Funny how the "free market" advocates are so vocal about how humanity is capable of adapting to various changes and yet is screaming and wailing that old troll that it's a choice between Coal and a caveman lifestyle.
We've done that. It's called nuclear energy. You still have to pay for the environmental damage that your selfishness is responsible for however, hence Carbon tax, proceeds to be distributed to the victims.
1) Corporate corruption is a separate issue entirely. 2) who do you think gets fucked over most from climate change? A) rich thieves or B) poor people? Case closed.
If a business can't survive without paying for the property destruction that is the result of doing business, why should anyone shed a tear for it? If you lose your job at pollution inc because society has made it unprofitable to pollute the land, that is too fucking bad.
Take a good look at Europe's $/CO2 ratio and consider that they have implimented a tax in many member states. Germany is a good example of this. They also have some of the lowest CO2/dollar GDP ratios in the world.
I would imagine that this kind of debate was exactly what would have been common when open sewers were common. Cleaning up after oneself is "socialist."
The consequences are the point. A tax is designed to reduce consumption of a resource. That is in fact what is does. The price goes up and consumption falls. Econ101.
Why do you believe that you have an inherent right to not have to pay for damage that your actions cause? If burning Coal to power your home causes property damage due to acid rain and erodion etc. from global warming, you are most definitely liable to pay for that damage. Society has no obligation to shield you from the consequences of environmental damage caused by your actions.
The thing about cap and trade is that a lot of left leaning environmentalists hate the idea because they feel that it's a case where markets/capitalism are intruding into environmental matters and the economic libertarians hate it because its government intrusion into markets. Cap and trade worked well for controlling NOX and SOX emissions but had unintended consequences where it was tried in Europe. The Carbon offsets were poorly defined and often lead to fraud.
Water vapor amplifies the effects of greenhouse gases as a feedback effect it is not however, strictly a causal agent. CO2 remains in the atmosphere for centuries while Water vapor generally is transient.
That is because half the country essentially believes that they have an unlimited right to piss in the pool without consequence. The problem is that if they even remotely believed in the ideal capitalism that they claim they do, they wouldn't be so keen to pollute the air and thus violate others' property rights. Of course, they don't; they believe in everyone out for themselves.
Being as volcanoes are responsible for an irrelevant amount of CO2, no one. Humanity produces several orders of magnitude more CO2 than volcanoes. It's like suggesting that we tax squirrels for using the road while they cross the street.
Neato. If this could be applied to human hearts, this could significantly open the options organ recipients have to save their lives. Perhaps even expand what kind of medical procedures that could be done on the human heart that may be limited by how long the heart can be kept viable outside the body.
Show me a good example where school gives people any degree of a "well rounded education." A few art classes and a history class tossed in for good measure don't count.
Experience to assist in the transition to humans living in space over the long term. Being stuck on this speck of dust called Earth is an evolutionary dead end.
Obama didn't kill NASA, he killed Ares which from what I've seen, wasn't going very well. It's sad that 40 years after we got to the moon the first time, we haven't made much progress in developing a good vehicle to return. Not that the moon is really where we should be going at this point. The asteroids and Mars are better targets due to their long term potential to fuel space based industry and such. NASA needs to go a different direction than it was if we are to have any progress. NASA should be focusing on operations farther out from Earth like Mars, the asteroids etc not a taxi service to LEO.
No... the GP is right... Methane is a gas and gases like Methane are a lot harder to store in comparison to gasoline. Methane can be stored in two major ways: 1) high pressure/adsorbed on to a sponge-like material or 2) in cryogenic liquid form. The former isn't terribly good at storing enough Methane to be competitive with Gasoline and the latter requires active refrigeration and spills are extremely dangerous.
It would be far more efficient to use salt water as a coolant in conventional power stations using the waste heat from producing power to evaporate pure water from sea water. Using sea water in these thermochemical processes would be disasterous from a design standpoint due to side reactions and contamination of the reactor with salt.
The UT-3 cycle + the ferrite cycle might work better in combination. Ferrite water cracking until the material is passivated at which point UT-3 takes over in a separate reaction chamber
Slashdot Mirror
1) I am not a "leftist"
2) Even if I was, you won't find many "leftists" advocating fucking other people over w/ pollution
Funny how the "free market" advocates are so vocal about how humanity is capable of adapting to various changes and yet is screaming and wailing that old troll that it's a choice between Coal and a caveman lifestyle.
We've done that. It's called nuclear energy. You still have to pay for the environmental damage that your selfishness is responsible for however, hence Carbon tax, proceeds to be distributed to the victims.
1) Corporate corruption is a separate issue entirely.
2) who do you think gets fucked over most from climate change? A) rich thieves or B) poor people? Case closed.
Why not?
If a business can't survive without paying for the property destruction that is the result of doing business, why should anyone shed a tear for it? If you lose your job at pollution inc because society has made it unprofitable to pollute the land, that is too fucking bad.
Take a good look at Europe's $/CO2 ratio and consider that they have implimented a tax in many member states. Germany is a good example of this. They also have some of the lowest CO2/dollar GDP ratios in the world.
I would imagine that this kind of debate was exactly what would have been common when open sewers were common. Cleaning up after oneself is "socialist."
The consequences are the point. A tax is designed to reduce consumption of a resource. That is in fact what is does. The price goes up and consumption falls. Econ101.
Every resource is "rationed." It just so happens that in Capitalism those with power get more rations than others.
Why do you believe that you have an inherent right to not have to pay for damage that your actions cause? If burning Coal to power your home causes property damage due to acid rain and erodion etc. from global warming, you are most definitely liable to pay for that damage. Society has no obligation to shield you from the consequences of environmental damage caused by your actions.
The thing about cap and trade is that a lot of left leaning environmentalists hate the idea because they feel that it's a case where markets/capitalism are intruding into environmental matters and the economic libertarians hate it because its government intrusion into markets. Cap and trade worked well for controlling NOX and SOX emissions but had unintended consequences where it was tried in Europe. The Carbon offsets were poorly defined and often lead to fraud.
Water vapor amplifies the effects of greenhouse gases as a feedback effect it is not however, strictly a causal agent. CO2 remains in the atmosphere for centuries while Water vapor generally is transient.
The problem with that is that we have good evidence that a Carbon tax does exactly what we want it to do.
That is because half the country essentially believes that they have an unlimited right to piss in the pool without consequence. The problem is that if they even remotely believed in the ideal capitalism that they claim they do, they wouldn't be so keen to pollute the air and thus violate others' property rights. Of course, they don't; they believe in everyone out for themselves.
Being as volcanoes are responsible for an irrelevant amount of CO2, no one. Humanity produces several orders of magnitude more CO2 than volcanoes. It's like suggesting that we tax squirrels for using the road while they cross the street.
It makes a lot more sense to tax a negative externality than it does to tax something we want more of like income.
Neato. If this could be applied to human hearts, this could significantly open the options organ recipients have to save their lives. Perhaps even expand what kind of medical procedures that could be done on the human heart that may be limited by how long the heart can be kept viable outside the body.
Show me a good example where school gives people any degree of a "well rounded education." A few art classes and a history class tossed in for good measure don't count.
Armstrong has a financial interest in keeping Ares alive.
Experience to assist in the transition to humans living in space over the long term. Being stuck on this speck of dust called Earth is an evolutionary dead end.
Obama didn't kill NASA, he killed Ares which from what I've seen, wasn't going very well. It's sad that 40 years after we got to the moon the first time, we haven't made much progress in developing a good vehicle to return. Not that the moon is really where we should be going at this point. The asteroids and Mars are better targets due to their long term potential to fuel space based industry and such. NASA needs to go a different direction than it was if we are to have any progress. NASA should be focusing on operations farther out from Earth like Mars, the asteroids etc not a taxi service to LEO.
No... the GP is right... Methane is a gas and gases like Methane are a lot harder to store in comparison to gasoline. Methane can be stored in two major ways: 1) high pressure/adsorbed on to a sponge-like material or 2) in cryogenic liquid form. The former isn't terribly good at storing enough Methane to be competitive with Gasoline and the latter requires active refrigeration and spills are extremely dangerous.
It would be far more efficient to use salt water as a coolant in conventional power stations using the waste heat from producing power to evaporate pure water from sea water. Using sea water in these thermochemical processes would be disasterous from a design standpoint due to side reactions and contamination of the reactor with salt.
The UT-3 cycle + the ferrite cycle might work better in combination. Ferrite water cracking until the material is passivated at which point UT-3 takes over in a separate reaction chamber