Author Topic: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal  (Read 440 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal
« Reply #45 on: December 07, 2017, 07:54:45 pm »
I see you didn't bother to read the article I linked.
Skeptical Science is a propaganda blog. Nothing it says about the state of the science can be taken as accurate. The Cook paper referenced in the link is a pathetic joke that should have never passed peer review.

the scientists educate the engineers on what needs to be achieved and let them then use their knowledge to effect it.
Sure - scientists can say that CO2 needs to be reduced and when the engineers say it can't be done with the currently available technology at a cost that people would be willing to pay then that should be the end of the discussion. The opinion of climate scientists on what we should do is still completely irrelevant.

you can determine something is wrong but you're not mechanically inclined, so what would YOU do? Pull into a garage and let a mechanic fix the problem.
And if the mechanic says it is problem that might be a serious concern in 10 years but you can pay $5000 to rebuild the engine to fix it now or simply keep driving and hope for the best. What would you do?

Offline Omni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8246
Re: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal
« Reply #46 on: December 07, 2017, 08:19:21 pm »
Skeptical Science is a propaganda blog. Nothing it says about the state of the science can be taken as accurate. The Cook paper referenced in the link is a pathetic joke that should have never passed peer review.
Sure - scientists can say that CO2 needs to be reduced and when the engineers say it can't be done with the currently available technology at a cost that people would be willing to pay then that should be the end of the discussion. The opinion of climate scientists on what we should do is still completely irrelevant.
And if the mechanic says it is problem that might be a serious concern in 10 years but you can pay $5000 to rebuild the engine to fix it now or simply keep driving and hope for the best. What would you do?

Apparently you would ignore the expert, keep driving, and pay a hell of a lot more when it actually seized up on you.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal
« Reply #47 on: December 07, 2017, 08:59:06 pm »
Apparently you would ignore the expert, keep driving, and pay a hell of a lot more when it actually seized up on you.
You are assuming a lot things:

1) That I expect to be driving the car in 10 years;
2) That the cost of buying a new car after 10 years or so would be more expensive to me than paying 5K now.

It is a basic principal of investment that money paid out in the future is worth less than money paid out now. It is partially because money you have today can be invested so you will have more money in the future. In addition, incomes can rise over time so a 5K bill to a college student is an extraordinary burden but the 20K cost of a new car is affordable to someone with a stable job.

The analogy holds for adaption. It the Canadian economy continues to grow at about 2% per year it will double in size by 2050 so Canadians living in 2050 may find the cost of adapting to climate change effects less than the cost of trying to stop emissions today even if the dollar value is more. When you add the inevitable technological and social change and the huge uncertainty wrt the effects of warming it becomes very hard to justify making significant sacrifices today in the name reducing CO2 emissions.

 

« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 09:01:22 pm by TimG »

Offline wilber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5955
Re: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal
« Reply #48 on: December 07, 2017, 09:02:22 pm »
One difference, you can always junk the old car and buy a shiny new one. You can't do that with a planet.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal
« Reply #49 on: December 07, 2017, 09:13:07 pm »
One difference, you can always junk the old car and buy a shiny new one. You can't do that with a planet.
The planet does not care about CO2. It will be fine. The only reason CO2 is even a concern is because it might have an economic impact on human societies. Since we are dealing with economic questions an economic analysis is necessary but it can't be based on lunatic statements like the 'planet will be destroyed'.

FWIW: if the most dire claims about AGW come true we are screwed no matter what we do now. So the only real choice is to assume that the outcomes are manageable and think about the relative cost of spending money now vs. later.

Offline Omni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8246
Re: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal
« Reply #50 on: December 07, 2017, 09:25:06 pm »
The planet does not care about CO2. It will be fine. The only reason CO2 is even a concern is because it might have an economic impact on human societies. Since we are dealing with economic questions an economic analysis is necessary but it can't be based on lunatic statements like the 'planet will be destroyed'.

FWIW: if the most dire claims about AGW come true we are screwed no matter what we do now. So the only real choice is to assume that the outcomes are manageable and think about the relative cost of spending money now vs. later.

You're right, the planet doesn't care, and the planet can't do anything about it. We should care, and we can. Assuming is not acting.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal
« Reply #51 on: December 07, 2017, 09:32:02 pm »
We should care, and we can. Assuming is not acting.
What we should do has to based on rational assessment of cost-benefit. Engaging in expensive virtue signalling exercises that accomplish nothing useful is a waste. What makes it difficult is we have no real information on what the future costs might be which means it is impossible to justify major sacrifices today for any but the most risk adverse. 

Nuclear power is a useful example. It is a excellent way to reduce CO2 emissions but most environmentalist oppose it. That tells me that no matter what they claim about the possible outcomes from AGW they see it as less of a problem than dealing with nuclear power. IOW, if the people most concerned about AGW do not really see it as a big enough threat to justify the use of a reliable power source that they dislike then why should people less inclined to care about AGW worry about bad outcomes?
« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 09:37:26 pm by TimG »

Offline Omni

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8246
Re: Technical Solutions - CO2 Removal
« Reply #52 on: December 07, 2017, 10:00:56 pm »
What we should do has to based on rational assessment of cost-benefit. Engaging in expensive virtue signalling exercises that accomplish nothing useful is a waste. What makes it difficult is we have no real information on what the future costs might be which means it is impossible to justify major sacrifices today for any but the most risk adverse. 

Nuclear power is a useful example. It is a excellent way to reduce CO2 emissions but most environmentalist oppose it. That tells me that no matter what they claim about the possible outcomes from AGW they see it as less of a problem than dealing with nuclear power. IOW, if the people most concerned about AGW do not really see it as a big enough threat to justify the use of a reliable power source that they dislike then why should people less inclined to care about AGW worry about bad outcomes?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-30/record-winds-in-germany-spur-free-electricity-at-weekend-chart
Germany recently produced enough wind power they were able to give consumers free power for a time is an example of how far renewable energy has come. Nukes are OK with me as well, unless they do such a silly job as the Japanese did with Fukushima. The success of renewable s seems to be well ahead of your concerns. We seem to just want to pollute the air until the last bbl. is sucked out of the ground and then we have no choice.