Prager: Paris Climate Agreement

Discussion in 'The Thunderdome' started by Tenacious D, Jun 2, 2017.

  1. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    When leadership is abdicated, the vacuum is filled. Trump has effectively ended the American century. I'm tired of seeing grinning Chinese and European leaders clasping hands. He's sidelined us on the biggest issue and technological challenge of our lifetimes.

    Pittsurgh doesn't like being made the poster child of his willful ignorance.
     
  2. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    YES!
     
  3. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    Isn't the US doing more, right now, in fighting climate change via investment in green technologies, than the Paris Agreement hoped to do, even with its most ambitious predictions? Wouldn't that money be much better spent on a continuation and expansion of that policy, instead?

    Isn't the rest of the world prepared to act in the absence of the US? I have some doubts as to another country who's going to pledge - much less pay - $3B. France? China? India? Russia? UK? Germany? Who?

    They wanted our stature and our money - but if it's as pressing as a problem as they say, and they are as committed to solving it as they (and many others) allege, then absolutely nothing prevents their from doing just that. And I (sincerely) wish them well in it.

    I don't care to "abdicate" our leadership in any endeavor which both appears to be a shit-show and we're having to act as the primary source of financing. Russia, China, France, Germany....I'll let them lead on any of those, anytime.

    I'm not (intentionally) poking you here, IP, but this seems like a very grand version of the classic liberal strategy of trying to bury something in money, no matter the effect or value, simply to say, "We're doing something!".
     
  4. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Founder of the Mike Honcho Fan Club

    But this shouldn't be a State issue. This should be a National issue.
     
  5. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    We are not doing more right now to fight climate change. We do not lead in investment. We do not lead in Wind (China). We do not lead in solar (Germany, then China). If you look at it as renewables per capita we are dismally behind, given we are the second biggest emitters currently and the biggest emitters in modern history.

    With Obama regulations being undone and reversed, we're actually not even the top in the western hemisphere. We're behind central American countries. And currently have a leader who thinks this is all a hoax and is actually trying to bring back an inferior technology.

    So I think you're pretty off on this.
     
  6. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    you realize like 97% of Scotland's household electricity comes from wind, annually? Costa Rica is at 99% renewables? And we have the DOE contradicting their own research and several existing examples to say that the grid can't take more renewables?

    In the US, some states tax wind energy twice as much as coal and natural gas. Think about that. Republican states, obviously.
     
  7. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    If you say I'm off, I trust you.

    Given our currently dismal position, is it fair to ask the rest of the world to give us the funds to develop more green technology? Seems only fair. Where do we sign up for that?

    We're the second biggest emitters of what? Carbon?
     
  8. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    Fair.

    But what happens when we deplete our supply of wind, just as we're doing with fossil fuels?
     
  9. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    Who says it can't still be?

    It doesn't have to be an international issue, either, at least insofar as the US is concerned.

    Every nation who remains in the Paris Agreement is no more bound by it, or their pledges, than we are - even now, after having withdrawn. If you want to see how Europe honors pledges, look no further than NATO.
     
  10. TennTradition

    TennTradition Super Moderator

    Funny enough, there would seem to be a theoretical limit as you remove energy from the earth's boundary layer.
     
  11. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    We have the most ability and access to the tech. We do not deploy it. Yes, carbon dioxide.
     
  12. gcbvol

    gcbvol Fabulous Moderator

    Theoretical nature noted, how could boundary layer energy be depleted? Could we do it?
     
  13. TennTradition

    TennTradition Super Moderator

    I haven't seen a calculation - but no. I don't think it's a concern.
     
  14. CardinalVol

    CardinalVol Uncultured, non-diverse mod

    Challenge accepted.
     
  15. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    There is a definite theoretical limit, but as long as the sun is unevenly heating the Earth there will be wind. And it is extremely unlikely we will ever reach or even want to reach that limit.

    As you well know but others might not, the layout of wind farms is done to deliberately minimize the wake effect of one turbine from interfering with others.

    Tenny, the USA is the Saudi Arabia of wind, and could lead the world in both onshore and offshore wind were we to develop even a fraction of our available resources.
     
  16. justingroves

    justingroves supermod

    Until an endangered bird flew into a turbine
     
  17. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    In the same way every bit of sunlight hitting the Earth could be captured. If you had a forest of turbines covering the Earth, the energy absorbed by the blades would eventually meet or exceed the energy of the air moving from high to low pressure cells.

    more realistically, within a wind farm wake effects actually create microclimates of turbulence and changed wind speeds. There really are only so dense of a farm you could build-- though again, this would be absurd.

    it's kind of like figuring out how to burn the last lump of coal or suck the last drop of oil from the Earth. It is so impractical of a situation that it is purely abstract.
     
  18. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    A glass building kills as many birds as a wind turbine. Turbines get a bad rap.
     
  19. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    If only we were smart and could engineer something to help minimize that.

    But I guess we're dumb, since things like this are oft brought up attempts to minimize us exporting alternative energy.

    Keep doing big oil's work.
     
  20. Volst53

    Volst53 Super Moderator

    To be fair it's easier to do a lot of experimentation in developing countries and China is doing it because of localized air quality since they've developed a lot of wealth
     

Share This Page