Science

kristopher

(29,798 posts)

34. Saying it will fail because it will fail is a fail in itself.

Fri Oct 28, 2016, 11:30 PM

Oct 2016

The evidence in the OP show that the circumstances the model is predicated on are not in place. The OP clearly outlines - with solid evidence - a completely disruptive technological revolution that is anything but "'do nothing' trends" in a "business-as-usual" environment.

Your remark is a tautology that amounts to total disregard of the the evidence instead of a reasoned examination of what the technological and economic situation is vis-a-vis the move away from carbon.

We ran the model forward to the year 2040, along a business-as-usual trajectory based on ‘do-nothing’ trends — that is, without any feedback loops that would change the underlying trend.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

60 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Have We Already Won the Renewables Revolution? [View all] kristopher Oct 2016 OP

Ethanol Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #1

The numbers might change your view... kristopher Oct 2016 #4

Fertilization? Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #5

That's a comparison of two methods for producing (bio)fuels for ICEs kristopher Oct 2016 #6

Robbing Peter to pay Paul Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #7

Actually they do consider the nature and role of the feedstocks.... kristopher Oct 2016 #9

Ummmm... Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #11

Ummmmm.... kristopher Oct 2016 #12

Maybe you grabbed the wrong link? Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #13

So you aren't referencing sustainability practices ... kristopher Oct 2016 #14

? Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #15

It isn't complicated kristopher Oct 2016 #16

DOA Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #17

You are making the unwarranted assumption that it isn't included. kristopher Oct 2016 #18

Biology 101 Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #19

Which has nothing at all to do with the specious nature of the criticism. kristopher Oct 2016 #20

WTF? Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #21

. kristopher Oct 2016 #22

Food vs. Fuel Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #23

"Since you're hell bent on playing stupid..." kristopher Oct 2016 #24

Food vs. Fuel....again Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #25

Subject kristopher Oct 2016 #26

Food vs. Fuel.....take 3 Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #27

The fact that you think you're offering cogent criticism is astounding. kristopher Oct 2016 #28

Food vs. Fuel.....take IV Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #29

If you want to have a discussion about ethanol start another thread. kristopher Oct 2016 #30

My bad. Dr.Jones Oct 2016 #31

Yes, it is. kristopher Oct 2016 #32

My F150 gets about 4 mpg less with E85 than E10. When I pull my trailer is goes to about 5.5 less. tonyt53 Oct 2016 #52

e-cars just shift the dirt around if powered by coal generated electricity instead of petroleum nt msongs Oct 2016 #2

I don't think that's accurate, but... kristopher Oct 2016 #3

Have we won? progressoid Oct 2016 #8

Good to know. kristopher Oct 2016 #10

"What could derail the revolution?" NickB79 Oct 2016 #33

Saying it will fail because it will fail is a fail in itself. kristopher Oct 2016 #34

Yeah, I'm sure things will work out just fine for us NickB79 Oct 2016 #39

How is that related to the OP? kristopher Oct 2016 #40

The idea of a 'trajectory' implies 'momentum' or 'inertia' muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #35

That's an interesting thought... kristopher Oct 2016 #36

I don't see at all that "we as a species" have deliberately chosen renewables muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #37

It sounds like you're describing the inertia of the existing fossil system. kristopher Oct 2016 #38

I'd like to cover one point I neglected to address earlier kristopher Oct 2016 #42

Shot down because as a whole, people don't care enough about it muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #44

I'm sorry but "the same thing" did not happen in the UK. kristopher Oct 2016 #45

"the challenge is to make that work" - you were saying the revolution was already won muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #46

I'm sorry, but are you equating a single minor battle with an entire war? kristopher Oct 2016 #47

Here's what I was referring to muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #48

"The article says that victory is inevitable. It's wrong." kristopher Oct 2016 #49

The support is the figures. We have fuck all renewables so far. muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #50

"And, as I said, there is no 'inertia' in economics. That's wishful thinking." kristopher Oct 2016 #51

No, I'm not claming inertia there muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #53

You haven't made a single legitimate argument yet. kristopher Oct 2016 #54

No, you've misread that. I attacked you for knowing *less* muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #55

Nope. kristopher Oct 2016 #56

Your complacency is worrying muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #57

Great way to "win" by false framing. kristopher Oct 2016 #58

UK drops to new low in global renewable energy league table kristopher Nov 2016 #60

Inertia and trajectory kristopher Nov 2016 #59

I believe big oil has realized it Victor_c3 Oct 2016 #41

It hasn't been OPEC so much as it's been Saudi Arabia. kristopher Oct 2016 #43