It is so easy to blame a politician, who has been in office for less than three years, for decades of bad policy and out of control growth/consumption!
So lets take a look at so called 'Alternatives' and see if any of them put together would actually stop the storm that is coming!
First, lets ban ALL fossil fuels - coal, oil, tar sands, natural gas. Would that stop our planet from heating up? Answer: Not really. Our planet will continue to heat up for the next 30 - 40 years. That is the part that people don't understand and while our planet continues to heat up, Methane levels would also rise - Google Methane as a greenhouse gas.
If we stopped all man made sources today, how long before the planet scrubs the CO2 that we released? Well in the year 3030, CO2 levels will still be in the 370 - 380 ppm range - which would mean that the planet would still be warming. CO2 levels need to be below 300 ppm in order for our planet to return to a more natural state!
Plus, since all fossil use would be stopped, our society will have trouble making the steel, concrete, solar panels, turbines, fertilizer, clothing, food, medicine... for the almost 8 billion people on the planet!
It is easy to point out the faults of others and blame people for the mess our planet is in... It is a lot harder to come up with real life practical solutions that would keep everyone happy!
Okay, stop using coal... what are you going to replace it with that does not produce CO2 at any time?
It is so easy to blame a politician, who has been in office for less than three years, for decades of bad policy and out of control growth/consumption!
So lets take a look at so called 'Alternatives' and see if any of them put together would actually stop the storm that is coming!
First, lets ban ALL fossil fuels - coal, oil, tar sands, natural gas. Would that stop our planet from heating up? Answer: Not really. Our planet will continue to heat up for the next 30 - 40 years. That is the part that people don't understand and while our planet continues to heat up, Methane levels would also rise - Google Methane as a greenhouse gas.
If we stopped all man made sources today, how long before the planet scrubs the CO2 that we released? Well in the year 3030, CO2 levels will still be in the 370 - 380 ppm range - which would mean that the planet would still be warming. CO2 levels need to be below 300 ppm in order for our planet to return to a more natural state!
Plus, since all fossil use would be stopped, our society will have trouble making the steel, concrete, solar panels, turbines, fertilizer, clothing, food, medicine... for the almost 8 billion people on the planet!
It is easy to point out the faults of others and blame people for the mess our planet is in... It is a lot harder to come up with real life practical solutions that would keep everyone happy!
Okay, stop using coal... what are you going to replace it with that does not produce CO2 at any time?
It is so easy to blame a politician, who has been in office for less than three years, for decades of bad policy and out of control growth/consumption!
So lets take a look at so called 'Alternatives' and see if any of them put together would actually stop the storm that is coming!
First, lets ban ALL fossil fuels - coal, oil, tar sands, natural gas. Would that stop our planet from heating up? Answer: Not really. Our planet will continue to heat up for the next 30 - 40 years. That is the part that people don't understand and while our planet continues to heat up, Methane levels would also rise - Google Methane as a greenhouse gas.
If we stopped all man made sources today, how long before the planet scrubs the CO2 that we released? Well in the year 3030, CO2 levels will still be in the 370 - 380 ppm range - which would mean that the planet would still be warming. CO2 levels need to be below 300 ppm in order for our planet to return to a more natural state!
Plus, since all fossil use would be stopped, our society will have trouble making the steel, concrete, solar panels, turbines, fertilizer, clothing, food, medicine... for the almost 8 billion people on the planet!
It is easy to point out the faults of others and blame people for the mess our planet is in... It is a lot harder to come up with real life practical solutions that would keep everyone happy!
Okay, stop using coal... what are you going to replace it with that does not produce CO2 at any time?
@The Critic nuclear power. Zero CO2 production and incredibly more reliable. Next.
2
"Nuclear power. Zero CO2 production and incredibly more reliable. Next."
????
The use of Concrete for Nuclear Power Plants produces tons of CO2 plus, as the movie "Into Eternity" by Danish director Michael Madse shows, we don't have any way to control the waste. I am all for Nuclear Power but at the same time I am fully aware of its shortcomings. Thorium reactors would be far safer than today's nuclear power plants!
Zero CO2 production?
Considering that Solar, Wind, Hydrogen all involve the use of Fossil Fuels only shows that people have little understanding of the problems our world is facing!
Energy dominance includes every variety of energy, it is only focused on oil and natural gas because they are the largest forms of energy today. Nothing should get in the way, but of course progressives love to obstruct improvements, so they might attempt to do so.
How many American homes could have received free rooftop solar energy if we never decided to have a war with Iraq that cost at least one trillion dollars? This would have put us not just on a great path to energy independence, but a clean and sustainable one as well. Shucks, a missed opportunity, but we did make a couple of defense contractors ultra wealthy and created some jobs at the VA to take care of maimed vets.
1
@Gene Cass If Iraq was not changed we might have a nuclear war in the Middle East, imagine the costs of that. And there is not enough raw materials to do that either in a short period of time either.
The instability in the Middle East was caused by the war in Iraq. There were no weapons of Mass Destruction. It was a hoax perpetrated by W and Cheney. Next?
It is easy to point out problems. It is also easy to blame others. What is hard is coming up with practical solutions that would actually work!
So lets try to explain this so that people will start to think about the issue, then get on Google and see if what I am about to say is even close to the truth.
First, lets try to tax carbon fuels to help save the planet by reducing consumption and see what happens. Well, when peoples wallets are hit by rising costs, they will do what the French are doing now - violent protests!
Second, lets switch to the so called "Hydrogen Economy" that is always 10 to 20 years in the future. People should Google "Hydrogen as a greenhouse gas" and see what scientists have known for years!
Third, if people are serious about climate change -stop having children. Move to a home that is under 500 square feet. Limit your closet to 3 jeans, 6 shirts, 7 socks, 7 underwear, 1 jacket, and 1 hat. In other words, stop contributing to climate change by purchasing less clothing (look it up on Google!)
Next, spend 30k on a solar system so that you can reduce the $100 dollar a month electricity bill to zero - your pay back will take 25 years while the solar panels will need to be replaced in 20 years do to loss of efficiency - it a hail storm doesn't damage them!
Between all the money I spent on insulation, high efficiency heating/cooling, solar and LED lighting - 50K to date... I will never see a payback in my lifetime!
@The Critic How foolish, taxing will get you the riots in France and H2 comes today from oil, nuclear power could make it but at a large cost. Simply there is no substitute today for carbon based energy and without a miracle there won't be one for decades at best.
The coal industry needs to understand they are yesterday's news. We should no more be burning coal than cutting down every tree to make sure the logging workers continue to have those jobs. Train for another industry for the 21st century and stop ruining the environment to make a buck.
1
I'm not sure which is the better metaphor. Like we are on a runaway train and the engineer insists on throwing more coal into the boiler. Or, like we are on the Titanic and the captain decides it's a good idea to have open bar for everyone in first class, while he adds more coal to the boilers because they need to get to New York faster.
1
This was known well before the most recent climate change report came out. Why was Trump allowed to implement a coal and fossil-fuel based energy policy in the first place. It never ever made any sense.
2
@Carol S. Because anything else is not possible, unless in a fantasy alternative reality. How about we say replace all 100 of our nuclear reactors before they are too old? You see that happening?
Leaving energy policy to an ignorant TV comb-over is a crime against the entire planet.
13
Trump policies will be short-lived, just like his administration. Obama-era policies will return and be strengthened.
Climate impacts may not be the "end of the oil and gas industry," as the energy analyst asserts, but I assert that the political reaction to them will be.
The people won't stand for planetary destruction much longer, either from plastics or climate, just like they won't stand for trump much longer. Oil will die hard but it will die.
12
Oh, please. Climate change will undoubtedly pose significant problems over the long term but the minor problems listed by this author are not a big deal. Transitory gasoline lines after a hurricane? Yawn. Need to re-design arctic drilling equipment? OK. Power plants that don't operate quite as efficiently? Meh.
This whole article is one big stretch. Nothing in it is a concern.
3
It is time to end all subsidies to the fossil fuel industries. If they fail on a level playing field, then they deserve to go. Even without subsidies, the non-fossil industries are competitive with fossil fuels. We also should develop small-scale nuclear reactors that can use our vast supply of nuclear waste that we have collected.
5
@catlover Fortunately in the US there are almost none, a fact that is not well known or accepted.
An even bigger problem for this idea is that alternative energy production is continuing to get cheeper by the year. All this fossile fuel development will be futile. The world and even US (belatedly and reluctantly) will in the future get its energy from alternative sources. GOP and Trump's refusal to get on board the future train will ensure that US will be left behind and have little role (let alone "dominance") in the future of energy.
13
@Ivan Sure it is getting cheaper than it was, but when you include all the costs it is still not cheaper. if it was nobody would be building a natural gas generation plant. And of course no alternative energy to fill your tank either.