The GOP: Anti-Science and Proud Of It

Environment • Views: 6,073

Running for the late Robert Byrd’s Senate seat in West Virginia, GOP nominee John Raese is yet another anti-science far right Republican candidate, spouting pseudo-scientific gobbledegook about volcanoes to argue that he has “zero trust” in human-caused global warming.

Even as he joked that the tea party movement was “a little bit to the left” of his worldview, Raese was decidedly serious about his hardcore conservatism.

He said that he “violently opposed” the federal stimulus funds that Manchin accepted for the state, wanted to abolish the Department of Education (and potentially the Department of Energy), and favored congressional term limits.

Turning back to the coal industry, Raese said that he had “zero” belief in the idea that human activity was contributing to climate change.

“The oceans that surround the world produce 185 billion tons of CO2 per annum. Man per annum only produces six billion tons, so what could possibly be the concern?” Raese said. “One volcano puts out more toxic gases-one volcano-than man makes in a whole year. And when you look at this ‘climate change,’ and when you look at the regular climate change that we all have in the world, we have warm and we have cooling spells.”

The kindest interpretation you can put on this nonsense is that Raese is mistaken. I tend to believe he’s deliberately lying.

Skeptical Science has the truth about these deniers’ talking points: Do volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans?

The burning of fossil fuels results in the emission into the atmosphere of approximately 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year worldwide, according to the EIA. The fossil fuels emissions numbers are about 100 times bigger than even the maximum estimated volcanic CO2 fluxes. Our understanding of volcanic discharges would have to be shown to be very mistaken before volcanic CO2 discharges could be considered anything but a bit player in contributing to the recent changes observed in the concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere.

(Hat tip: Climate Progress.)

Jump to bottom

95 comments
1 shutdown  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:06:29pm

People post first comments to threads for the same reason they climb Everest: It’s there. And I can post from sitting on my ass.

2 Political Atheist  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:07:31pm

Okay now about the toxic gases emitted by Mr Raese as he spoke…

3 euphgeek  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:07:46pm

The entire GOP reminds me of this:

Image: beliefs.jpg

4 engineer cat  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:08:14pm

A new poll shows Republican tea party candidate Rand Paul losing his lead in the Kentucky Senate race, but he still remains competitive.

Democrat Jack Conway has cut into Paul’s lead in the Kentucky Senate race and is now in a statistical tie with Republican, according to a new Courier-Journal/WHAS11 Bluegrass Poll.

The poll, conducted by SurveyUSA, finds Paul, an ophthalmologist and son of Texas Rep. Ron Paul, leading the state attorney general 49 to 47 percent among likely voters, with 4 percent undecided. That puts Paul’s lead within the poll’s 4-point margin of error.

The last Bluegrass Poll, released at the start of September, showed Paul, a tea party candidate, leading 55 to 40 percent.

5 shutdown  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:10:50pm

BBL, time to get some work done.

6 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:13:05pm

Politicians truly need to believe the lies they are telling. It allows them to appear sincere, which appeals to people and makes people vote for them.

But the people who back the politicians know what is going on. They are the ones who stand to benefit from their candidates spreading falisifications.

7 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:13:54pm

It is kind of hard to imagine a Republican candidate from W VA that wouldn’t be an AGW skeptic. They would be getting lots of coin from the coal industry, and that industry has been very clear that it views any attempts to address AGW as a gun aimed at its head.

So while this is disappointing, it is not surprising.

8 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:15:09pm

re: #7 garhighway

The people behind the candidates…

9 elizajane  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:15:42pm

I suspect that he does believe it.

It’s an interesting Tea Party phenomenon: Selective Belief Syndrome. Characterized by a wildly intense belief in any fact that suits their pre-conceived narrative, and extreme aversion to contrary evidence.

I think of it as right up there with Selective Misreading Syndrome, applied to various foundational texts. Like citing “Am I my brother’s keeper?” as Biblical justification for opposing national healthcare, while forgetting that Cain was damned forever by God for his little fratricidal thing.

11 Sol Berdinowitz  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:18:23pm

re: #9 elizajane

We all tend to think that way, and it takes a great deal of effort and intellectual discipline to questions one’s own beliefs and try to examine them in the light of counter aguments.

Nobody ever succeeds completely in overcoming one’s preconceived notions, but some people make no effort whatsoever, especially if they see no political advantage in doing so.

12 Charles Johnson  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:19:24pm

It might be more newsworthy if someone could find a Republican who doesn’t deny global warming.

Now that would be a ‘man bites dog’ story.

13 Ojoe  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:19:28pm

What does he mean by “toxic gasses?” it is hard to have a rational discussion unless terms are defined. Perhaps he means some sort of sulphur fumes too. But he doesn’t say. It is all very nebulous. Which is not very scientific.

BBL

14 DaddyG  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:23:00pm
15 DaddyG  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:23:35pm

re: #14 DaddyG
For those of you enjoying the climate on the west coast today.

16 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:24:30pm

re: #15 DaddyG

Enjoying my ass. It’s hotter than 7 shades of hell here and going out means instant sweat bath.

17 rwmofo  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:25:00pm

A democrat congressman is bragging about voting with George Bush and Republicans in his campaign ad.

They’re getting desperate.

Heh.

18 Randall Gross  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:27:41pm

This volcano meme started with Dixie Lee Ray iirc and it just won’t die, it’s telling that the idiot GOP is so willing to retread this ad infinitum. While DLR was a Dem, she was more conservative than many R’s at that time, so don’t let the party affiliation fool you.

While vulcanism can still be posited to have some effects on collapsing ice shelves (magnitude unknown) it’s ridiculous to try to use them to explain atmospheric CO2 levels, and what they contribute is often offset by reflective particulates, which makes the more explosive volcanoes cool the earth (you can see a downward jog in the temperature from Pinatubo.)

19 DaddyG  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:28:16pm

re: #16 Dreggas

Enjoying my ass. It’s hotter than 7 shades of hell here and going out means instant sweat bath.

This is the first week in 2 months that we haven’t hit a humid 90+ here in Altanta. I’m noticing the effect on record long term heat on my plants. (Non-scientific of course but there is a shift in what grows and what doesn’t since we moved here a decade ago).

20 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:30:04pm

re: #19 DaddyG

I have a chili garden and was worried when the temps were low the past few weeks but they did surprisingly well. I am waiting to see how they deal with the heat, supposedly the hotter the better so I am glad it warmed up. However I didn’t request the oven that we have right now.

21 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:32:02pm

re: #17 rwmofo

A democrat congressman is bragging about voting with George Bush and Republicans in his campaign ad.

They’re getting desperate.

Heh.

He found the one time Bush acted like a Democrat. Although the fundamental structure of the RX benefit program was pretty strange.

22 wrenchwench  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:32:09pm
[Updated at 12:52 p.m.: As of 12:50 p.m.: downtown L.A. had hit 113 degrees, a record high. Stuart Seto, a forecaster for the National Weather Service, said that’s the hottest temperature recorded at the downtown station since record-keeping began in 1877.]

I endured three weeks of over-100 degrees one summer, but I don’t think it ever hit 113. That’s hot.

23 Political Atheist  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:32:40pm

re: #12 Charles

Not AGW but an interesting side note…

SNIP
I asked Brown about his opposition to it last month, at a campaign stop in Medfield.

“If we don’t use cap and trade, how do we reduce emissions?” I wondered.

“You can reduce by conservation, wind, solar, hydroelectric, nuclear,” Brown told me. “You can provide a total package and let people have different avenues and different ways to heat and light their businesses. How does government enforce that? They have their hands in pretty much everything. I’m sure there’ll be a role for government — and at some point, government needs to get out of the way, as well.”

What you won’t hear in one of Brown’s campaign speeches is that cap and trade is actually an idea first championed by a Republican president.

Fred Krupp, the president of the Environmental Defense Fund, remembers getting an invitation from Vice President George H.W. Bush’s office to come up with a market mechanism to control acid rain.

“His counsel, Boyden Gray, invited the Environmental Defense Fund to help put together a practical idea that would reduce sulphur dioxide emissions,” Krupp recalled. “And that was to become the first big-scale use of cap and trade.”

And, Krupp said, the cap and trade system worked. For example, it helped clean up the streams in the White Mountains of New Hampshire.

The Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest is where someone first figured out that there is something called acid rain in North America. Scientist have been measuring the changes in the acidity of some of the streams here. They also measure the changes in acidity of the rainwater.

Geoff Wilson is the forest’s program director. “We can say for sure that the acidity of the rainwater has become less over time and the acidity of the stream water has become less over time,” Wilson said.

Acid rain here is still a problem, but not as bad as it used to be.

“The use of emissions trading on acid rain has been the single biggest achievement in environmental policy, probably in the last 20 years,” said Krupp, the president of the Environmental Defense Fund. “The reason is: suddenly we aligned the profit motive with reducing sulphur emissions.”

24 wrenchwench  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:33:49pm

re: #20 Dreggas

I have a chili garden and was worried when the temps were low the past few weeks but they did surprisingly well. I am waiting to see how they deal with the heat, supposedly the hotter the better so I am glad it warmed up. However I didn’t request the oven that we have right now.

I harvested 58 Serranos this morning.

25 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:33:50pm

re: #22 wrenchwench

it’s currently 107 here in newport.

26 DaddyG  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:35:57pm

re: #25 Dreggas

it’s currently 107 here in newport.

Is it a dry heat? /

27 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:36:54pm

re: #23 Rightwingconspirator

Not AGW but an interesting side note…

SNIP
I asked Brown about his opposition to it last month, at a campaign stop in Medfield.

“If we don’t use cap and trade, how do we reduce emissions?” I wondered.

“You can reduce by conservation, wind, solar, hydroelectric, nuclear,” Brown told me. “You can provide a total package and let people have different avenues and different ways to heat and light their businesses. How does government enforce that? They have their hands in pretty much everything. I’m sure there’ll be a role for government — and at some point, government needs to get out of the way, as well.”

What you won’t hear in one of Brown’s campaign speeches is that cap and trade is actually an idea first championed by a Republican president.

Fred Krupp, the president of the Environmental Defense Fund, remembers getting an invitation from Vice President George H.W. Bush’s office to come up with a market mechanism to control acid rain.

“His counsel, Boyden Gray, invited the Environmental Defense Fund to help put together a practical idea that would reduce sulphur dioxide emissions,” Krupp recalled. “And that was to become the first big-scale use of cap and trade.”

And, Krupp said, the cap and trade system worked. For example, it helped clean up the streams in the White Mountains of New Hampshire.

The Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest is where someone first figured out that there is something called acid rain in North America. Scientist have been measuring the changes in the acidity of some of the streams here. They also measure the changes in acidity of the rainwater.

Geoff Wilson is the forest’s program director. “We can say for sure that the acidity of the rainwater has become less over time and the acidity of the stream water has become less over time,” Wilson said.

Acid rain here is still a problem, but not as bad as it used to be.

“The use of emissions trading on acid rain has been the single biggest achievement in environmental policy, probably in the last 20 years,” said Krupp, the president of the Environmental Defense Fund. “The reason is: suddenly we aligned the profit motive with reducing sulphur emissions.”

And while “cap and trade” has been turned into “cap and tax” by the Fox/GOP noise machine, the sad fact is that you have to have government intervention in one form or another to get reduction in greenhouse gases. Alternative energy sources cannot compete with oil and coal without subsidy or intervention of one sort or another: those technologies have fully developed, large scale infrastructure that gives them great advantages. Solar, wind and the rest do not.

So whether it is cap-and-trade or some other method, getting serious about AGW means government interference in the energy marketplace.

28 Idle Drifter  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:37:05pm

re: #26 DaddyG

Is it a dry heat? /

A bonfire is a dry heat!

29 engineer cat  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:37:36pm

re: #17 rwmofo

A democrat congressman is bragging about voting with George Bush and Republicans in his campaign ad.

They’re getting desperate.

Heh.

to judge by the velocity and amperage of tea party and fox news lying, they would seem to be pretty desperate about something as well

30 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:39:17pm

re: #26 DaddyG

yeah. Oven roasting dry. If humidity was added into the mix we’d all be dead I am sure lol.

31 Mich-again  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:42:07pm

I don’t deny the science of AGW, but I do deny some of the dumb political solutions our leaders have dreamt up to take on the problem. We ridicule people who deny science unless that science happens to be economics.

32 sattv4u2  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:42:24pm

re: #26 DaddyG

Is it a dry heat? /

When anyone asks that of me, I say

How would I know ,, it was too FRAKKIN HOT for me to notice

33 abolitionist  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:42:30pm

These “cloud graphs” are consistent with the stated numbers if you consider them to be 2-dimensional, ie, the areas represent the quantities of interest. Areas scale according to the width squared. (Or any linear measure squared.)

But most people think of clouds as 3-dimensional. Volumes scale according to the width cubed. I really hate deceptive graphs.

34 Idle Drifter  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:43:42pm

re: #32 sattv4u2

When anyone asks that of me, I say

How would I know ,, it was too FRAKKIN HOT for me to notice

That would be nerve damage.

35 iossarian  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:44:20pm

re: #31 Mich-again

I don’t deny the science of AGW, but I do deny some of the dumb political solutions our leaders have dreamt up to take on the problem. We ridicule people who deny science unless that science happens to be economics.

What are these “dumb solutions”?

36 euphgeek  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:47:54pm

re: #12 Charles

It might be more newsworthy if someone could find a Republican who doesn’t deny global warming.

Now that would be a ‘man bites dog’ story.

Charles, they are out there but they are usually denounced as RINOs and voted out of office.

37 Stan the Demanded Plan  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:50:35pm

re: #25 Dreggas

it’s currently 107 here in newport.

103 San Marcos.

Pity party!

38 sattv4u2  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:51:44pm

re: #25 Dreggas

it’s currently 107 here in newport.

If it hits 110, SELL!!

39 engineer cat  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:56:36pm

clearly, god created global warming just to confuse AGW deniers, just like he made fossils to confound scientists

40 Brother Holy Cruise Missile of Mild Acceptance  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:56:57pm

re: #37 Stanley Sea

what gets me is that the week before the first day of fall it felt like fall here. Then the first day of fall comes and BOOM it’s triple digits.

41 Killgore Trout  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 1:59:23pm

We’re warm in Portland today too. 83 and muggy. It wouldn’t be remarkable but we’ve had a very cool summer.

42 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:00:28pm

OT: Here is a cool graphic that illustrates the relationship between payroll and W - L record in Major League Baseball:

[Link: www.nytimes.com…]

43 Ojoe  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:01:30pm

Super excellent Towercam view.

It is changing quickly.

44 Summer Seale  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:02:48pm

All I have to say is…they’ve really become the party of feckin’ eejits.

45 Killgore Trout  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:03:01pm

This could be interesting….
Wow


Wow, we’re watching a totally mind-blowing interview that Fox News’ Stuart Varney is holding practically yelling at some econ professor from Occidental. Gobsmackingest thing I’ve ever seen. Not even sure where to start. We’ll try to get the video.

I’m not even quite sure how to describe it other than it seemed out of the norm in terms of ranthood even by the copiously rantishous standards of Fox News.

46 Ojoe  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:03:25pm

re: #44 Summer

Check out the Modern Whig Party.

BBL

47 Mich-again  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:04:53pm

re: #35 iossarian

I disagreed with Kyoto and Cap and Trade. I believe we need to have a strong economy to provide the tax revenues for the massive investment required for a new efficient sustainable energy infrastructure. We can’t get from here to a green future without a cash cow to pay for it all. Shrinking the economy to cut energy use is not a good long term plan.

48 Liberal Classic  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:05:04pm

I’m a capitalist, and I see emissions trading generally as a positive thing. It is a method for harnessing market forces to help achieve public policy goals. I’m not too optimistic at the moment, because neither party seems to be on track towards energy independence. The Democrats cannot seem to shake their aversion to nuclear power generation, which I consider a necessity for reducing our reliance on foreign oil and reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The Republicans seem to have their head in the sand that there is even a problem at all. Neither party has expressed any real long-term vision, such as how is our civilization going to cope with rising coastlines and changing growing seasons and habitats. Most pols don’t think much past the next election anyway. How can they be expected to plan for five hundred years in the future when there are palm trees and alligators in Seattle.

49 Summer Seale  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:07:47pm

re: #46 Ojoe

Check out the Modern Whig Party.

BBL

I have. You’ve been tenacious about it since a year and a half. =) But I live in France now so it really is out of my scope atm. I can just basically vote for president.

Anyway, night all. =)

50 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:07:52pm

re: #47 Mich-again

I disagreed with Kyoto and Cap and Trade. I believe we need to have a strong economy to provide the tax revenues for the massive investment required for a new efficient sustainable energy infrastructure. We can’t get from here to a green future without a cash cow to pay for it all. Shrinking the economy to cut energy use is not a good long term plan.

So how would you have us get to reduced emissions? So long as gas, oil and coal are cheaper energy sources, why would private industry invest in the more expensive alternatives?

How do you think this is going to work?

51 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:09:16pm

Dammit, sorry, I wrote that speech for Mr. Raese and I seem to have somehow accidentally moved the decimal place several spaces to the left. Oops, my bad ;)

///want to buy a bridge for dirt cheap?

52 sattv4u2  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:12:23pm

re: #51 ausador

Dammit, sorry, I wrote that speech for Mr. Raese and I seem to have somehow accidentally moved the decimal place several spaces to the left. Oops, my bad ;)

///want to buy a bridge for dirt cheap?

Is it at least a bridge to SOMEWHERE !?!?!

53 goddamnedfrank  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:15:17pm

re: #37 Stanley Sea

103 San Marcos.

Pity party!

108 right now in downtown Underbelly.

54 sattv4u2  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:16:27pm

Speaking of weather

Marble size hail pelting Calhoun Georgia

55 freetoken  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:18:58pm
“The oceans that surround the world produce 185 billion tons of CO2 per annum. Man per annum only produces six billion tons, …”

Not only does this show an ignorance of the science, but it also demonstrates why the GOP can’t balance a budget - it’s anti-accounting also.

Namely, this candidate has left off an entire column on the ledger - the consumption of CO2 by the plants (mostly plankton) in the ocean.

It’s like he’s counting credits (to the atmosphere) only, and not debits!

56 Mich-again  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:19:54pm

Why would anyone watch Fox News at all? re: #50 garhighway

So how would you have us get to reduced emissions? So long as gas, oil and coal are cheaper energy sources, why would private industry invest in the more expensive alternatives?

How do you think this is going to work?

What I’m saying is that if the economy is in the tank, the government won’t be able to pay for the new infrastructure and neither will private industries.

57 freetoken  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:20:56pm

I’ve been watching some videos of local (San Diego county) candidates “debates”, and to a person every GOP candidate I’ve come across has denied AGW.

58 Killgore Trout  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:21:36pm

James Delingpole exposes the New World Order…..
Global Cooling and the New World Order

The wheels are starting to come off the AGW bandwagon. Ordinary people, resisting two decades of concerted brainwashing, are starting to notice.

All this, of course, spells big trouble for the global power elite.

It is time we put a stop to this. In the US, the Tea Party movement is showing us the way. We need to punish these dodgy politicians at the ballot box. We need to ensure that those scientists guilty of malfeasance are, at the very least thrown out of the jobs which we taxpayers have been funding these last decades. We need to ensure that corporatist profiteers are no longer able to benefit from the distortion and corruption of the markets which result from green regulation.

We need a “Global Warming” Nuremberg.

59 Romantic Heretic  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:22:13pm

re: #25 Dreggas

it’s currently 107 here in newport.

15C (58F) and raining here. A bit chilly for late September.

60 freetoken  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:23:40pm

re: #58 Killgore Trout

Delingpole has been (for some time) evidence that the Telegraph is slowly moving to Murdoch-type tabloidism.

Delingpole is also a fav of the UKIP crowd, including the now banned Bagua.

61 rwdflynavy  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:24:00pm

re: #50 garhighway

So how would you have us get to reduced emissions? So long as gas, oil and coal are cheaper energy sources, why would private industry invest in the more expensive alternatives?

How do you think this is going to work?

I’d like to see huge tax incentives for businesses to install wind/solar. Imagine if every wal-mart roof was covered with solar panels? It would be a good start.

62 Mich-again  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:24:58pm

I would at least be amused by a curmudgeon GOP candidate who ran with the line that we actually “need” extra greenhouse gases in the air to help us all stay warm after the impending meteor strike/massive volcano due our way blots out the sun for a couple years. At least it would be something new for once..

63 Yashmak  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:26:42pm
The kindest interpretation you can put on this nonsense is that Raese is mistaken. I tend to believe he’s deliberately lying.

- Charles

Possibly, but there’s another possibility as well. At one point in time, I heard (and temporarily believed - for about 2 days) a similar figure … but then I realized the folks spreading this had confused carbon, and carbon dioxide. One is a solid (ash), and one is a greenhouse gas. The former falls to the ground on its own, the latter stays in the atmosphere until processed. However, the scientifically ignorant might not so quickly understand the difference.

64 Killgore Trout  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:27:50pm

re: #60 freetoken

Delingpole has been (for some time) evidence that the Telegraph is slowly moving to Murdoch-type tabloidism.

Delingpole is also a fav of the UKIP crowd, including the now banned Bagua.

I know he writes for American conservative sites like Human Events too. I seem to recall him on staff at PJM but I think they might have let him go.

65 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:34:11pm

re: #56 Mich-again

Why would anyone watch Fox News at all?

What I’m saying is that if the economy is in the tank, the government won’t be able to pay for the new infrastructure and neither will private industries.

So until the economy reaches some predetermined level of performance, we do nothing?

Are there any other issues you see that way? Or do you save that view for those issues that involve the well being of the whole planet?

66 Interesting Times  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:35:00pm

re: #58 Killgore Trout

James Delingpole exposes the New World Order…
Global Cooling and the New World Order

The quote was bad enough; no way am I reading the whole article - that much concentrated dishonesty, douchebaggery, and dumbness is bound to be hazardous to one’s health o_O

I just can’t find the words to express my disgust for these anti-science morons and the damage they’re doing. There’s another country who doesn’t have the same problem, and if they succeed in displacing the US as the world’s only superpower, you know who to blame:

“There is really no debate about climate change in China,” said Peggy Liu, chairwoman of the Joint U.S.-China Collaboration on Clean Energy, a nonprofit group working to accelerate the greening of China. “China’s leaders are mostly engineers and scientists, so they don’t waste time questioning scientific data.” The push for green in China, she added, “is a practical discussion on health and wealth. There is no need to emphasize future consequences when people already see, eat and breathe pollution every day.”

67 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:37:15pm

re: #61 rwdflynavy

I’d like to see huge tax incentives for businesses to install wind/solar. Imagine if every wal-mart roof was covered with solar panels? It would be a good start.

I like that, but I am reminded that neither wind nor solar are good “base load” sources of power, since the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine.

I don’t see how we get out of this without going much, much bigger into nuclear.

68 Mich-again  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:39:10pm

re: #65 garhighway No you’re missing the point. If the solution requires massive investment in new power generation facilities, new electrical grid, etc, than the policy needs to take into account that the economy has to keep churning out the tax revenue to pay for that investment. We can’t shrink the economy and invest in the green future simultaneously. Simply imposing huge new taxes on energy usage will not pay for the years of investment we need.

69 Political Atheist  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:46:56pm

re: #61 rwdflynavy

And note many places are not open at night so solar makes sense for daytime help with energy. In summer they can still be open late. Only very late operations would need to fall back on the grid or batteries.

I hate to pimp for anyone not paying (J/k!) But one power idea I like a great deal is retrofitting old design nuclear power plants with compact safer designs. Hyperion baby! Already being tested. Not a theory, or just another cool idea in a magazine. Likely to be installed soon. I’m far from the first to post about it here, but the link has news from this month.

[Link: www.aikenstandard.com…]

70 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:47:05pm

re: #68 Mich-again

NWe can’t shrink the economy and invest in the green future simultaneously.

Please find me a quote from any respectable economist who proposes doing that.

By definition, “shrinking the economy” means throwing us back into recession. I hear no one advocating that. Might we have to sacrifice a little piece of future growth to address this problem? Yes.

But remember, waiting means increasing the cost of remediation. A lot. So deferring the fix means loading a more severe problem, and more severe costs, onto future taxpayers. That sound good to you?

Generally, the “wait until times are better” argument is rarely advanced in good faith. It is part of the “delay, deny and defer” school of AGW denial, all of which is based on the idea that posting a few more quarters of good results in the energy business is a goal worth messing up the planet to accomplish.

71 webevintage  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:48:51pm

Fucking Magnets, How Do They Work?
/

72 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:49:27pm

re: #52 sattv4u2

Is it at least a bridge to SOMEWHERE !?!?!

At low tide there is a fairly substantially sand bar there, at high tide…well…at least you can wade on it without drowning (Disclaimer: 6’6” height required to avoid treading water).

/

73 sattv4u2  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:50:00pm

re: #67 garhighway

I like that, but I am reminded that neither wind nor solar are good “base load” sources of power, since the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine.

I don’t see how we get out of this without going much, much bigger into nuclear.

How about a happy medium to start

Give tax incentives to a Wal Mart (for instance) for installing and using roof solar. When the stored energy starts running out they can switch to shore power until their batteries have regained a sufficient level

Here at work we have a similar arrangement with the local power company. During peak demand times they’ll call and ask if we could go on our inhouse generators for awhile. If we do that for “X” amount of hours per month they give us a 10% 9iirc0 discount on that months bill

74 rwdflynavy  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:50:26pm

re: #69 Rightwingconspirator

And note many places are not open at night so solar makes sense for daytime help with energy. In summer they can still be open late. Only very late operations would need to fall back on the grid or batteries.

I hate to pimp for anyone not paying (J/k!) But one power idea I like a great deal is retrofitting old design nuclear power plants with compact safer designs. Hyperion baby! Already being tested. Not a theory, or just another cool idea in a magazine. Likely to be installed soon. I’m far from the first to post about it here, but the link has news from this month.

[Link: www.aikenstandard.com…]


I am all for nuclear, but realize that the NIMBY NAMBY PAMBIES will make waves. Hard to complain about solar panels on top of a flat roof building in your “backyard”.

75 rwdflynavy  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:51:58pm

re: #74 rwdflynavy

I am all for nuclear, but realize that the NIMBY NAMBY PAMBIES will make waves. Hard to complain about solar panels on top of a flat roof building in your “backyard”.


rwdflynavy owns all references to NIMBY NAMBY PAMBIES. All rights reserved…
//

76 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 2:54:36pm

re: #74 rwdflynavy

I am all for nuclear, but realize that the NIMBY NAMBY PAMBIES will make waves. Hard to complain about solar panels on top of a flat roof building in your “backyard”.

I am all for the tax credit route. I also recognize that Nimby-ism will require that some of the things we need to happen, like nuclear, will require some federal preemption of state and local processes, lest the Nimbys be able to gum up the works.

77 freetoken  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:01:35pm

As I often do, my plea is that no matter how bad the effects become for society, our imminent problems are already being avoided by many.

For example, in many parts of the world fresh water is a current problem, including out here in the western part of this country. Lake Mead just recorded its lowest August level since the original infilling and 1950’s drought:
[Link: arachnoid.com…]
(note that the sharp decrease in the early 60’s was due to restricted water flow because of the infilling of Lake Powell.)

Global warming will make many of these water issues worse, but my point is that there is a problem today, and yet most US political discussions avoid this.

There are many other energy and ecological issues that are very pressing (species loss, food source threats, etc.) and we treat them with the same disregard, as far as political decisions, as AGW.

78 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:03:47pm

re: #77 freetoken

As I often do, my plea is that no matter how bad the effects become for society, our imminent problems are already being avoided by many.

For example, in many parts of the world fresh water is a current problem, including out here in the western part of this country. Lake Mead just recorded its lowest August level since the original infilling and 1950’s drought:
[Link: arachnoid.com…]
(note that the sharp decrease in the early 60’s was due to restricted water flow because of the infilling of Lake Powell.)

Global warming will make many of these water issues worse, but my point is that there is a problem today, and yet most US political discussions avoid this.

There are many other energy and ecological issues that are very pressing (species loss, food source threats, etc.) and we treat them with the same disregard, as far as political decisions, as AGW.

Sorry: gotta wait for business to get better.

/

79 Political Atheist  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:05:00pm

re: #74 rwdflynavy

I am all for nuclear, but realize that the NIMBY NAMBY PAMBIES will make waves. Hard to complain about solar panels on top of a flat roof building in your “backyard”.


Minor rant-
It’s not hard to complain about that. Those fools abound. Note “Codes, Covenants and Regulations”. I have a problem with that kind of “authority” I guess.

Many home owners have to submit paint samples, or worse, choose from a list that the neighborhood likes. Imagine that couple at home trying to get the ok’s for solar or wind.

Ask folks in gated communities if they can do roof solar, wind towers and the like. Then see if the state is even ready to issue permits for new energy technologies in consumers hands. So far not so much.

I’d love to hear from lizards who do this work, and hear if that permit atmosphere has improved. I’d love to have Ludwig for my advocate at the permit meetings though. :) Heh.

80 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:08:45pm

re: #79 Rightwingconspirator

Minor rant-
It’s not hard to complain about that. Those fools abound. Note “Codes, Covenants and Regulations”. I have a problem with that kind of “authority” I guess.

Many home owners have to submit paint samples, or worse, choose from a list that the neighborhood likes. Imagine that couple at home trying to get the ok’s for solar or wind.

Ask folks in gated communities if they can do roof solar, wind towers and the like. Then see if the state is even ready to issue permits for new energy technologies in consumers hands. So far not so much.

I’d love to hear from lizards who do this work, and hear if that permit atmosphere has improved. I’d love to have Ludwig for my advocate at the permit meetings though. :) Heh.

I don’t think the permit environment has eased up any. And I would note that in the residential setting, a lot of restrictions are essentially self-inflicted. The developer put the restrictions in the deeds or other foundational documents to make the development more desirable.

Fixing that problem requires some high-level legislative intervention, and my hunch (which is just that and no more) is that the real estate industry would fight such changes tooth and nail.

81 sattv4u2  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:18:56pm

re: #80 garhighway

Fixing that problem requires some high-level legislative intervention,

No it doesn’t. I lived for a time in one such sub division. There was one particular onerous covenant in place by the original builder who by the time I moved in had no stake left in the community. We (the property owners) came up with a mutually agreeable compromise and revised the covenant.

82 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:24:04pm

re: #81 sattv4u2

Fixing that problem requires some high-level legislative intervention,

No it doesn’t. I lived for a time in one such sub division. There was one particular onerous covenant in place by the original builder who by the time I moved in had no stake left in the community. We (the property owners) came up with a mutually agreeable compromise and revised the covenant.

That works if you all agree.

I consider it likely that in many/most cases, all the owners will not agree. Nimby and such.

83 Political Atheist  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:27:36pm

re: #81 sattv4u2

Fixing that problem requires some high-level legislative intervention,

No it doesn’t. I lived for a time in one such sub division. There was one particular onerous covenant in place by the original builder who by the time I moved in had no stake left in the community. We (the property owners) came up with a mutually agreeable compromise and revised the covenant.

Thats encouraging.

84 sattv4u2  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:29:30pm

re: #82 garhighway

That works if you all agree.

I consider it likely that in many/most cases, all the owners will not agree. Nimby and such.

The larger point was “high level leg. intervention” is not needed

85 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:35:37pm

re: #84 sattv4u2

The larger point was “high level leg. intervention” is not needed

And your larger point is, by and large, wrong. Since the case where everyone in the subdivision gets together, sings Kumbayah and signs on the dotted line will be 1 out of 20 or so, if we want to empower residential use of the sorts of technologies we are talking about, the law will have to change. Otherwise, the one guy in the subdivision who says no will win. That’s how the law is currently structured.

Changing that requires either a State Supreme Court to change it (activist judges!) or state legislative action. Or federal preemption.

I admit I could be wrong about my “1 in 20” prediction, but I don’t think I am. I have been around a lot of those sorts of disputes, and they get ugly and contentious quickly, especially among higher-end homeowners.

86 Ojoe  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:39:28pm

re: #67 garhighway

Solar electricity is actually a good match to demand because max demand comes in hot months when there is a big air conditioning load and that is precisely when the photovoltaics are producing the most electricity.

87 garhighway  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:44:32pm

re: #86 Ojoe

Solar electricity is actually a good match to demand because max demand comes in hot months when there is a big air conditioning load and that is precisely when the photovoltaics are producing the most electricity.

Don’t misunderstand me: I’m not against solar. Far from it. But it, and wind, are only a partial answer. You cannot run a grid with just them. You need base load power that works in the dark, cold and rain. That’s hydro, which is pretty much maxed out in North America, oil,. gas, coal or nuclear. I am unaware of any other technologies that would work for 24/7 base load power. (Fuel cells?)

But I like the idea of rules that tilt the table towards those alternative energy sources, and I am not particularly invested in any given technique.

88 Ojoe  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:47:43pm

re: #87 garhighway

It will have to be a mix of many sources, you are right about that.

89 sattv4u2  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 3:56:55pm

re: #85 garhighway

I admit I could be wrong about my “1 in 20” prediction,

I would say it’s more like 20-1!

The lawsuits that you see where a homeowner wants to fly a flag on a pole 6”s higher than allowed or to leave a car on blocks in his driveway are the exception rather than the rule

90 lostlakehiker  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 7:09:43pm

re: #1 imp_62

People post first comments to threads for the same reason they climb Everest: It’s there. And I can post from sitting on my ass.

Can you climb Everest from there?

And now to the serious point: I think Mr. Raese is not lying when he says he believes that nonsense about volcanoes. If I try to get inside his head and think like he’d have to be thinking to honestly believe what he says, it’s not all that impossible:

Nature is mighty, man is puny. This is apparent to one and all. I ain’t inclined to busy my head with numbers and suchnot, but prefer to cut straight to a conclusion that’s simple, straightforward, well received in conversation, and gosh-darn-it, appealing. Volcanoes, part of nature, are a bigger player in the CO2 situation than my own auto, which is visibly much smaller than a volcano.

Even as many autos as I can imagine, a whole traffic jam with thousands of them, don’t amount to anything compared to a volcano.

I don’t put much stock in flim-flam with estimates, and `papers’, and that sort of high falutin balderdash. If a man has something to say, let him say it straight up, I say. No charts and pie charts and numbers and computers spitting out made up numbers built on other made up numbers and chemistry—-did you know that chemistry grew out of alchemy? Kind of opens your eyes don’t it?—-just tell your story.

So I told mine and a lot of good people agree with me and the ones that agree with you are like these East Anglia professors who say they lost their code and anyway they tried to stop this brave dissident from publishing and did I tell you how Piltdown Man was a hoax?

Anyway, that’s how I got it figured.

91 lostlakehiker  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 7:15:12pm

re: #87 garhighway

Don’t misunderstand me: I’m not against solar. Far from it. But it, and wind, are only a partial answer. You cannot run a grid with just them. You need base load power that works in the dark, cold and rain. That’s hydro, which is pretty much maxed out in North America, oil,. gas, coal or nuclear. I am unaware of any other technologies that would work for 24/7 base load power. (Fuel cells?)

But I like the idea of rules that tilt the table towards those alternative energy sources, and I am not particularly invested in any given technique.

Hydro doesn’t have to run 7/24. It can be started and stopped without too much trouble. If you don’t use it then and there, it’s not like you’ll lose it. The water can pile up behind the dam for a while. It’ll keep. Refitting as many dams as possible with state of the art turbines would cost money, but it could come close to doubling the electricity got out of a given amount of potential energy.

Natural gas, too, is not terribly difficult to start and stop. These technologies can then be played to maximum advantage, running precisely when the contribution from wind and solar falters.

This tactic can allow for using wind and solar as a larger fraction of our total power than if we used hydro and natural gas as always-on.

We’ll still need coal for a while. There’s just no way around it. We’ve made too many mistakes NIMBYing nuclear power plant construction, and we must now live with the consequences.

92 Mich-again  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 7:46:42pm

re: #70 garhighway
First, an energy tax is a tax on consumption which will reduce consumption which will affect most every market negatively. Its not a stretch to say that a large new energy tax right now could stop the recovery, which would threaten ongoing funding for long term infrastructure projects. The trick is to not just wait until times get better, but make them get better. I say do that by focusing on cutting waste in energy use to help create a glut to crash the price. Then, the energy taxes can take a chunk of the windfall from lower prices to fund the new infrastructure.

There are different ways to get people to use less energy. One way is to tax the energy to make it more expensive so individuals will use less because they can’t afford otherwise. That seems to be the prevailing approach.
But another more practical way is to focus on helping consumers use less energy. There could be immediate gains just by timing all the stoplights in cities across the country and by improving traffic flow at highway construction projects. I think a 0.5 mpg average increase is within range. That would be huge. And along with that, the government itself could reduce energy use by converting schools to 4 day weeks or cutting US junk Mail delivery to a few days a week. There are a hundred ways like that the government could help reduce energy usage. All better than just sitting back and imposing energy taxes on consumers and waiting.

93 William  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 9:11:24pm

An interesting look at greenhouse gasses:

A United Nations report has identified the world’s rapidly growing herds of cattle as the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife. And they are blamed for a host of other environmental crimes, from acid rain to the introduction of alien species, from producing deserts to creating dead zones in the oceans, from poisoning rivers and drinking water to destroying coral reefs. The world’s 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 percent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together.

Unfortunately, the environmental community has focused its efforts almost exclusively on abating carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. This is a serious miscalculation. CO2 emissions are not the main cause of observed atmospheric warming. It’s true that human activity produces vastly more CO2 than all other greenhouse gases put together. However, this does not mean it is responsible for most of the earth’s warming. Many other greenhouse gases trap heat far more powerfully than CO2, some of them tens of thousands of times more powerfully. Methane is another gas that warms the world 20 times faster than carbon dioxide.

By far the most important non-CO2 greenhouse gas is methane, and the major source of methane worldwide is animal agriculture. Cattle wind and manure emit more than one third of emissions of methane.

[Link: www.greendiary.com…]

94 freetoken  Mon, Sep 27, 2010 9:27:07pm

re: #93 William

Sorry, but the writer of that article is just wrong.

While methane is quite a good absorber of IR, CH4 is also relatively (compared to CO2) short lived in the atmosphere, as it combines readily (i.e., burns) with oxygen.

Also, human caused methane comes from sources other than cows. For example rice production, given that most of it in the East is in wet fields that generate methane. So if one is really worried about human methane production then one would also have to ban many agricultural products other than meat.

It has been shown that the principal human affects on the climate are from the production of CO2 by both burning fossil fuels and by land use (e.g., clearing forests.)

95 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Tue, Sep 28, 2010 2:42:17am

re: #58 Killgore Trout

what kind of pole? A Delingpole!


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Ranked-Choice Voting Has Challenged the Status Quo. Its Popularity Will Be Tested in November. JUNEAU — Alaska’s new election system — with open primaries and ranked voting — has been a model for those in other states who are frustrated by political polarization and a sense that voters lack real choice at the ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 271 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1