energy, we could speed up the curve significantly.
[3] Sustainable energy has no fuel costs. It is a technology that is getting cheaper at an exponential rate. 2007 numbers are completely obsolete. Pricing and gains in sustainable energy keep upending “experts” with linear projections. Market forces are already dissing coal and selecting renewable. This trend will swell into a tsunami if we do not allow the oil industry to keep their lock on politics.
The chance of your children, _at_some_point_in_the_future, becoming orphans, on account of your death, is pretty darned high…….. It would, in fact, be more catastrophic if they didn’t..
Which is exactly why it’s hardly catastrophic: Because is highly unlikely to happen overnight, you have plenty of time to rearrange your affairs once your end is near.
Ditto climate change. The world has been much, much hotter in earlier periods. Without falling off some equilibrium, and ending up Venus. So, a runaway catastrophe is pretty darned unlikely. Instead, the worst that is likely to happen, is people from the Med having to schlep it to Scandinavia if they want to continue enjoying their current temps.. And the Beach Boys will be surfing Canada. With a few hundreds to thousand of years to get from here to there. Some catastrophe….
Ehh, we don’t portend the cost of the other, carbon neutral would bankrupt us anyway, we need to keep pulling the black stuff out as fast as possible. The only way to make it work is a slow changeover, that’s what the carbon neutral nations did, now the greedy capitalist nations, no, change has to start at the top and that’s where all the crooks go!
The climate alarmist have been wrong all along. 10 years ago, I read an article that stated snow would be a rare occurrence in most of the US within 10 years.
We have record food production year after year. I don’t know of any place that we can’t live that we could live 20 years ago. When exactly are the bad consequences of climate change going to start?
The alarmist have nothing to back them up except computer models that have been consistently wrong.
No, their predictions have been remarkably accurate. I posted a link to an article showing this, but for some reason the post vanished. Maybe because it wasn’t a link to Scott Adams, creator of comic strip “Dilbert?” Because that passes for evidence here apparently, but other links don’t.
Here’s the link again that apparently made someone feel threatened: link to carbonbrief.org
Politicians have lost all connections with reality – new green infrastructure, slave reparations, shiny new border fences, and new war efforts in Iran all cost big money. Currently with $22 Trillion debt building at additional $ 1 Trillion annually that works out to over $100,000 per taxpayer currently. To restore US finances will require about $ 2 trillion additional revenue annually to pay debt down over the next 25 years or so and zero the annual deficit. The data I found show currently about 9 trillion reported income for tax returns and 1 trillion revenue collected on 138 million taxpayers.
Looks to me like a 300% tax increase over current rates would be necessary just to bring the mess from the last 40 years of spending under control. I can’t believe that this is likely but it shows how deep the spending problem is. The last thing anyone should be considering is massive new spending programs for anything. Data here:
“Politicians have lost all connections with reality – new green infrastructure, slave reparations, shiny new border fences, and new war efforts in Iran all cost big money. “
The more you intend to steal, the more distractions you have to put up, in order to keep the dupes looking some other way…
Here we go, the ***** is in the headlines, Again. This would all sound ludicrous if it wasn’t serious and had several people backing it. You do realize that eat less meat is cue for “eat insects”? That’s another one of their ideas. Do pigs fart? Do chickens fart? Are humans going to be required to where fart bags, or have a tube shoved up their rear that charges you everytime you fart? Problem is trying to convince 80% of the poplulation that dont even have $1000 for an emergency that the current system is superior is laughable. I don’t think it matters what comes next. People get fed up and many are going to vote for her and others like her. What’s even worse are people saying that will never happen. It already has. She’s in office.
This data is over 10 years old, from before the time when Hillary Clinton was diagnosed with a brain disorder. Perhaps we should find out what “Dilbert” creator Scott Adams thinks about this issue?
The dinosaurs were victims of climate change. But the forces of nature were too great, so the weak dinosaurs perished while the others evolved.
I think it was Reagan who cautioned about government action: “Don’t just do something, stand there.”
bush’s ineptitude and warmongering brought Obama ,Obama’s stunning incompetence brought us trump,now trump’s ?? what do even call it… bringing us……lol cortez…text book banana republic circle of life!
Trump has nothing to worry about once he gets past the special counsel Russia investigation. He literally doesn’t have to talk and let the likes of AOC and Bernie control the airwaves for 2020. Given how nutty the left have gone over everything, it wouldn’t be surprising if the reason the Fed stopped hiking and stopped withdrawing support is to prevent an MMTer from getting elected. In a world with capitalism with little competition vs outright socialism and unlimited money printing, there is only one choice.
Since “deficits don’t matter” Cheney was on the stage I think the Republicans seem to be beating out the Democrats on the “unlimited money printing”
The sooner we get an MMT’er into power the sooner this fiat money charade blows up. Seriously, there is no point dragging this out. For the sake of my children we need to take the pain today and start the rebuilding process as soon as possible.
The US will be bankrupt by 2040 and will have some new form of government by then anyway. What’s the harm in pulling bankruptcy forward 20 years? Some of us might not live to see freedom replaced by a dictatorship otherwise.
History, and even quite recent history, is rife with examples after examples from scientific and educated minds that never came to pass. Most great economic minds did not see the 2008 crisis coming up, while many of us saw the writing on the wall years before.
In my 4 decades of life, I’ve witnessed the following scares that never came to pass:
The population bomb,
Killer Bees,
pesticides,
WWIII,
Pandemics (Swine flu, Asian flu),
Ozone hole,
Peak oil,
Y2K
The end of the world has been predicted for decades, and yet we’re still here.
Certainly less dangerous than Trump and McConnell!
Sure, just screw it all. Let the planet fry for a while. Humans will be killed off, the planet will eventually recover and the universe will be a better place w/o us. Sheeze.
Is it factual we can make changes to Earth’s temperatures with Co2 reductions? I’m baffled by this mass assumption people put their belief’s in. Supposedly a tax is the cure to save the planet? The destruction of trillion dollar industries? All while people continue on with living the way they do. This has gone on to long.
AOC is trolling the right with the GND, which includes healthcare, income equality proposals and the kitchen sink.
From the above chart, it looks like Kyoto with the U.S. would save $630B and help reduce the impact of climate change (I know, you all think it isn’t happening, has always happened, Dilbert is a climate scientist, etc. – let’s agree not to go there).
Why would you be against that?
The obvious answer is that it will create winners and losers, and the biggest losers are Saudi Arabia, Russia, and other countries or organizations with unrecovered carbon assets. Unfortunately these losers are very rich and powerful, and are likely to spend a small fraction of their assets buying off politicians and swaying opinion in their favor.
I accept the science in the IPCC report (I know that makes me in the minority here, but that isn’t an argument I’m trying to start, so please don’t), but I also believe that the solutions are not that difficult and expensive, and also won’t require us to lower our standard of living. I think some smart policies around taxing energy (and using the taxes to lower income taxes so they are neutral for most people) would let the market step in with conservation and new technologies. Sure, Miami is going underwater, but that is already dialed in.
Between crazy Bernie and full-retard socialist AOC…
Trump landslide in 2020.
If only we could be more like Venezuela. AOC is dangerous.
AOC does not know how to make a proper fist.