Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So, in the real news today:

The earth is still warming. Alaska is sweltering in an unprecedented heat wave, Calgary is unprecently flooded. Last year, the Danube was so low that boats lay in the riverbed, this year, there was historic flooding in Bavaria and part of Eastern Europe. The Sierra snowpack reached an unprecedented low. This is what climatologists have been predicting for a long time: Less snowpack, more droughts AND more floods. That's exactly what's happening.

---

Quote:

---

Demonstrations in Egypt, Brazil, Argentina etc. You don't hear much about Greece anymore, but Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and most of Eastern Europe are suffering from youth unemployed of 25%+. This does not bode well for places like Pakistan, which has a very large, angry, young population. It doesn't seem to matter whether the system is democratic, semi-democratic, or authoritarian, or capitalist or mixed... modern economies, when tied into international trade, are finding it impossible to stabilize their economies at high employment.

---

Quote:

---

Developed and developing nations are "investing" in Africa: another cheap labor pool to exploit, and a possible market to suck dry. Obama is urged to follow suit, and get in line behind China and Russia before the good deals run out.

---

Quote:

---

Fertilizers are killing our oceans and lakes

Gulf of Mexico could see record-sized ‘dead zone’ from pollution this year

Quote:

---

The Gulf of Mexico could see a record-size dead zone this year of oxygen-deprived waters resulting from pollution, US scientists have cautioned based on government data models. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s forecasts said the dead zone could be as large as New Jersey, or up to 8,561 square miles (22,172 square kilometers).

Dead zones are toxic to marine life and are caused by excessive nutrient pollution due to agriculture runoff. They are influenced by weather, precipitation, wind and temperature.

When there is little oxygen in the water, most marine life near the bottom is unable to survive.

“This year’s prediction for the Gulf reflects flood conditions in the Midwest that caused large amounts of nutrients to be transported from the Mississippi watershed to the Gulf,” NOAA said in a statement.

“Last year’s dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico was the fourth smallest on record due to drought conditions, covering an area of approximately 2,889 square miles.”

---

---

Quote:

---

And your solution is?

Got jobs for hundreds of millions when heavy equipment, automation and computers reduce the bodies needed to do the work necessary to provide for everyone?

---

Quote:

---

:So, in the real news today:

The earth is still warming. Alaska is sweltering in an unprecedented heat wave, Calgary is unprecently flooded. Last year, the Danube was so low that boats lay in the riverbed, this year, there was historic flooding in Bavaria and part of Eastern Europe. The Sierra snowpack reached an unprecedented low. This is what climatologists have been predicting for a long time: Less snowpack, more droughts AND more floods. That's exactly what's happening.- SIGNYM

And your solution is?
Even if North America and Europe do everything possible to reduce global warming, China, India, South America, and Africa are still going to increase their usage of fossil fuels for the forseeable future. Should we rearrange the deck chairs by reducing carbon emmissions when they're increasing everywhere else, or try to adapt to a changing climate? -GEEZER

Demonstrations in Egypt, Brazil, Argentina etc. You don't hear much about Greece anymore, but Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and most of Eastern Europe are suffering from youth unemployed of 25%+. This does not bode well for places like Pakistan, which has a very large, angry, young population. It doesn't seem to matter whether the system is democratic, semi-democratic, or authoritarian, or capitalist or mixed... modern economies, when tied into international trade, are finding it impossible to stabilize their economies at high employment.-SIGNY

And your solution is? Got jobs for hundreds of millions when heavy equipment, automation and computers reduce the bodies needed to do the work necessary to provide for everyone? -GEEZER

Developed and developing nations are "investing" in Africa: another cheap labor pool to exploit, and a possible market to suck dry. Obama is urged to follow suit, and get in line behind China and Russia before the good deals run out.-SIGNY

Unlike the U.S. government, China and Russia don't care about rights of Africans. They'll gladly bribe dictators and arm them to get plum deals. Wanna go to war with the Chinese and Russians over better government for Africa? -GEEZER

Fertilizers are killing our oceans and lakes
Gulf of Mexico could see record-sized ‘dead zone’ from pollution this year

Quote:

---

The Gulf of Mexico could see a record-size dead zone this year of oxygen-deprived waters resulting from pollution, US scientists have cautioned based on government data models. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s forecasts said the dead zone could be as large as New Jersey, or up to 8,561 square miles (22,172 square kilometers).

Dead zones are toxic to marine life and are caused by excessive nutrient pollution due to agriculture runoff. They are influenced by weather, precipitation, wind and temperature.

When there is little oxygen in the water, most marine life near the bottom is unable to survive.

“This year’s prediction for the Gulf reflects flood conditions in the Midwest that caused large amounts of nutrients to be transported from the Mississippi watershed to the Gulf,” NOAA said in a statement.

“Last year’s dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico was the fourth smallest on record due to drought conditions, covering an area of approximately 2,889 square miles.”

---

-SIGNY

And food - which a lot of folks can barely afford - gets more expensive.
As one of my old bosses - who I didn't particularly like but respected - said, "Don't bring me problems. Bring me solutions." -GEEZER

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

---

Even if North America and Europe do EVERYTHING POSSIBLE to reduce global warming ... (cites?)

---

I'm not sure why you're including Europe - their per capita emissions are roughly half ours.

[img][/img]

---

Quote:

---

And your solution is? Even if North America and Europe do everything possible to reduce global warming, China, India, South America, and Africa are still going to increase their usage of fossil fuels for the forseeable future. Should we rearrange the deck chairs by reducing carbon emmissions when they're increasing everywhere else, or try to adapt to a changing climate?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
So is your solution to do nothing? How about being world leaders in this stuff?

Taking active steps so that your country is cleaner and greener generally, has less waste, more recycling. How about encouraging investment in energy efficent products and discourgaing growth in dirty industries?

Tell me where the negatives are in any of this? Because who wants to live in a tip or a wasteland?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
2010

---

Quote:

---

Europe, still half, or less, than the US. Cuba 1/10 of US.

Did it change anything? Yes, it made my argument stronger. So thanks for pointing that out, old fart.

Now, do you have any solutions?

Yeah, I thought not.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Geezer: any solutions yet?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:


So unless you have a way to get China, India, etc. on board - which I figure is gonna be kind of difficult, since their populations are clamoring for more energy and a better life - It's going to be difficult to reach a global reduction in carbon emissions. This is why I don't have much faith in putting all our eggs in the emissions control basket, and think we need to be prepared to deal with the effects of climate change as well.

---

Quote:

---

According to a recently released United Nations report, global investment in renewable energy reached a record $257 billion in 2011, a 17 percent increase from the amount invested in 2010. Globally, renewable energy covers approximately 16.7 percent of energy consumption. Of this share, modern technologies such as solar and wind accounted for just 8.2 percent, even less than the 8.5 percent contributed by biomass. By comparison, more than 80 percent of electricity consumed worldwide still comes from fossil fuels.

China was responsible for almost one-fifth of total global investment, spending $52 billion on renewable energy last year. The United States was close behind with investments of $51 billion, as developers sought to benefit from government incentive programs before they expired. Germany, Italy and India rounded out the list of the top five countries.

According to China’s 12th Five-Year Plan for Economic and Social Development (2011-2015), the country will spend $473.1 billion on clean energy investments over the next five years. China’s goal is to have 20 percent of its total energy demand sourced from renewable energy by 2020.

In 2011, solar led the way as far as global investment in renewable energy, with investment surging to $147 billion, a year-on-year increase of 52 percent, due to strong demand for rooftop photovoltaic installations in Germany, Italy, China and Britain. Large-scale solar thermal installations in Spain and the United States also contributed to growth during the year. Wind power investment slipped 12 percent to $84 billion as a result of uncertainty about energy policy in Europe and fewer new installations in China, according to the report.

Despite the substantial investments in solar energy, the industry is in turmoil. A number of large American manufacturers such as Solyndra, Evergreen Solar, SpectraWatt, Solar Millennium and Solon fell victim to price pressure from Chinese rivals that helped to halve the cost of photovoltaic modules in 2011.

Even the survivors are not doing well. Shares of First Solar, Inc. (NASDAQ:FSLR), are selling at their lowest level in five years. The company, which is the leading solar company in the United States, lost $39.5 million last year. In the first quarter of this year, First Solar reported a loss of $449 million after non-recurring expenses of $405 million. The company is due to report second quarter results on August 1.

Not unexpectedly, the industry’s poor fundamentals are provoking trade battles. In May, the U.S. Commerce Department found several Chinese solar-panel companies guilty of dumping and imposed 31 percent tariffs on their products. The action came as a result of a complaint filed by the American subsidiary of Germany’s SolarWorld AG (DE:SWV) and a half-dozen other solar-energy companies that said that the Chinese manufacturers are selling solar panels at below-market prices. The Chinese companies affected are Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd. (NYSE:STP) and Trina Solar Limited (NYSE:TSL). SolarWorld has now asked the European Union to investigate claims that Chinese rivals have been selling their products at below market value in Europe as well.

While China pricing has been devastating for American and European solar manufacturers, it has been no less devastating for their Chinese rivals. Suntech, Trina, Yingli Green Energy Holding Co. Ltd. (NYSE:YGE) and Canadian Solar Inc. (NASDAQ:CSIQ), four of China’s largest solar manufacturers, lost a combined $1.7 billion in 2011, and the shares of all four companies are selling at five year lows.

The economics for the solar industry, both globally and in China, have never been worse, and there are no bright spots on the horizon. Clearly, solar investments in the United States and Europe will take a hit in 2012. However, the underlying unprofitability of the industry is in sharp conflict with China’s long-term goal to derive 20 percent of its energy needs from renewable energy sources as well. How can the Chinese companies continue to operate in the face of such losses? Will China continue to support the industry’s development? These are some of the questions that the country’s new leaders will need to address as they take the helm this fall.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
What I'm hearing is that everything stays essentially the same, but the outcome should change.

---

Quote:

---

But what if everything DOESN'T stay the same? What if we were to go hell-bent for leather to either reduce climate change, or mitigate the impacts of climate change, or both? What could we do? (Trying to get you to think out of the box, in brainstorming mode. Surely you've been in brainstorming sessions!)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
So Geezer - do you want to know why I laugh at you? Probably not, but here it is for all to read - because you are so ideologically driven you can't think any other way.

FOR EXAMPLE:

You start out with the argument that EVEN IF the US and Europe were to do EVERYTHING POSSIBLE to slow down (or even eventually reverse) global warming, the emissions from China and India would undo those efforts. You take this as gospel, and expect everyone else to do that as well.

But there's one really enormous, gaping, obvious logical flaw in your argument - you don't know. You've drawn a conclusion on a qualitative assumption when you need to do quantitative analysis. What do I mean by that? What I mean is that if the US and Europe were to do EVERYTHING POSSIBLE - by which I mean technically feasible at the moment * - that one logical possibility is that US and Europe could do SO MUCH that they would at least mitigate the effects of China and India, and perhaps reverse them.

---

Quote:

---

Actually, the first thing you have to do is figure out how you're going to get the U.S. and Europe to do EVERYTHING POSSIBLE. That's the big IF.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Actually, the first thing you have to do is figure out how you're going to get the U.S. and Europe to do EVERYTHING POSSIBLE. That's the big IF.

---

Actually, the first thing you have to do is figure out how you're going to get people to think past what currently exists.

---

Quote:

---

Here, let me give you an example that a right-winger would appreciate: We could have never developed democracy if the FF couldn't think past monarchy which, up until then, was the only form of European government extant, which therefore would have been the predicted model.

---

Quote:

---

So, can you? Thinks past the present and imagine a different future? I've asked... oh, I dunno... three or four times now. I don't want to jump the gun and start giving you my ideas, I want to see yours. Not looking for a "prediction" but some blue-sky thinking. At the beginning of a brainstorming session, one NEVER rejects ideas for being "impractical", so fire away.

---

Quote:

---

America, tired of the same old politics and government, overwhelmingly adopts a Libertarian philosophy and the Non-aggression Principle - Libertarians sweep the 2016 elections. We bring the troops home and stop all foreign aid. Government support for insurance of coastal dwellings and those on floodplains goes away. Subsidies for coal go away (yes, there are some http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/04/13/463874/top-three-ways-that
-american-taxpayers-subsidize-dirty-coal-development/ ).

Embracing the Libertarian philosopy of self-reliance, and the understanding that initiating violence - physical, emotional, or environmental - against others is wrong, individuals strive to reduce their energy footprint and reduce pollution and carbon generation. Entrepeneurs find ways to, for example, capture the methane in cow farts and use it to generate clean energy.

Seeing the success of Americans in breaking free of massive, all-controlling government, people around the world rise up in Libertarian revolutions - recognizing that while one should not initiate violence, it is perfectly appropriate to violence initiated agains oneself.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hypocrite. You had your chance, Geezer. Yes, indeed.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Americans actually do care a lot about the environment, especially global warming.

---

Quote:

---

You apparently think that there is a solution, but seem unwilling to state it. Put up or shut up.

---

Quote:

---

America, tired of the same old politics and government, overwhelmingly adopts a Libertarian philosophy and the Non-aggression Principle - Libertarians sweep the 2016 elections. We bring the troops home and stop all foreign aid. Government support for insurance of coastal dwellings and those on floodplains goes away. Subsidies for coal go away (yes, there are some http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/04/13/463874/top-three-ways-that
-american-taxpayers-subsidize-dirty-coal-development/ ).

Embracing the Libertarian philosopy of self-reliance, and the understanding that initiating violence - physical, emotional, or environmental - against others is wrong, individuals strive to reduce their energy footprint and reduce pollution and carbon generation. Entrepeneurs find ways to, for example, capture the methane in cow farts and use it to generate clean energy.

Seeing the success of Americans in breaking free of massive, all-controlling government, people around the world rise up in Libertarian revolutions - recognizing that while one should not initiate violence, it is perfectly appropriate to violence initiated agains oneself.


Now, I don't think this is likely, but I also am not to sure about any other scheme for getting most everyone on the planet to "go hell-for-leather" for reductions in energy usage or carbon emissions reduction.

---

Quote:

---

As noted before, I think some problems are beyond solution by one country or set of countries. I've stated my reasons for believing this

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

America, tired of the same old politics and government, overwhelmingly adopts a Libertarian philosophy and the Non-aggression Principle - Libertarians sweep the 2016 elections. We bring the troops home and stop all foreign aid. Government support for insurance of coastal dwellings and those on floodplains goes away. Subsidies for coal go away (yes, there are some
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/04/13/463874/top-three-ways-that
-american-taxpayers-subsidize-dirty-coal-development/ ).

Embracing the Libertarian philosopy of self-reliance, and the understanding that initiating violence - physical, emotional, or environmental - against others is wrong, individuals strive to reduce their energy footprint and reduce pollution and carbon generation. Entrepeneurs find ways to, for example, capture the methane in cow farts and use it to generate clean energy.

Seeing the success of Americans in breaking free of massive, all-controlling government, people around the world rise up in Libertarian revolutions - recognizing that while one should not initiate violence, it is perfectly appropriate to violence initiated agains oneself.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
The biggest contributors to global emissions in 2011 were China (2.5 PgC, 28%), the United States (1.5 PgC, 16%), the European Union (EU27; 1.0 PgC, 11%), and India (0.6 PgC, 7%).

...

So let's say that the US CAN technically achieve an emissions reduction of 1/3 over the next 12 years (0.5 PgC), and the EU can reduce their emissions by another 1/5 (0.2 PgC). That's a 0.7 PgC per year reduction after 12 years between the two of them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
So explain it to us in a way that will convince a majority of American voters. Remember, that's your standard for Kiki and Signy, so please stick to it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
As far as Geezer is concerned.... still waiting for ideas, I guess! I tried to give hm some starter ideas, yanno- like a starter culture. Maybe he's fresh out?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Also if you can find any evidence that SignyM's and KIKI's proposals to reduce U.S. carbon emissions by 1/3 or 1/2 or 4/5 are actually feasible, I'd be happy to see that too.

---

Oh, so you ARE discussing the topic? HAHHAHAHAHA! Thought so!

And yanno, the funny thing is, I keep saying I'm look for ideas, not proposals. In fact, I specifically said "I'm not looking for solutions to put on a development grant" (ie, a proposal). And so far, I haven't made any "proposals", I've provided three nascent ideas with the thought that perhaps they might spark other, possibly better ideas.

And finally- not that I'm trying to dictate where people post, but I keep trying to corral the discussion in the original thread, so it can be contemplated with all of the original context. So FWIW, here is the link, again.

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=55505

---

Quote:

---

I often find that statement, or something similar, in discussions here and elsewhere. It seems to me to be the same wishful thinking as "If you believe it, you can fly", but expanded to "If everyone would just believe it, we could all fly"

---

Quote:

---

Could this be because you don't have any real solutions yourself? That you know that the problem is not amenible to solution, but hope that "If you wish hard enough you can fly"?... .

---

Quote:

---

If you don't think that can occur, then you can hardly support the idea of a Libertarian society.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
So explain it to us in a way that will convince a majority of American voters. Remember, that's your standard for Kiki and Signy, so please stick to it.

---

Interesting that you left out the bit where I said I didn't think this was likely.

---