The Climate Crisis Is Now a WAR

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Naomi Klein says the climate crisis is now a war: “We need to grow out of the story that some politician is going to come along and save us”

http://www.salon.com/2015/09/15/nao...us/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

 

[Mat_Hawks]

Hopefully it will be more successful than the War on Drugs

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Hopefully it will be more successful than the War on Drugs

Successful for whom?

I suspect Mother Nature will successfully kick our butts unless we get our act together.

 

[NoleandDawg]

Crisis? Seems like the weather is about the same as it always is. It did rain a little yesterday but I'd hardly call that a crisis.

 

[HawkAttackDial911]

Crisis? Seems like the weather is about the same as it always is. It did rain a little yesterday but I'd hardly call that a crisis.

Always forward thinking I see. She's right though. If there truly is a climate crisis, you can't expect some politicians to save us.

 

[theVoicefromtheTomb]

Successful for whom?

I suspect Mother Nature will successfully kick our butts unless we get our act together.

I think it is a foregone conclusion that at some point in time man will go as the dinosaur went. Doing it to ourselves by fouling the environment we need to exist seems to be a highly likely path.

 

[22*43*51]

The War on ???

Tired marketing.

 

[CeMar_Clone]

Naomi Klein says the climate crisis is now a war: “We need to grow out of the story that some politician is going to come along and save us”

http://www.salon.com/2015/09/15/nao...us/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

I think these people are complete morons, but I am always interested in alternatives that will make my life better and cheaper. So what is the alternative to the grid here in Iowa.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I think these people are complete morons, but I am always interested in alternatives that will make my life better and cheaper. So what is the alternative to the grid here in Iowa.

The grid? Why are you asking for an alternative to the grid?

 

[DrVenkman]

The grid? Why are you asking for an alternative to the grid?

Maybe because that is something that is going on now in Hawaii with some consumer customers going off the electric grid. They have enough solar there that this is reality albeit on a small scale now. the hope is that a much more robust and cheaper fuel cell (see Elon Musk) may come along that could be sold on a residential basis along with a solar platform to get folks off the grid. This of course would rely on substantial govt subsidies- across the board.

I think Neomi and team should spend more time in China. I understand going after the Canadians but the biggest shock to the world system in in China.

 

[CeMar_Clone]

The grid? Why are you asking for an alternative to the grid?

As the article says the price of solar is coming down. If we want people to get off carbon energy, then we need something even better. The solution is not with mandates, it is not with subsidies, it is not fuel cells for a "tiny" movement house. If you want people off carbon fuels, then give them something better. I personally have checked into solar shingles, fuel cells, windmills for the home. So far not one of them is a smart decision to invest in. If we want to have this work here is what has to happen:

1) It has to be cheaper than what we have today( and this means no subsidies as well)
2) Every bit as reliable as the grid today.
3) Can not have any impact on my life of home style. Not interested in joining the "tiny" house movement in other words.
4) ROI must be very short time, like 2 years.
5) Does not require any governmental involvement.

What is going to save the environment in the long haul is a better mouse trap, not all the other crap that is being proposed.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

As the article says the price of solar is coming down. If we want people to get off carbon energy, then we need something even better. The solution is not with mandates, it is not with subsidies, it is not fuel cells for a "tiny" movement house. If you want people off carbon fuels, then give them something better. I personally have checked into solar shingles, fuel cells, windmills for the home. So far not one of them is a smart decision to invest in. If we want to have this work here is what has to happen:

1) It has to be cheaper than what we have today( and this means no subsidies as well)
2) Every bit as reliable as the grid today.
3) Can not have any impact on my life of home style. Not interested in joining the "tiny" house movement in other words.
4) ROI must be very short time, like 2 years.
5) Does not require any governmental involvement.

What is going to save the environment in the long haul is a better mouse trap, not all the other crap that is being proposed.

I don't agree with most of your numbered points, but I still don't know why you are focusing on grid. I mean I think doing something with our grid like Germany did makes sense. And we are told our grid needs repair and modernization. So let's do that. But I don't see that we need an alternative to the grid. We mainly need greener ways to feed the grid.

 

[Joes Place]

As the article says the price of solar is coming down. If we want people to get off carbon energy, then we need something even better. The solution is not with mandates, it is not with subsidies, it is not fuel cells for a "tiny" movement house. If you want people off carbon fuels, then give them something better. I personally have checked into solar shingles, fuel cells, windmills for the home. So far not one of them is a smart decision to invest in. If we want to have this work here is what has to happen:

1) It has to be cheaper than what we have today( and this means no subsidies as well)
2) Every bit as reliable as the grid today.
3) Can not have any impact on my life of home style. Not interested in joining the "tiny" house movement in other words.
4) ROI must be very short time, like 2 years.
5) Does not require any governmental involvement.

What is going to save the environment in the long haul is a better mouse trap, not all the other crap that is being proposed.

Really? 2 year ROI?

That's not even remotely close to the cost structure or ROI for new coal or natural gas power plants...
You have 'subsidized' the energy model you use now for many decades; you 'pay' for the new coal or natural gas plant, or new high-voltage transmission lines thru line item costs on your bill, where someone ELSE pays out the major investment, pays the interest on the loan, and then charges you for those additional costs every month, practically forever (most of those are 20 yr to 30 yr ROI; they utilize 30 year or 40 year loans which are completely invisible to you).

Are you claiming that you wouldn't buy an LED bulb that was a 60 or 100W equivalent, because it costs 20x more than a standard incandescent, but the ROI is 3 years or 5 years? And once that ROI is met, you have continued cost savings for another 15-20 years??!!!

FWIW, rooftop solar may require a 10-15 yr ROI, but based upon reasonable assumptions for energy cost increases vs time and a 30 year lifetime for the panels (which most are warranted for), investment in solar can equate to a 4% to 5% year-over-year return for the 30 years. That's not bad, considering once you put the panels up, there's practically no risk to the ROI and cash flow.

The main issue with wind and solar is energy storage; you get power when the wind blows or sun shines, not on demand. Once energy storage costs drop enough to compete with standard 'central grid' technology, we will see a major shift in energy use and distribution, with localities setting up their own 'storage' areas and only pulling from the grid during extreme events/high usage.

 

[Run&Blade]

Couple of panels on my roof isn't going to do jack if China is allowed to run straight pipe from all its factories.

It is all politics and a money grab.

When the movement includes a mandate that all imported goods must come from factories that have passed the same environmental standards as U.S. Factories you can tell me this is about the planet.

Until that time everybody can just shut their collective holes, because if the rest of the world isn't reined in this is nothing more than masturbation by the tree huggers.

 

[Joes Place]

Couple of panels on my roof isn't going to do jack if China is allowed to run straight pipe from all its factories.

It is all politics and a money grab.

When the movement includes a mandate that all imported goods must come from factories that have passed the same environmental standards as U.S. Factories you can tell me this is about the planet.

Until that time everybody can just shut their collective holes, because if the rest of the world isn't reined in this is nothing more than masturbation by the tree huggers.

FYI - China is installing renewable energy at a pace far faster than the US is....and they are likely to meet their 2030 target nearly a decade sooner - not a trivial accomplishment, considering the economic growth there and the extremely high dependence on coal for electricity.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Couple of panels on my roof isn't going to do jack if China is allowed to run straight pipe from all its factories.

If someone used this same reasoning to argue against stopping child abuse, or against stopping slave labor, you would reject it out of hand.

Why do you find it convincing in this context?

 

[IACub]

FYI - China is installing renewable energy at a pace far faster than the US is....and they are likely to meet their 2030 target nearly a decade sooner - not a trivial accomplishment, considering the economic growth there and the extremely high dependence on coal for electricity.

China can install renewable energy faster because their big business belongs to the government, not the other way around.

 

[Joes Place]

China can install renewable energy faster because their big business belongs to the government, not the other way around.

So? The criticism was that 'China won't do jack'; the reality is they are ramping up renewable energy sources much faster than us and much of the world, and appear likely to meet their 2030 commitment a decade early.

 

[86Hawkeye]

Successful for whom?

I suspect Mother Nature will successfully kick our butts unless we get our act together.

I suspect Mother Nature will by-and-large do what she wants regardless of what we do.

 

[Run&Blade]

China is choking from pollution their air quality is a joke.

Climate change was happening long before man. If you want to hu trees for no reason at least level the playing field.

Comparing child abuse to a theory that man is contributing to climate change. Now that is rich.

 

[IMCC965]

FYI - China is installing renewable energy at a pace far faster than the US is....and they are likely to meet their 2030 target nearly a decade sooner - not a trivial accomplishment, considering the economic growth there and the extremely high dependence on coal for electricity.

Yeah. China is light years ahead of us.

 

[Rifler]

I don't agree with most of your numbered points, but I still don't know why you are focusing on grid. I mean I think doing something with our grid like Germany did makes sense. And we are told our grid needs repair and modernization. So let's do that. But I don't see that we need an alternative to the grid. We mainly need greener ways to feed the grid.

I think a major grid improvement project would pay huge dividends down the road. What we have now is a lot like the tangled mess of Christmas tree lights that I put up every year. A proper grid would be much better equipped to accept energy from many of the alternative sources that we really can't capitalize on right now. As a project this could be likened to a modern version of Eisenhower's interstate highway initiative.....

 

[naturalmwa]

I think a major grid improvement project would pay huge dividends down the road. What we have now is a lot like the tangled mess of Christmas tree lights that I put up every year. A proper grid would be much better equipped to accept energy from many of the alternative sources that we really can't capitalize on right now. As a project this could be likened to a modern version of Eisenhower's interstate highway initiative.....

This seems wise, but how should it be paid for? I assume since you referenced Eisenhower's interstate highways you see this a a public project paid for with taxes? If that's so, should the tax payers get to keep control of the grid and charge profit making utilities to use it? Should electric utilities be nationalized? Should the tax to pay for this only be on electricity so that the utilities and their customers are paying directly? Does it make sense for the whole nation to pool resources to do this nationally or would we be better off incentivizing local efforts and non-grid generation? Lots of practical and ideological questions to be answered.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

1) It has to be cheaper than what we have today( and this means no subsidies as well)
2) Every bit as reliable as the grid today.
3) Can not have any impact on my life of home style. Not interested in joining the "tiny" house movement in other words.
4) ROI must be very short time, like 2 years.
5) Does not require any governmental involvement.

Until you factor in the true cost of fossil fuel use, this is an impossibility.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Yeah. China is light years ahead of us.

That's the best you can do? The Chinese are shutting down coal plants across the country. They are leaders in the development of solar cells and wind turbines...a lead we ceded to them. That battle is over. When the world looks for top solar or wind technology, they won't be looking to the US.

 

[Rifler]

This seems wise, but how should it be paid for? I assume since you referenced Eisenhower's interstate highways you see this a a public project paid for with taxes? If that's so, should the tax payers get to keep control of the grid and charge profit making utilities to use it? Should electric utilities be nationalized? Should the tax to pay for this only be on electricity so that the utilities and their customers are paying directly? Does it make sense for the whole nation to pool resources to do this nationally or would we be better off incentivizing local efforts and non-grid generation? Lots of practical and ideological questions to be answered.

I think this would have to be a government project as it is too large an undertaking for the private sector. Plus I doubt that the ROI would materialize soon enough to interest the normal big energy players. I see the modern grid working as an energy transportation tool that can be used to accept energy where it's most efficiently produced and dispense energy where it's most needed. Utilities don't need to be nationalized but I would see them paying to use the grid to move their product.....

 

[SSG T]

This seems wise, but how should it be paid for? I assume since you referenced Eisenhower's interstate highways you see this a a public project paid for with taxes? If that's so, should the tax payers get to keep control of the grid and charge profit making utilities to use it? Should electric utilities be nationalized? Should the tax to pay for this only be on electricity so that the utilities and their customers are paying directly? Does it make sense for the whole nation to pool resources to do this nationally or would we be better off incentivizing local efforts and non-grid generation? Lots of practical and ideological questions to be answered.

Have a two year moratorium on all weapon system spending for the military. We're talking new items here, not Class IX repair parts or MWOs (modification work orders). No new fighters, destroyers, carriers, tanks, ie major weapon systems. Use that money to start an upgrade. It won't pay for all of it, but it would be a good start and we don't need new of any of those things in the next two years.

At the end of two years, review and either keep the moratorium or go back to spending on stuff we don't need.

 

[Joes Place]

I think this would have to be a government project as it is too large an undertaking for the private sector. Plus I doubt that the ROI would materialize soon enough to interest the normal big energy players. I see the modern grid working as an energy transportation tool that can be used to accept energy where it's most efficiently produced and dispense energy where it's most needed. Utilities don't need to be nationalized but I would see them paying to use the grid to move their product.....

I agree; only it may not be something the federal government needs to be directly involved in, unless states/localities decide that's the best option for them. Each locality should identify energy needs and plan for their own local distributed generation and storage; the federal government could provide low-interest and backed funding (backed municipal securities, etc) for the projects.

Generally, energy companies with centralized structure (e.g. big power plants) are not in favor of these types of systems, because it ultimately means lower energy use from their power plants - and many are still paying on the 30-40 year loans for building the existing infrastructure. It would make sense to try to bring them into the fold to build and manage the distributed systems, but the know-how to do that is outside of their traditional 'swing lanes'. Thus, this becomes a challenging problem politically - Big Energy wants to protect its turf, only the game is changing with the rapid development of distributed systems.

Perhaps the federal government could help with backing munis or loans to the major energy suppliers to incentivize distributed grids; whatever the final solution is, there does need to be some federal-level or top-level planning and standards in place so that different distributed parts of the 'new grid' can operate seamlessly.

 

[naturalmwa]

Have a two year moratorium on all weapon system spending for the military. We're talking new items here, not Class IX repair parts or MWOs (modification work orders). No new fighters, destroyers, carriers, tanks, ie major weapon systems. Use that money to start an upgrade. It won't pay for all of it, but it would be a good start and we don't need new of any of those things in the next two years.

At the end of two years, review and either keep the moratorium or go back to spending on stuff we don't need.

So your not in agreement with Carly? IIRC you have special standing to speak with some authority on this point.

 

[IACub]

So? The criticism was that 'China won't do jack'; the reality is they are ramping up renewable energy sources much faster than us and much of the world, and appear likely to meet their 2030 commitment a decade early.

Right, I agree with you. I'm saying they can do it because they aren't beholden to corporations.

 

[Rifler]

I agree; only it may not be something the federal government needs to be directly involved in, unless states/localities decide that's the best option for them. Each locality should identify energy needs and plan for their own local distributed generation and storage; the federal government could provide low-interest and backed funding (backed municipal securities, etc) for the projects.

Generally, energy companies with centralized structure (e.g. big power plants) are not in favor of these types of systems, because it ultimately means lower energy use from their power plants - and many are still paying on the 30-40 year loans for building the existing infrastructure. It would make sense to try to bring them into the fold to build and manage the distributed systems, but the know-how to do that is outside of their traditional 'swing lanes'. Thus, this becomes a challenging problem politically - Big Energy wants to protect its turf, only the game is changing with the rapid development of distributed systems.

Perhaps the federal government could help with backing munis or loans to the major energy suppliers to incentivize distributed grids; whatever the final solution is, there does need to be some federal-level or top-level planning and standards in place so that different distributed parts of the 'new grid' can operate seamlessly.

Personally, I really think this has to be a federal project. Allowing individual localities to get involved in the grid design will simply give us a new version of what we currently have. Imagine a massive solar array located in the Arizona desert being able to feed the grid with the idea that New York City was a potential user. Do you think that energy players in the midwest would try to accommodate this type of far range thinking when working out thier little piece of the puzzle? Again I'll compare it to the interstate highway system. When Ike built it there were a lot of people who thought it was nothing more than a nice surface to roller skate on out in the middle of nowhere. Today it's apparent how it has totally transformed this country....

 

[SSG T]

So your not in agreement with Carly? IIRC you have special standing to speak with some authority on this point.

I don't know, what was her idea?

I would say authority, though I have had to deal with component level (NGB, USAR, AC) funding for the last few years as part of my job. So I see how the interplay works and have to keep an eye on where the money is coming from and going to.

For the record, I've long maintained that military spending could be slashed greatly without affecting readiness or combat power, but that no one would do so, mainly for reasons Eisenhower laid out 55 years ago.

 

[naturalmwa]

I don't know, what was her idea?

I would say authority, though I have had to deal with component level (NGB, USAR, AC) funding for the last few years as part of my job. So I see how the interplay works and have to keep an eye on where the money is coming from and going to.

For the record, I've long maintained that military spending could be slashed greatly without affecting readiness or combat power, but that no one would do so, mainly for reasons Eisenhower laid out 55 years ago.

Her plan was rebuild the 6th fleet (do you know what that entails?) missile defense in Poland, more troops in Germany, exercises with the Balkin states. Rubio wants new subs. Graham want 10k in Syria.

 

[SSG T]

Her plan was rebuild the 6th fleet (do you know what that entails?) missile defense in Poland, more troops in Germany, exercises with the Balkin states. Rubio wants new subs. Graham want 10k in Syria.

All they would "need" to do is move more existing ships out of lesser needed command and into 6th Fleet command. They don't need to acquire more "stuff", they just need to shift existing stuff. I'm good with that.

My guess is what they are talking about is acquisition of more stuff. They don't need that.

Stuff = resources (ships, aircraft, missiles, ie hardware)

 

[IMCC965]

That's the best you can do? The Chinese are shutting down coal plants across the country. They are leaders in the development of solar cells and wind turbines...a lead we ceded to them. That battle is over. When the world looks for top solar or wind technology, they won't be looking to the US.

OK. How about this one…….isn't it beautiful? Looks like they're REALLY taking the lead here……