|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-27-10 03:24 PM Original message |
Some CO2 scenarios |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-27-10 05:17 PM Response to Original message |
1. Build one nuclear generating station every week for the next 40 years |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tinrobot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-27-10 09:27 PM Response to Reply #1 |
4. That assumes no cutbacks on consumption. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-27-10 10:09 PM Response to Reply #4 |
5. Cutbacks on consumption |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 06:49 AM Response to Reply #5 |
7. There's a massive amount of room to improve efficiency yet, still. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Javaman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 12:32 PM Response to Reply #7 |
10. it's been said by leading climate scientists, that we could cut back on |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 01:48 PM Response to Reply #10 |
14. Yep, I agree, and it would foster innovation to insane levels. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kristopher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 12:19 PM Response to Reply #1 |
9. directing resources to nuclear slows the response to climate change |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 01:22 PM Response to Reply #9 |
13. You mean it might make it slower than it already is? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 01:49 PM Response to Reply #13 |
15. You don't understand, .2% annual investment is an incredible indicator that we're fixing it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kristopher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 01:57 PM Response to Reply #15 |
16. 0.2% investment in nuclear yields less power more slowly than if spent on renewables. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 02:28 PM Response to Reply #16 |
17. 0.2% investment in EITHER yields NOT ENOUGH power to do any good for anybody. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 03:22 PM Response to Reply #17 |
21. I dunno about that. 0.2% investment in Gen IV radioactive waste disposal technology... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 03:19 PM Response to Reply #16 |
19. That's actually untrue, Statistical did the numbers, it's about break-even under *current* scenarios |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 03:20 PM Response to Reply #19 |
20. Note: Statistical did the numbers on the HIGHEST cost Gen III nuclear. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 03:35 PM Response to Reply #20 |
23. Got linky? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 04:12 AM Response to Reply #23 |
32. I tried finding it to no avail. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 07:56 PM Response to Reply #16 |
24. About the CO2 opportunity cost of nuclear power vs. wind |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kristopher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 11:51 PM Response to Reply #24 |
27. Faulty analysis (again) that misdefines "opportunity cost" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 08:32 AM Response to Reply #27 |
35. CO2 opportunity cost vs economic opportunity cost. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 10:52 AM Response to Reply #35 |
40. A little more on CO2 opportunity cost |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kristopher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 04:09 PM Response to Reply #35 |
57. That is total tripe. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 10:05 AM Response to Reply #57 |
72. In this case "opportunity cost" is not well enough specified to be meaningful |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kristopher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 01:16 PM Response to Reply #72 |
75. Your attempt at spin is what lacks meaning |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 02:04 PM Response to Reply #75 |
76. Your statement is true so long as you include efficiency only on one side of the equation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kristopher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 03:15 PM Response to Reply #76 |
78. This point has always made me suspect your motives for supporting nuclear |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 11:42 PM Response to Reply #78 |
79. Incongruous? It may seem so. Let me explain. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 01:27 AM Response to Reply #24 |
31. "between now and 2020 wind power will have avoided the production |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 06:25 AM Response to Reply #31 |
33. Sorry, I wasn't as clear as I might have been |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 11:32 AM Response to Reply #33 |
42. Got it, thanks. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
XemaSab (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 08:46 AM Response to Reply #24 |
36. This is assuming we don't hit "peak wind" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 09:44 AM Response to Reply #36 |
38. Yeah. It's interesting that winds may be slowing down |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
elocs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-27-10 06:45 PM Response to Original message |
2. I see nothing being done and business as usual. It's likely already too late. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-27-10 08:00 PM Response to Reply #2 |
3. I have to agree. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 06:47 AM Response to Original message |
6. To the greatest page, GG. ;) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
azul (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 10:21 AM Response to Original message |
8. The 2 behaviors that may doom us. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 12:44 PM Response to Reply #8 |
11. You didn't mention the single most important factor which drives all of it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 01:12 PM Response to Reply #11 |
12. It's implicit in every discussion of this topic. To wit: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 03:04 PM Response to Reply #11 |
18. Ok, I'll bite |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 03:25 PM Response to Reply #18 |
22. You win. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
azul (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 11:08 PM Response to Reply #22 |
25. Oh, you must be from the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 12:58 AM Response to Reply #25 |
28. I'm from "the patient is in critical shape, get to the emergency room" movement. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
azul (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 01:12 AM Response to Reply #28 |
30. We can only really speak for ourselves. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 11:22 AM Response to Reply #30 |
41. None here... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 01:16 PM Response to Reply #30 |
46. No. 54 years old and won't. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 11:37 AM Response to Reply #25 |
43. VHEMT is a great organization! I'm very much a supporter. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stuntcat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 04:01 PM Response to Reply #25 |
54. truth-facers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-28-10 11:15 PM Response to Reply #22 |
26. Having children is fine. Having too many is not. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
azul (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 01:09 AM Response to Reply #26 |
29. Yes, China limits births, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 11:40 AM Response to Reply #29 |
44. I have two kids |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 11:42 AM Response to Reply #44 |
45. "children of irresponsible adults" = "Idiocracy" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 02:05 PM Response to Reply #26 |
48. Given that we're in 50% overshoot already and heading in deeper all the time, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stuntcat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 04:04 PM Response to Reply #48 |
56. yup. humans more than QUADRUPLED in about half a century |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 04:56 PM Response to Reply #56 |
59. Half a century, give or take half a century. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stuntcat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 05:12 PM Response to Reply #59 |
60. & there will be a painful crash |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 05:19 PM Response to Reply #60 |
61. Everything is ultimately selfish, but that's beside the point. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stuntcat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 05:26 PM Response to Reply #61 |
62. that's the first time anyone's ever told me that! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 05:37 PM Response to Reply #62 |
64. You're not the first pessimist I've ever met either |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stuntcat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 05:41 PM Response to Reply #64 |
66. "optimism is a genetically-inherited trait" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 01:42 PM Response to Reply #22 |
47. Here is the problem with having no children |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 02:16 PM Response to Reply #47 |
49. And infinite growth is the morality of a cancer cell. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 02:40 PM Response to Reply #49 |
50. Responses |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 03:01 PM Response to Reply #50 |
51. The one-third number is the current estimate of human overshoot |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 03:23 PM Response to Reply #51 |
52. By only considering population stabilization and efficiency |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 03:39 PM Response to Reply #52 |
53. I think taking a piecemeal approach like that misses the point. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 04:27 PM Response to Reply #53 |
58. All we have is a piecemeal approach. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stuntcat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 05:29 PM Response to Reply #58 |
63. "if you're looking for a fundamental change in human nature you won't get it." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 09:14 AM Response to Reply #58 |
70. Technology on its own isn't evil (and a bunch of other thoughts) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 12:42 PM Response to Reply #70 |
74. Yes, yes, yes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 04:01 PM Response to Reply #51 |
55. The fundamental problem with these types of groups |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 09:08 PM Response to Reply #47 |
68. That's true. But how do you conclude the number two is appropriate? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 02:55 AM Response to Reply #68 |
69. After one, my wife still hadn't given birth to a male heir. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 02:43 PM Response to Reply #69 |
77. No one said anything about "no" children. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 07:52 AM Response to Reply #11 |
34. Population vs consumption |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 05:41 PM Response to Reply #34 |
65. GDP per capita != Resource Consumption |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 11:22 AM Response to Reply #65 |
73. GDP trends are a valid indicator of consumption trends in hard resources |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The2ndWheel (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 09:15 AM Response to Reply #11 |
37. Tough to think there's a single most important factor that drives all of it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 09:47 AM Response to Reply #37 |
39. Yes, every problem in a system this complex is multi-factorial. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gregorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Dec-29-10 08:52 PM Response to Reply #37 |
67. As more and more people begin living modern lifestyles, number of people becomes more important. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The2ndWheel (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Dec-30-10 09:53 AM Response to Reply #67 |
71. I agree with what you're saying |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nihil (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-04-11 10:07 AM Response to Reply #71 |
80. In other words ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 04:18 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC