• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

A sobering read. Time is running out regarding climate change.

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,375
7,164
146
Don't fall for the republican talking point that these taxes would be passed straight through. If you slap a huge carbon tax on generation, utilities would more quickly more to move to carbon free generation. Consumers will also be drawn to higher efficiency and co-generation.

The good thing about a carbon tax is it directly internalizes external costs back to the producers of them.
Didn’t you hear. Markets for carbon don’t work because Al Gore flew in a plane.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
11,846
6,301
136
We spend 700 billion on defense. 300 billion from that is a small investment. Deficits are a bargain. Exactly how much is too much to avert an extinction level event?
I haven't taken a position in this thread as to whether or not I support a carbon tax. I'm just pointing out that economics are not irrelevant and everything has a cost. I will support such a high cost. I just want to make sure we're spending it the most efficient way we can.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
11,846
6,301
136
Don't fall for the republican talking point that these taxes would be passed straight through. If you slap a huge carbon tax on generation, utilities would more quickly more to move to carbon free generation. Consumers will also be drawn to higher efficiency and co-generation.

The good thing about a carbon tax is it directly internalizes external costs back to the producers of them.
Yes, I understand that. Is it a better way than say, having federal tax credits for purchasing electric cars, solar panels, windmills, insulation, etc? Or should we do both?
 

mect

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2004
2,095
992
136
I haven't taken a position in this thread as to whether or not I support a carbon tax. I'm just pointing out that economics are not irrelevant and everything has a cost. I will support such a high cost. I just want to make sure we're spending it the most efficient way we can.
At the same time, when faced with a time sensitive issue, at some point you have to stop worrying about if you have the best solution, and act accepting that you have a good solution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ajay

spacejamz

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
10,261
557
126
Except that he’s completely right. If a person takes a shuttle or not has absolutely no bearing on if climate change is real or what we should do about it.

It’s an attempt to deflect because conservatives have lost the debate.
Based on that logic, why should the general public want to go green then? if what one person (or 4,000 in a 4 day period) does has no bearing, why do we even need electric cars?

Last year, I made a statement that it doesn't matter what the US does because of all the pollution being generated by India and China and some liberal here responded along the lines that two wrongs don't make a right and that we all need to do our part...guess that went out the window....

Guess you haven't heard the phrase "lead by example" then??? It is more difficult to get people to listen to your message when you say one thing yet do another....this is just plain common sense which is something liberals just don't understand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: DennisGondola

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
11,846
6,301
136
At the same time, when faced with a time sensitive issue, at some point you have to stop worrying about if you have the best solution, and act accepting that you have a good solution.
Oh, we need to act now. That's for sure. I'm not advocating taking years to decide what to do. What I'm trying to hash out is what I think is our best solution. In any event, we're totally dead on all solutions at the federal level right now because we have a POTUS who is a loony denier of science. So we may as well use the time to figure out how best to implement policy once we have a more rational presence in DC.
 

Zorba

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 1999
7,838
1,728
136
Yes, I understand that. Is it a better way than say, having federal tax credits for purchasing electric cars, solar panels, windmills, insulation, etc? Or should we do both?
I think both is the answer.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
11,846
6,301
136
I think both is the answer.
Fair enough. Both probably is the best answer. But I'm concerned about selling a carbon tax to the American people in an election, more so than tax credits. If we can't win an election, then you know what the alternative is...doing nothing.
 

ecogen

Golden Member
Dec 24, 2016
1,159
1,159
106
Based on that logic, why should the general public want to go green then? if what one person (or 4,000 in a 4 day period) does has no bearing, why do we even need electric cars?

Last year, I made a statement that it doesn't matter what the US does because of all the pollution being generated by India and China and some liberal here responded along the lines that two wrongs don't make a right and that we all need to do our part...guess that went out the window....

Guess you haven't heard the phrase "lead by example" then??? It is more difficult to get people to listen to your message when you say one thing yet do another....this is just plain common sense which is something liberals just don't understand...
It's even easier to get people to listen to you when what you want them to listen to is enshrined in law. Actually it's the only way to get the majority of people to listen to you. There is absolutely no chance that a large enough number of people to make a difference goes green out of the goodness of their hearts, we need systemic changes.

You're SlowSpyder levels of retarded, shut up. All you're doing is digging the hole deeper.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
67,840
2,945
126
Carbon Tax - OMG teh gubmint theft at gunpointz!
Fuel/Carbon/GHG reducing regulation - OMG teh Jerb killingz!
Carbon Market - OMG teh stewpit!
 

MixMasterTang

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2001
3,138
142
106
Based on that logic, why should the general public want to go green then? if what one person (or 4,000 in a 4 day period) does has no bearing, why do we even need electric cars?

Last year, I made a statement that it doesn't matter what the US does because of all the pollution being generated by India and China and some liberal here responded along the lines that two wrongs don't make a right and that we all need to do our part...guess that went out the window....

Guess you haven't heard the phrase "lead by example" then??? It is more difficult to get people to listen to your message when you say one thing yet do another....this is just plain common sense which is something liberals just don't understand...
I agree with you for the most part, they do need to lead by example. The flip side is that some of these people may require extra security detail, like politicians or royalty and some may be on a tight schedule where they have commitments that leave them no extra time for travelling commercial. Again I am more with your opinion than against it, but there are too many variables just to make a blanket judgement on.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,515
3,281
126
Wondering if Hurricane Michael is about to get even with Florida Republicans for stealing the election from Gore.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,073
6,061
136
Wondering if Hurricane Michael is about to get even with Florida Republicans for stealing the election from Gore.
Hurricanes only punish gay people and those that support them. Not sure why NC got hit so hard last time though, and it looks like they'll be getting a bunch more unneeded rain from Michael. I, for one, would be heartbroken if the entire state washed into the sea.
 

repoman0

Diamond Member
Jun 17, 2010
3,079
1,344
136
well that depend on what temperature we end at, we could end up like venus if we don't do anything.
Nah, CO2 concentration has been multiple times higher in the past. Antarctica used to be a tropical rainforest filled with dinosaurs. Plant and reptile life will thrive even if humans and mammals die off. All traces of humanity will eventually get buried deep under the earth and destroyed as tectonic plates shift and continents realign.

The earth will be fine. What this is really about is deciding whether it has to kill off a good chunk of the human population and other species on the planet in order to get there. If it does, then we deserve it.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,874
4,204
126
Carbon Tax - OMG teh gubmint theft at gunpointz!
Fuel/Carbon/GHG reducing regulation - OMG teh Jerb killingz!
Carbon Market - OMG teh stewpit!
"Galactic Survey 19482, Species 5618 summary-
Primitive intelligence failed due to the inability to anticipate and plan for consequences of technology.

Status- Extinct.
Notable characteristics- None.

Report ends".
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,631
2,779
136
Carbon Tax - OMG teh gubmint theft at gunpointz!
Fuel/Carbon/GHG reducing regulation - OMG teh Jerb killingz!
Carbon Market - OMG teh stewpit!
What do we do as it seems we can’t fix stupid? Our share (2.5% of GDP) is ~$500B for twenty years to limit the damage due to climate change. The damage due to stupidity is catastrophic.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
30,966
9,756
146
It's even easier to get people to listen to you when what you want them to listen to is enshrined in law. Actually it's the only way to get the majority of people to listen to you. There is absolutely no chance that a large enough number of people to make a difference goes green out of the goodness of their hearts, we need systemic changes.

You're SlowSpyder levels of retarded, shut up. All you're doing is digging the hole deeper.
He missed what fski's logic was, and ranted about his concern over leading g by example, except it's still disingenuous as he doesn't require that of his own leaders
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,083
490
126
Hey think I have figured it out. The goal is to heat the earth so it is more friendly to reptiles aka lizard people. You know people within our govt.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,206
19,030
136
Based on that logic, why should the general public want to go green then? if what one person (or 4,000 in a 4 day period) does has no bearing, why do we even need electric cars?

Last year, I made a statement that it doesn't matter what the US does because of all the pollution being generated by India and China and some liberal here responded along the lines that two wrongs don't make a right and that we all need to do our part...guess that went out the window....

Guess you haven't heard the phrase "lead by example" then??? It is more difficult to get people to listen to your message when you say one thing yet do another....this is just plain common sense which is something liberals just don't understand...
I agree this is a collective action problem that requires a government response, that's how you get everyone to do it. It's just like taxes.
 

Zorba

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 1999
7,838
1,728
136
Fair enough. Both probably is the best answer. But I'm concerned about selling a carbon tax to the American people in an election, more so than tax credits. If we can't win an election, then you know what the alternative is...doing nothing.
I agree that credits are easier to sell, but I don't think they are nearly as effective. It also shifts the external cost burden on to society instead of the producer which doesn't motivate the producer to change.

I think for a carbon tax to work we'd have to tariff any goods coming into the US based on their carbon footprint as well.

I just don't see how any real sequestering effort could ever take hold without a carbon tax or cap and trade.
 

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
26,766
3,753
126
Last year, I made a statement that it doesn't matter what the US does because of all the pollution being generated by India and China and some liberal here responded along the lines that two wrongs don't make a right and that we all need to do our part...guess that went out the window....
The US is a way worse emiter of greenhouse gases than China or India per capita.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
15,880
3,466
136
Last year, I made a statement that it doesn't matter what the US does because of all the pollution being generated by India and China and some liberal here responded along the lines that two wrongs don't make a right and that we all need to do our part...guess that went out the window....

.
Among the top three nations, China is the undisputed renewable growth leader, accounting for over 40% of the total global clean energy mix by 2022. This is due to meeting various capacity targets and addressing concerns about the country’s air pollution.

In recent months, for example, China has deployed a number of novel technologies designed to clean the air, including a 100-metre-tall smog-sucking tower in the city of Xian.

China has also already surpassed its 2020 solar panel target, and the IEA says it expects the country to exceed its wind target in 2019. China is also the global market leader in hydropower, bioenergy for electricity and heat, and electric vehicles.
In India, meanwhile, renewable capacity is expected to more than double by 2022. Solar and wind represent 90% of India’s capacity growth, which is the result of auctions for contracts to develop power-generation capacity that have yielded some of the world’s lowest prices for both technologies, the report says.

It adds that India has also improved grid integration and addressed the financial issues of its utilities. Because of these factors, India’s growth between now and 2022 is, for the first time, expected to be higher than in the European Union (EU).
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/02/countries-behind-global-renewable-energy-growth/
 
  • Like
Reactions: dank69

ASK THE COMMUNITY