Skepticism about Climate Change

[Farmer]

There you go again attacking me with insults rather than providing the hard-to-find research to refute my points.

It's not hard to find and it's not my role to do your research.  Since you've ably demonstrated that you can't do research, I'm not motivated in the slightest to do it for you.  Others who engage and read and make logical points, on the other hand, I'm happy to pull data for them.  But with you, no amount of data will make any difference.  You and Ray just dismiss it with your own theories, which you actually believe to be on par with people who actually know what they're talking about.

There's no possibility of reasonable debate with you, because you just make shit up and then insist it's possible despite the evidence.  You argue about science without any actual concept as to what it is, or any understanding of some of the most basic principles.  If you've managed 70+ years to avoid learning, it's certainly not my job to teach you now.

[pegelli]

There you go again attacking me with insults rather than providing the hard-to-find research to refute my points.

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

[LesPalenik]

You can definitely grow large vegetables with more CO2.

Keith Foster has been a Gardener for most of his career. Prior to starting his seed company, he was head Gardener to Lord and Lady Normanby (The Guinness Family) for 17 years. Before that he was Head Gardener to Lord Zetland in the UK.  Keith said, “I use a gas heater to heat the growing area, which raises my CO2 quite high, but the onions thrive on levels around 1,500 to 2,500ppm so they are OK. To grow onions to a world class size and weight, you need good reliable equipment,” he continued.  Most of my onions weigh around 14 lbs. each!”

https://www.co2meter.com/blogs/news/tim10-helps-grow-record-onion

[Farmer]

Triffids.

[LesPalenik]

This pales in comparison to the world's largest pumpkin grown in Belgium - a 2,624-pounder (1,190 kg).
Apparently, the record growing pumpkin farmers utilize a Lithovit spray product (CO2 treatment), targeting the plant leaves.

[Alan Klein]

You can definitely grow large vegetables with more CO2.



https://www.co2meter.com/blogs/news/tim10-helps-grow-record-onion

Stop confusing the Global Warming enthusiasts with all this stuff about CO2.  Anyway, the Brits are weird about gardening over there.  I mean, just look at that guy. For all we know it could be his left testicle.

[texshooter]

No worries.  If city air gets too toxic to breath, a Swiss company now sells canned fresh air.

https://swissfreshaircan.com

[pegelli]

Stop confusing the Global Warming enthusiasts with all this stuff about CO2. 

Can you explain the contradiction you seem to indicate that CO2 has a positive imact on plant growth and that the same CO2 also warms up the earth by the greenhouse effect? To me these are two phenomena of this molecule that are not contradictory.

[Alan Klein]

Can you explain the contradiction you seem to indicate that CO2 has a positive imact on plant growth and that the same CO2 also warms up the earth by the greenhouse effect? To me these are two phenomena of this molecule that are not contradictory.

I'll defer to Ray to answer.  He's the expert on CO2. 

[pegelli]

I'll defer to Ray to answer.  He's the expert on CO2. 

Really?

[Alan Klein]

US Solar Industry Could Be Devastated By Today’s Tariffs Ruling — May Lead To Crushing Tariffs
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/09/22/us-solar-industry-devastated-todays-ruling-may-lead-crushing-tariffs/

(Let's leave aside the fact that one of the American solar manufacturer suing to impose American tariffs on imported Chinese solar panels is owned by the Germans and the other American solar manufacturer is owned by a Chinese company who is opposing increasing tariffs supported by the company's re-structuring officer due to a bankruptcy filing.)

So China subsidizes the manufacturing of panels in their country at the cost of higher taxes for their citizens. Thank you to Chinese slave workers for paying for low cost panels we use here in America. And here in America, the Federal and State governments additionally subsidize homeowners to install roof systems at the additional cost to our taxpayers. Rebates pay for a large part of American solar installation jobs. What good are private American jobs paid partially for by government taxes? So we have all these solar jobs adding to the cost to produce the same electricity as other fuels which cost less to produce because there are less workers.

Maybe we should just put those little electric generators on bicycles. Then we can hire a million Americans to pedal those bikes to produce the same amount of electricity we get from a thousand coal or natural gas workers. Think of all the jobs we can create. So where is the benefit of solar economically? Am I missing something here?

[Alan Klein]

Should we take some of the money intended for the Paris Accord to defeat the new drug resistant Malaria bug that will kill millions by 2050 including some of our grand and great grandchildren?
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-41351160

[pegelli]

US Solar Industry Could Be Devastated By Today’s Tariffs Ruling — May Lead To Crushing Tariffs
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/09/22/us-solar-industry-devastated-todays-ruling-may-lead-crushing-tariffs/

(Let's leave aside the fact that one of the American solar manufacturer suing to impose American tariffs on imported Chinese solar panels is owned by the Germans and the other American solar manufacturer is owned by a Chinese company who is opposing increasing tariffs supported by the company's re-structuring officer due to a bankruptcy filing.)

So China subsidizes the manufacturing of panels in their country at the cost of higher taxes for their citizens. Thank you to Chinese slave workers for paying for low cost panels we use here in America. And here in America, the Federal and State governments additionally subsidize homeowners to install roof systems at the additional cost to our taxpayers. Rebates pay for a large part of American solar installation jobs. What good are private American jobs paid partially for by government taxes? So we have all these solar jobs adding to the cost to produce the same electricity as other fuels which cost less to produce because there are less workers.

Maybe we should just put those little electric generators on bicycles. Then we can hire a million Americans to pedal those bikes to produce the same amount of electricity we get from a thousand coal or natural gas workers. Think of all the jobs we can create. So where is the benefit of solar economically? Am I missing something here?

I think Trump (as the shrewd business man you claim he is) should be able do better for you. Currently in Belgium and the Netherlands solar panels are no longer subsidized, to the contrary. In Belgium you have to pay a tarriff to be allowed to pump electricity back into the grid (and rightfully so). Even with that payout is less then 10 years, even with the cost of cleaning and the periodic replacement of the inverter taken into account. So why you can't do that in the US I don't know, but I'm sure you have an excuse ready for that

[Alan Klein]

I think Trump (as the shrewd business man you claim he is) should be able do better for you. Currently in Belgium and the Netherlands solar panels are no longer subsidized, to the contrary. In Belgium you have to pay a tarriff to be allowed to pump electricity back into the grid (and rightfully so). Even with that payout is less then 10 years, even with the cost of cleaning and the periodic replacement of the inverter taken into account. So why you can't do that in the US I don't know, but I'm sure you have an excuse ready for that

Although retired, I use to sell, install and maintain computerized energy management systems to commercial building owners.  Ten year return on investment (ROI) would be very hard sell.  They usually wanted no more than 5 years, preferable 3.

Residential homes is different as they seem to accept longer periods.  I checked the web and it seems there's a 5-7 years ROI where I live here in New Jersey.  I'm paying about US$0.10 KWH.  But the 5-7 years includes federal and state rebates.  Federal subsidies are suppose to stop in 2020.  Not sure about NJ state subsidies. If the ROI went to 10 years if subsidies stopped, installation sales would drop dramatically I believe. 

I think Netherland's non-rebates are the right way to go.  These products should stand on their own.  Also, in America, taxes for subsidies are unfairly paid by people who can't afford to pay for the installations.  So the rich people who can, are getting money from poorer people who also then pay higher prices for electricity.  That's not fair in my book.  If you got the money to pay for an installation, pay a little more.  Don't ask poorer people to pay for you by subsidizing your installation.

It's going to be interesting what Trump decides.  Because of his campaign, he should favor imposing tariffs to protect American manufacturing like he said he would do during the campaign.  But Americans installation jobs will be lost as people cancel higher costing projects. The estimate is 66,000 jobs lost out of 266,000. So they'll be more unemployed who have to find jobs.  He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

[pegelli]

Although retired, I use to sell, install and maintain computerized energy management systems to commercial building owners.  Ten year return on investment (ROI) would be very hard sell.  They usually wanted no more than 5 years, preferable 3.

I can understand that, but due to economy of scale and simpler installations their investment goes down. However don't know if it's down to 5 years yet.

In the industry I worked 2 or 3 years pay-out were for projects that depended on more sales and upkeep of the sales price (so riskier). Lower returns (~5years) were allowed for "utility" type projects where the return was more certain (avoided cost is less risky then more sales)

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Yes, the polar bears are moving south and the ticks are marching north...

And that would be the evidence of what exactly?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Just one link already shared several times, possibly ignored.

One summary of summaries of facts:
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

That seems to be the evidence of the "97% consensus"? Or, more precisely, evidence that humans are prone to a confirmation bias.

Can you cite at least one "evidence"? Les actually made at least an effort in that direction, with bears and ticks, but it only proves a changing climate, which has been going on for, oh, I don't know, five billion years?, overwhelmingly without human interference.

[Alan Goldhammer]

There were months and month of videos, newscasts, stories and media hype when everyone had been making a big deal out of the Larsen C Ice Shelf in Antarctica.   It finally broke off, and everyone fainted.  Yet, it's entire volume has NO effect on the sea levels because it was floating.  So why can't I even ask a simple question about factors that may increase sea levels? 

For you Alan, here is the plain English explanation, http://smithplanet.com/stuff/iceandwater.htm  You need to read it carefully and the focus on the final section.  It's not just the breaking apart, but the migration and melting of the bound up water.

[Robert Roaldi]

A CBC Ideas podcast about encountering climate change "deniers": http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/decoding-the-resistance-to-climate-change-are-we-doomed-1.4288483. This won't appeal to some, but I point it out for information's sake.

I placed "deniers" in parentheses because I don't personally believe it's only about denying and it's not only about climate change. I'd say that this issue is not a debate about science or skepticism, it has become a lightning rod for some. A lightning rod of what, I don't know, some kind of generic rebellion. I can't express the thought very well, I hope there are others who can. It's such an odd thing that people have latched onto it to be skeptical about, given all the other "magical" aspects of science that could be difficult to believe for the non-professional. I am thinking of things like relativity (special or general) or evolution. Do people view those as the far-out ideas of elites that should be fought against? Why not?

[Alan Goldhammer]

I am thinking of things like relativity (special or general) or evolution. Do people view those as the far-out ideas of elites that should be fought against? Why not?

I don't see any signs of the general public objecting to relativity as it's such an abstract topic.  The objection to evolution on the other hand has a long and continuing history in the United States.  They have tried to remove the religious component by renaming it "creation science."  It's taught in lots of private Christian schools and there are a couple of institutes that have been established to continue in portraying it as an alternative to evolution.  When I encounter anyone who espouses this view point I always ask them to account for the rise in drug resistant microorganisms.  If evolution does not exist, then why do antibiotics lose their effectiveness.  They never have an answer other than it is God's will.