Author Topic: Climate Change  (Read 28632 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Granny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #720 on: June 07, 2019, 12:57:41 pm »
Honey bees are going extinct because of excessive use of pesticides in crops and certain blood-sucking parasites that only reproduce in bee colonies. It’s true that the extinction of bees would mean the end of humanity.

"For many of us, honeybees are annoying. We think that their only purpose is to keep buzzing around and dropping their formic acid-laden stings on random people (this impression will certainly change when we stop getting spoonfuls of sweet honey in our morning cereal).

The truth is, honeybees are crucial elements of our environment, and almost never get the credit that they deserve.

If bees didn’t exist, humans wouldn’t either.

Bee extinction – Why would it affect us?
Out of the 100 crop species that provide us with 90% of our food, 35% are pollinated by bees, birds and bats (source). It’s that simple.

Bees are the primary initiators of reproduction among plants, as they transfer pollen from the male stamens to the female pistils."

Since 2006, the population of bees has declined considerably (source). Pesticides, disease, parasites, and poor weather due to global warming have played a major role in this worrying decline."



In fall and spring, we tidy-to-a-fault gardeners like to clean leaves and plant debris from our gardens.
BUT ... JUST DON'T DO IT.
https://savvygardening.com/spring-garden-clean-done-right/

Fall:
... reasons why you shouldn’t do a fall garden clean up. ... let your garden stand all winter in order to provide habitat for many of the beneficial insects and other creatures living in it.

Spring
Lots of beneficial insects, including pollinators like tiny native bees and pest-munching predators like syrphid flies, lacewings, and parasitic wasps, spend the winter hunkered down in hollow plant stems either as adults or pupae. Cutting down the dead plant stems too early in the spring will disturb them before they have a chance to emerge. Wait as long as you can to do your spring garden clean up. Ideally, you should wait until the daytime temperatures are consistently above 50 degrees F.

Or ... just don't do it at all.
This year I totally conquered my ocd urges and social pressures to clean out my garden fall and spring. The debris is now mulching the garden nicely and  hidden by new growth, and for the first time in my 15 years here in the concrete jungle, there are honeybees flying around my garden.
A very simple but significant change.
Who knew!

And don't prune shrubs in spring either - cocoons  attached!  Lol

Mother Nature is still the best gardener. Lol

« Last Edit: June 07, 2019, 01:12:30 pm by Granny »

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #721 on: June 07, 2019, 01:32:21 pm »
Now it's just economic and technical-sounding arguments for the short-term: continuing fossil-fuel production because renewables 'aren't ready'.
Solar and wind cannot be our primary source of power. This is a fact that can be shown to be true by looking at the experience of almost every jurisdiction that has tried to force their deployment. No amount of wishful thinking on your part will change this reality.

Those are both just short-term challenges, good reasons to wind down fossil fuel subsidies and ramp up support for development and implementation of renewables.
The notion that fossil fuels are subsidized in this country is a fiction. There is no pot of money that can be magically produced by ending these imaginary subsidies. In the real world, fossil fuels are net contributors to government revenues. Again, no amount of wishful thinking on your part will change this reality.

If we want to have a conversation about what can be done about emissions it has to be based on the real world. It can't be based on these falsehoods that you insist on clinging to.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2019, 01:36:20 pm by TimG »

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #722 on: June 07, 2019, 01:37:05 pm »
fossil fuels are net contributors to government revenues

I paid $0.01 tax last year, so I am a net contributor to government using that logic.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #723 on: June 07, 2019, 01:47:10 pm »
I paid $0.01 tax last year, so I am a net contributor to government using that logic.
Governments collect $20 billion per year in revenue from fossil fuel production and sale. Furthermore, these fossil fuels are a key input into the economy that allows everyone to produce more and also contribute to the economy. Replacing fossil fuels will less flexible and/or more expensive energy sources would reduce economic activity and reduce government revenues even more than $20 billion they get from direct revenues.

IOW, if you want to bring in unquantifiable "harms" caused by fossil fuels you MUST also include the  unquantifiable "benefits" of fossil fuels. It is simply dishonest to only talk about the unquantifiable harms as if they are cost that must be paid. Every accountant knows that proper book keeping requires that the liabilities AND assets be added up to determine the net worth.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2019, 01:50:35 pm by TimG »

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #724 on: June 07, 2019, 01:54:17 pm »
Every accountant knows that proper book keeping requires that the liabilities AND assets be added up to determine the net worth.

Exactly, and the net contribution of fossil fuels is low or negative. They receive a lot of direct and indirect benefits.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #725 on: June 07, 2019, 02:15:36 pm »
Exactly, and the net contribution of fossil fuels is low or negative. They receive a lot of direct and indirect benefits.
What imaginary numbers do you base this on? Fossil fuels are essential in many parts of our economy. For example, aircraft, shipping, trucking, et. al. There are simply no alternatives to fossil fuels which means the benefits of having aircraft, shipping and trucking are benefits that fossil fuels provide. It is simply not plausible to argue that fossil fuels are net negative contribute once you look at both sides of the ledger.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #726 on: June 07, 2019, 02:26:02 pm »
aircraft, shipping and trucking are benefits that fossil fuels provide

You are confusing the transportation industry with the energy industry.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #727 on: June 07, 2019, 02:31:51 pm »
You are confusing the transportation industry with the energy industry.
Without fossil fuels the transportation industry could not operate on the scale that it operates today. Therefore, all of the benefits provided by the transportation industry are also benefits provided by fossil fuels. It is frankly ridiculous to claim that the emissions produced by the transportation industry are "harms" caused by fossil fuels without counting the benefits of the transportation industry as a benefit of fossil fuels. If you don't want to count the transportation industry as a benefit then you have to exclude emissions from transportation industry as a harm. It is the only fair way to these kinds of calculations.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2019, 02:53:33 pm by TimG »

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #728 on: June 07, 2019, 03:12:49 pm »
Without fossil fuels the transportation industry could not operate on the scale that it operates today. Therefore, all of the benefits provided by the transportation industry are also benefits provided by fossil fuels. It is frankly ridiculous to claim that the emissions produced by the transportation industry are "harms" caused by fossil fuels without counting the benefits of the transportation industry as a benefit of fossil fuels. If you don't want to count the transportation industry as a benefit then you have to exclude emissions from transportation industry as a harm. It is the only fair way to these kinds of calculations.

You seem to think that goods being brought to your door somehow offsets the harm that delivery truck burning diesel does to the air your breathe. Sorry but it is rather silly to make such an assumption. That delivery truck could be running on electricity and probably soon will be. And yes, the fossil fuel industry is subsidized either directly or through tax benefits.

Offline Granny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #729 on: June 07, 2019, 03:21:39 pm »
Solar and wind cannot be our primary source of power. This is a fact that can be shown to be true by looking at the experience of almost every jurisdiction that has tried to force their deployment. No amount of wishful thinking on your part will change this reality.

Improved technology will change that.
So will applying current fossil fuel subsidies to development and implementation of renewables.

Some projections:

https://www.iea.org/renewables2018/
Quote
The notion that fossil fuels are subsidized in this country is a fiction. There is no pot of money that can be magically produced by ending these imaginary subsidies. In the real world, fossil fuels are net contributors to government revenues. Again, no amount of wishful thinking on your part will change this reality.
False logic:
Federal government revenues from energy production don't disappear.
Switch the subsidies to renewables, and revenues come from renewables.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #730 on: June 07, 2019, 03:37:26 pm »
Improved technology will change that.
Wishful thinking. Wishing for a unicorn does not make them real.

So will applying current fossil fuel subsidies to development and implementation of renewables.
There are no subsidies to switch. We can't make policy based on your delusions.

Federal government revenues from energy production don't disappear.
Nonsense, Wind and solar are not viable without government subsidies. There is no way governments could turn around and charge producers royalties like they does with fossil fuels. Nor could they double everyone's electrical bill with taxes like they do with gasoline. Get rid of fossil fuels and government revenues will take a hit.


« Last Edit: June 07, 2019, 03:39:37 pm by TimG »

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #731 on: June 07, 2019, 03:39:49 pm »
That delivery truck could be running on electricity and probably soon will be.

I came across the perfect candidate today. There was a pickup truck at the lock park stopping every 50-100 meters and leaving his engine running while he emptied trash cans. These are the no-brainers. There already exist electric pickups, this is a local service returning to the garage every night, and spends most of its time idling.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2019, 03:52:16 pm by ?Impact »

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #732 on: June 07, 2019, 03:41:59 pm »
Get rid of fossil fuels and government revenues will take a hit.

Now there is an argument. We need to destroy the Earth for future generations to run government.

...I didn't say it was a good one.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #733 on: June 07, 2019, 03:46:53 pm »
Now there is an argument. We need to destroy the Earth for future generations to run government.
You and your fellow crusaders seem to be under the delusion that fossil fuels are subsidized and that if they subsidies were ended there would be a big pile of cash to to spend your pet projects. This is nonsense. The potential loss of revenues to government is proof that it is nonsense.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2019, 03:48:47 pm by TimG »

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #734 on: June 07, 2019, 03:53:11 pm »
I cam across the perfect candidate today. There was a pickup truck at the lock park stopping every 50-100 meters and leaving his engine running while he emptied trash cans. These are the no-brainers. There already exist electric pickups, this is a local service returning to the garage every night, and spends most of its time idling.

As a follow up to that yesterday was "blue box" day in my neighborhood. Instead of a diesel engine roar for 10 seconds and then the screeching of brakes as the truck moved along from house to house, why not convert that to an EV. Much less noise, much less pollution. When you hit the brakes in an EV some of the energy goes right back to the battery. Sounds like a win/win to me.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List