Author Topic: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal  (Read 722 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline waldo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6381
Re: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal
« Reply #15 on: November 30, 2017, 04:32:19 am »
However, messing up our power grid by effectively outlawing the construction of new baseload (coal, hydro, gas or nuclear) is extremely harmful and should be rejected. Arbitrary CO2 reduction targets are also harmful policies because they encourage governments to waste resources pretending to meet targets rather than focusing on actual improvments.
which countries have, in your word, "outlawed" hydro or gas? Should so-called "next gen" nuclear come forward and prove itself, expectations are that it will become more acceptable to those country/governments who policy shifted away from nuclear given the devastation associated with the Fukushima disaster. Please say outright that you're a proponent of "clean coal"... just say it; sure you can!  ;D 

2 can play at that game: what I am and right and aggressive policies don't work AND drive the global economy into a deep recession which results in much greater harm than would have occurred if those resources had been focused on adaptation rather than mitigation?
c'mon, you mean your interpretations of - not whether you personally are right or wrong! Your prior post shows just how vague your "adaptation only" nonsense is - you project it in terms of some uncertain and imprecise futures requirement; something that clearly plays to your, again, "do nothing today, delay at all costs". Except that latest revelation of yours is that you used to only speak of, "do nothing/delay", in terms of mitigation... now you've applied it to your nebulous ramblings on adaptation as well. Geezaz!

People who claim that very bad weather event is "caused by climate change" are intellectually no different from the people in the past claiming their cow died because the unmarried old woman (a.k.a. witch) cast a spell. IOW - it is scapegoating.
you sir, you are intellectually dishonest in how you continue to play out and leverage public perceptions on causal ties to extreme weather events. Of course, general public perceptions are typically influenced by lazy journalism and the absence/diminishment of good scientific writing for the layperson. If you had any semblance of honesty in this regard you would acknowledge that the majority of scientists working in related disciplines are most cautious in attributing any single extreme event to any singular causal tie... but most certainly include AGW/climate change as a contributing influence/factor in most extreme weather events.
Agree Agree x 1 View List