Global Warming?

[crash325]

I'm in Melbourne outer eastern metropolitan area in Australia now and its rather cold and wet, so if the planet is warming can you please send some of it to us so we can reduce using gas and electricity to keep us citizens in reasonable comfort.

Our Australian Labor Party in coalition with the minority Greens Party have in their infinite wisdom introduced a CARBON TAX in their belief that we will change our behaviour and use less fossil fuels by increasing the prices.

Dirty industries such as electricity generated with coal fired power stations are going to have to increase their prices of electricity to cover the extra $23 per tonne of carbon tax.... so i guess some of the poorer people will switch to using wood fired heating systems which tend to generate extra smoke, but the weathy will continue to use as before and the middle classes will try and reduce heating their larger homes by closing off some rooms but then decide that they can cut out other expenditure to cover their basic primary need for warmth and food. Prices will go up and consumers might vote the current political members out of office at the next elections.

I'm thinking the best way to try keep Australia in a pristine carbon free zone is to export all our 24 Million people including natives to China or the USA if you'll have us. We will need an income to pay our way and we would want to keep exporting the minerals like iron ore & coal to china where they can continue to burn fuels to make the things we need like cars and computers, Unfortunately we wont be able to control bush fires which creates carbon dioxide during bushfires, but thats ok according to the Greenies. And then we will still need to keep our little army on site to protect our minerals from being stolen by other nearby nations, but wait why would they not just move 150 Million people in anyway as we have lots of dams and other infrustructure and our houses are more than big enough to house 6 times more people. Back to square one, except the Greens wont have any power to stop 150 million new invaders and the cycle starts all over again.

My view is ...instead of introducing all these new taxes and punishing its citizens for daring to live a reasonable lifestyle and to subsidise uneconomic renewable products made from fossel fuels, why dont the many government funded R & D departments use their skills and those of the many University professors throughout the world to continue the research begun by Nicola Tesla and or also to offer TAX FREE status rewards for inventions to both individuals as well as to corporations who can develope low input high output energy systems, on their own and without government assistance or subsidies. ie Tax benefits after they are proven to work in a free market financial environment, but certainly no reward until it works.

The current methods used by various governments throughout the western communities seem designed to benefit our trading competitors and punishing all our western citizens except those companies who are peddling unproven and uneconomic renewable energies for inexperienced gullible politicians who are trying to second guess and pick winners. The reality is when governments have tried to create wealth they usually destroy it instead, especially when our manufacturing jobs are dissapearing in Australia and the USA due to excessive increases in energy and labour cost for the direct benefit of the cheaper asian situated workforces where there are no punishing taxes for CO2 emissions which incidently plants use to convert to OXYGEN.

Why dont farmers and forestry owners earn cash for oxygen they create on there farms?..

Now can I take this opportunity to suggest a total re-definition of the meaning of true work......a farmer or a factory worker is a real worker, but a government "worker" sitting in an office writing up reports and collecting taxes is hardly a worker IMHO. Anyone have any opinions on this topic and my other comments above?

I have always thought the Aussies had more common sense than the USA politicians. Now it look's like they are just as bad or as stupid as ours.

Well written post.

 

[Loren49]

Some information on subsidies by energy source. First source includes the substantial hidden costs also.

Wind Power Subsidies Don’t Compare to Fossil Fuel & Nuclear Subsidies - CleanTechnica

With wind getting it痴 choice between a 2.2 cent PTC or a 30% first year tax credit or a cash grant, the production cost of wind energy is approximately 6.7 cents (4.5 cents plus 2.2 cents) minus whatever profit the owners put in their pockets. For comparison, coal wholesales for 5 cents but has approximately 18 cents in hidden costs and nuclear gets about 6 cents per kWh in subsidies, bringing its unsubsidized price up to about 10-12 cents per kWh.

So, without subsidies, prices would be something like this:
■Wind: 6-7 cents/kWh
■Nuclear: 11-20+ cents/kWh
■Coal: 9-32+ cents/kWh

Source: Clean Technica (Wind Power Subsidies Don’t Compare to Fossil Fuel & Nuclear Subsidies - CleanTechnica)

Loren

 

[EE_Bota]

Our Australian Labor Party in coalition with the minority Greens Party have in their infinite wisdom introduced a CARBON TAX in their belief that we will change our behaviour...

<snip>

Prices will go up and consumers might vote the current political members out of office at the next elections.

Ahh..when I read the first part, I thought...you guys need to....and then I saw you knew the solution, and see it on the horizon. So, things will be righted in the end.

 

[crash325]

Coal fired plants can be clean.

They are not. I showed reams of evidence on this. Coal is the biggest polluter in the US. So everyone in southern AZ is going to die from all that pollution. Not to mention lots of northern AZ and everyone in the 4 corners area. You post the same old stale BS web sites over & over again. You are also wrong on biggest polluter in the US. Forrest fires are making more pollution than everything man is doing.

There are more ways to save energy than solar and wind or water.

I never said there weren't BUT PV, wind and hydro are our best alternatives at this point. - If all this is so great and good, why does it cost .25 to .35 cents a KWH after all the 'Gov $$$ poured into it. Fossil fuel power plants produce the same energy at .05 cents.

Steel, copper, aluminum & plastic all cost more than 10 years ago.

PV prices have dropped dramatically in the past ten years. Go check today prices. Yep they have come way down. But the steel, copper & aluminum to mount & install them have gone up.

You can not produce copper or steel without fossil fuel.

Not true, you can use electricity. The metal doesn't care what produces that electricity. You don't seem to have a clue as to how much energy it takes to refine these metals on a large scale.

Aluminum requires so much energy to produce it's doubt full that wind or solar could ever do the job.

Not true, see above answer. Initially the only place in the US that had enough electric power was in the north west and lots of hydro dams.

You brag about you fine big house that you built. Out of New Lumber?? Why not use reclaimed lumber??? It could have been built out of adobe or rammed earth, very little heating or cooling.

It's not big BUT it was built to maximize wind and sun. It's efficient, not big. It is as easy to cool and heat as adobe (not viable here or rammed earth) I felt insulation and building wise it is best suited to this area to build out of wood. I planted trees to more than replace the lumber I used in its construction. I'm impressed, you planted a few trees. How did you make up the fossil fuel used to cut, mill and transport that lumber??? Did you even look into recycled lumber?? Adobe not viable?? Last time I checked they were made out of dirt. No Dirt where you live???

Explain why other people should be helping to pay for your energy. You claim to be some big deal inventor, why aren't those inventions paying for your energy???

I did pay two thirds, the government only gives me back 30%, I put in the rest. Also new technology benefits us all, just as the technology we paid for from the space program benefited everyone. We all paid for it and we all benefited from it. Did you object to subsidization of other technologies that you benefited from? Food, nuclear, fossil fuel, etc. Alternate grants and subsidies are available to everyone including you. Poor baby you had to pay for 2/3s of it yourself. Want me to send you a few $$ to help you out?? I'd like to know how to get some of those grants or subsidies, without spending a bunch of $$$. Space program benefited everyone. Now tell me how you getting free electricity benefits me or anyone else. Some how I have missed out on the food food benefits. Are you getting Food Stamps, is that what you mean????

Rob

I know that you have an agenda and facts or ideas not fitting in are just plain wrong. To me that is Selective Ignorance.

I say something bad about Lithium batteries and you turn that into me wanting a Pinto. You could not even stick up for the batteries. You did not have anything to say about the warning label on a package with a little cell phone battery in it.

 

[Rob-D]

This I have to SEE. Prove what you just said is true.



OK exactly which which subsidies are available to me. Exactly which subsidies are given to nuclear, oil coal etc.?

http://www.energy.ca.gov/process/pubs/pq_inductn_melting_tc114625.pdf


Induction Furnace: Inductotherm

Inductotherm's induction melting furnaces and charging systems are ideal for alloy critical casting operations, such as the manufacturing of aluminum wheels, where inductive stirring provides a high level of alloy and temperature homogeneity. Inductotherm also manufactures the patented Acutrak's DEH Crucible Furnace. This unique aluminum melting and holding induction furnace uses an air-cooled, direct electric heating system that is more efficient, environmentally friendly and assures more accurate temperature control of molten metal.

Why alternatives of course, they are available to everyone!

US Coal Subsidy $345 billion: Harvard Study Commercial Climate

Through incorporating externalities into their lifecycle analysis, Harvard researchers have discovered the true extent of subsidies to coal in the United States: $345 billion.

Nuclear Power Subsidies Will Shift Financial Risks to Taxpayers (2010) | Union of Concerned Scientists

Nuclear Power Subsidies Will Shift Financial Risks to Taxpayers

Nuclear Subsidies in the American Power Act (APA) and the American Clean Energy Leadership Act (ACELA)


Rob

 

[Rob-D]

I know that you have an agenda and facts or ideas not fitting in are just plain wrong. To me that is Selective Ignorance.

I say something bad about Lithium batteries and you turn that into me wanting a Pinto. You could not even stick up for the batteries. You did not have anything to say about the warning label on a package with a little cell phone battery in it.

Lithium battery technology suffered from poor charging algorithm design parameters that have been resolved. Pinto gas tanks blew up on read collision, which was resolved in later Ford products (hopefully).
You made the remark about insurance and buying an EV with batteries that caught fire, I just reminded you of a failed opportunity with the Pinto.

Rob

 

[Rob-D]

Ahh..when I read the first part, I thought...you guys need to....and then I saw you knew the solution, and see it on the horizon. So, things will be righted in the end.

Or maybe they will stay right in office.

Higher cigarette taxes don't deter all smokers, study finds; Smokers aged 25 to 44 most unresponsive to price increases

Higher Cigarette Taxes Don't Deter All Smokers, Study Finds; Smokers Aged 25 to 44 Most Unresponsive to Price Increases


ScienceDaily (July 13, 2011) Raising taxes on cigarettes, a public health measure used by governments to encourage people to quit, doesn't motivate all smokers to stop the deadly habit.



Rob

 

[Rob-D]

...And another thing about the (non) global warming fiasco. Hot off the newswire:

1930s photos show Greenland glaciers retreating faster than today: But nobody thought it was a big deal!
(By Lewis Page, Posted in Science, 2nd June 2012)
"Recently unearthed photographs taken by Danish explorers in the 1930s show glaciers in Greenland retreating faster than they are today, according to researchers...
The photos in question were taken by the seventh Thule Expedition to Greenland led by Dr Knud Rasmussen in 1932. The explorers were equipped with a seaplane, which they used to take aerial snaps of glaciers along the Arctic island's coasts...
After the expedition returned the photographs were used to make maps and charts of the area, then placed in archives in Denmark where they lay forgotten for decades. Then, in recent years, international researchers trying to find information on the history of the Greenland glaciers stumbled across them...
Taken together the pictures show clearly that glaciers in the region were melting even faster in the 1930s than they are today, according to Professor Jason Box, who works at the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University..."

So there!!

Apparently you missed the article about the town in Alaska relocating because of melting permafrost.

 

[Rob-D]

I know that you have an agenda and facts or ideas not fitting in are just plain wrong. To me that is Selective Ignorance.

I say something bad about Lithium batteries and you turn that into me wanting a Pinto. You could not even stick up for the batteries. You did not have anything to say about the warning label on a package with a little cell phone battery in it.

If you want me to respond to your other statement please use correct quoting procedures.
Thanks.

Rob

 

[Rob-D]

Why do you run your mouth when you have NO clue?

Angry aggressiveness:

Anger has it roots in fear, it is the result of unfulfilled expectations. We build a reality and when that reality is challenged we get angry. What we are expressing is our fear, specifically our fear that the foundation we have constructed around us, that we want to believe is valid, may not be.