Countries Going "Green"

http://www.accuweather.com/en/features/trend/climate-change-green-laws-econ/18975869

Utility companies fight tooth and nail to stop the spread of Solar and wind power here in the USA. Their lobbyist at the state and federal level make it hard for homeowners and businesses to have solar power in a good many states. They see it as competition. Some politicians think it will cost jobs. So many Americans are at the mercy of Utility companies rate increases. Whether you believe in climate change or not, there is a benefit to weaning us off Nuclear power and Oil. There is Nuclear waste and a finite amount of oil left. Going green can create a lot of jobs. The article I posted shows some countries that are making it work for them. I think the USA is far behind these countries in the green transformation. Then there are the start up cost for solar panels $20,000+. Most. People need tax credits, subsidies and financing. Utility companies balk at governments helping the competition. Things are changing in the Utility companies want to control the green stuff and market it themselves

Just a few comments :
Climate change (caused by human activity) is a proven fact with the majority of scientists agreeing on it. The only reason why some people think it's still not sure is because the media introduce it that way (show one guy explaining it vs in guy telling it's not happening and people will think it's 50/50 even though in reality it's more like 98/2).

Even though I'm 100% for the energy change, solar panels and wind turbines also have some downsides too (non recycle wastes for panels and environment issues for turbines) but I guess there is still room for improvement of new discoveries IF the lobbies stop slowing it down.

I don't see why they can't put cages around the wind turbines to keep the birds from flying into them? Then there is the noise factor from the wind turbines that people complain about. The aesthetics from turbines placed off the coastlines even though most can't be seen from the shore. Florida has placed turbines under water where the wave and/or current action turn them.g
People around here are called Tree huggers and other silly names if they believe in global warming. Many think the green effort hurts economic development and jobs. So those types don't care about the science.
Then there are those that think other countries won't do their part ie China , India etc so it won't matter what we do. Then is make for unfair competition to add the burden to our businesses.
Then there are those that think the earth is going through a natural cycle of warmth. Volcano's cause the warming or cow poop does or sun cycles etc

cages around the wind turbines, what will stop the birds from flying into the cages? more birds die flying into radio and tv towers than anything.

Quote:

Then there are those that think the earth is going through a natural cycle of warmth. Volcano's cause the warming or cow poop does or sun cycles etc

Which is not true.
There isn't more big volcanoes eruption lately, cow poop does indeed help global warming but that's not something natural as cows only exist in such numbers because humans use them. And the sun is currently in a "cold" cycle.

I have no doubt that human impact on the earth and environment is changing things...and climate may be one of them. But to say that our impact is creating global warming and that is 100% fact is simply not true. It may very well be true, but it is still just a theory at best. Its extremely arrogant to think that after a couple decades of research on a couple hundred years of data that we can forecast a climate change on a planet that is 4.5 billion years old. If the entire life span of the earth was fit into just 1 year, humans would have only been around for the last 14 seconds, and industrial humans for just the last 1 second. So yeah...you can't forecast (and claim something as fact) something when only being able to examine 0.00000317% of the time the earth has been around.

I have to agree with Sugarpie on this, there are jus to many unknowns that not even the scientists understand.

I'd have thought that the weight of evidence showing humans are impacting climate change is stacking up. My opinion is that, like in most things, a precautionary approach would be the sensible option because by the time the whole world was convinced, the earth would be pretty well fucked. Unfortunately no one (at least very few) is willing to change their lifestyle so humanity is going to find out one way or another. A really good reason to not have kids..two others are that they are loud and smell bad.

Quote:

Originally posted by ranging

I'd have thought that the weight of evidence showing humans are impacting climate change is stacking up. My opinion is that, like in most things, a precautionary approach would be the sensible option because by the time the whole world was convinced, the earth would be pretty well fucked. Unfortunately no one (at least very few) is willing to change their lifestyle so humanity is going to find out one way or another. A really good reason to not have kids..two others are that they are loud and smell bad.

I'm not saying that global warming doesn't exist, I'm just saying that its one of any number of theories. There is no doubt that humans are impacting the environment, but to what outcome, I have no idea, and the experts opinions are just that...opinions.

Quote:

Originally posted by Sugarpie

...

I'm not saying that global warming doesn't exist, I'm just saying that its one of any number of theories. There is no doubt that humans are impacting the environment, but to what outcome, I have no idea, and the experts opinions are just that...opinions.

But aren't the potential impacts so serious that we should use all possible means to avoid them?

Quote:

Originally posted by ranging

...

But aren't the potential impacts so serious that we should use all possible means to avoid them?

Yes.

If the scientific consensus is correct, continuing to emit CO2 into the atmosphere has the potential to cause global catastrophic damage, to the extent that many species will not survive and our current way of life will be torn apart.

If the scientific consensus is wrong and humanity adopts measures to eliminate CO2 emissions, it will merely decrease global GDP by a few percentage points for a number of years.

The course of action should be obvious.

The math is simple. If you have even a 1% chance of global catastrophe vs. a 99% chance that nothing bad happens to the world by continued emissions, the right move is to still try to limit emissions, because (.0005) x (global catastrophe) > (.99) x (GDP/cost of lowering CO2 emissions)

Quote:

Originally posted by ranging

...

But aren't the potential impacts so serious that we should use all possible means to avoid them?

Probably. But we don't. We point fingers at big business, and oil companies and say "you're destroying the planet". When in actuality, the CO2 produced by corporations is tiny compared to what the public produces. So let me ask you...do you drive a low emission car? Do you carpool? Would you be willing to pay for solar panels? Do you unplug electronics when no in use? Maybe you do, and if so, good on you, but most of us don't but are willing to bitch about global warming.

Quote:

Originally posted by Sugarpie

So let me ask you...do you drive a low emission car? Do you carpool? Would you be willing to pay for solar panels? Do you unplug electronics when no in use? Maybe you do, and if so, good on you, but most of us don't but are willing to bitch about global warming.

Oh don't get me wrong. I'm as guilty as the next person, perhaps more so in that I think we should do something but I take no concrete steps myself. Basically I'm fatalistic and selfish; I think everything will go to hell so I might as well not deprive myself when no one else is willing to do so. However I'm also honest, I don't pretend there is no issue and only believe the information that suits my preferred way of life. (no offence meant here, just an observation of a lot of people regarding the climate change issue).

PS. I certainly wouldn't blame business. Corporations, for the most part, are only as strong as the number of people willing to use their product.

Quote:

Originally posted by EricLindros

The course of action should be obvious.

Obvious...but inconvenient. (apologies to Al Gore)

What many Scientist say is that Human activity has drastically sped up what normal warming cycles takes 100s of 1000s of years to do. Scientist have 1000s of ice cores to study that date back 100s of 1000s of years. Then they have layers of earth where they can do the same.
Warming may have an opposite effect of what people may think it should do. The ice and permafrost melt can dilute the Oceans enough to where the warm Gulf stream disappears. Then there are other important current that might fade away. This could lead to an Ice age and massive marine life extinctions. If marine life goes extinct then most of Humans will do the same. Drastic changes in Ocean/Lake water temperature can kill off Marine life. The Ocean current conveyor belt is very important to Marine life. A less salty Ocean is not a good thing. Life is probably doomed anyway but Scientist say the Human factor will doom it a lot sooner.
Already much of the North East USA and other parts of the world are experiencing flooding from rising seas. Some areas of the earth sit lower than others

We are taking the remains of other orgasms (That were turned into hydrocarbons through millions of years.) that have been trapped underground and re-releasing them into the environment so this will definitely have an impact just as damming a river has an impact on the ecosystem above the dam and below the dam. So the big question is what will the impact be and what camp do people belong to the Al Gore or the Koch brother's camp since these seem to be the dominant ideologies.

I don't believe humankind will exist in another 100-200 years and if it does it will be drastically different than the industrialized world we live in today. Over population and declining levels of top soil and drinkable water will doom us if nuclear holocaust doesn't.

As for greenhouse gasses and CO2, it's going to be tough to drastically alter the current situation. Even if the US and the Western world was to embrace total green energy policies, there's no way China or India would. Deforestation has eliminated much of the trees that could help reduce CO2 levels.

Pretty much screwed.

One theory that isn't talked about much is that even if we destroy our current nitrogen and oxygen rich atmosphere, perhaps our species will evolve and adapt to be able to survive in a different type of atmosphere. If there's one thing that life on earth has going for it, its that we evolve and adapt.

Not saying that we should sit back and do nothing, just saying its another theory, and its another possible outcome to climate change.

Quote:

Originally posted by Sugarpie

One theory that isn't talked about much is that even if we destroy our current nitrogen and oxygen rich atmosphere, perhaps our species will evolve and adapt to be able to survive in a different type of atmosphere. If there's one thing that life on earth has going for it, its that we evolve and adapt.

Not saying that we should sit back and do nothing, just saying its another theory, and its another possible outcome to climate change.

Evolution takes time. A lot. And at the speed we are screwing things up, we can't evolve that much. At best we'll have slightly different hands to handle our electronics better.
A lot of societies declined and disappeared for far less than not having enough oxygen, either because of an environment change or because they screw themselves up.

Regarding your previous post about climate change, of course there are other factors but whether human activity goes against or speeds the natural events, it's still a dominant factor just as humans are the dominant factor of the third massive species extinction (there's not much to argue when hundreds of species are decimated or their habitat directly destroyed by humans).

At least the poor people will die first..............