Oklahoma Charges through the Nose: Solar Success Attracts Fees

[SunEagle]

The problem with climate change doubters is that they refuse to look at the facts and come to reasonable conclusions simply because that collides with their politics. That's just sad. Climate change should not be a political football, no more than renewable energy should be some kind of new age religion. Facts are pretty clear: we won't have non renewable energy for too long (a century or two max) and the earth is getting warmer.

Smart people look at the above and try to figure a way to fix this. The dumb ones choose to ignore it. Pick a camp.

I'm not ignoring the data. I just don't trust it.

From what I have read most of today's "conclusions" for climate change is based on "data" for the last 2000 years. Only in the last 100 years has that data been collected by really accurate instruments. Prior to that all of the data collected requires some type of "reconstruction", "calibration" and a lot of "assumption".

Even if all of that data is "good" we are still only talking about 2000 years which equates to a couple of data points across the entire history of the Earth. Just because the last temperature data point is higher than the previous couple shouldn't be accepted as being the highest temperature point ever seen on this planet.

There are way too many natural events happening that we don't necessarily measure or even understand to determine what is really changing the climate. How can we positively know that the readings in the last 50 years are the highest experienced if we don't have accurate data from the last million years or 2? We're not talking about the lifespan of a mayfly, we are talking about the earth's climate which has been changing for millions of years and will keep on doing so without input from us humans. The only way to make an accurate determination as to "cause and affect" is to have more "accurate" data. Which unless "time travel" has been found will be very hard to collect.

[pleppik]

The chemistry involved and the scale of it is mind boggling! In process we have operated for 50 years under very controlled conditions we still don't understand it all. It becomes better all the time - programs like Aspen+ are wonderful in many ways - one of those ways is they show you how much you don't know/understand.

To be as positive as these clowns are on first time and unproven methodology/approaches is really quite cute - in a rather sick way.

Your argument basically boils down to, "I don't understand the science therefore it must be wrong."

[russ]

Your argument basically boils down to, "I don't understand the science therefore it must be wrong."

No - My argument boils to you and the "scientists" using it don't understand the science - they have a vague idea only. But yourreligion - the HCGW or HCCC demand that everyone believe the BS spewed out by positive know nothings.

[Shockah]

i'm not ignoring the data. I just don't trust it.

^^^ that!

[JCP]

No - My argument boils to you and the "scientists" using it don't understand the science - they have a vague idea only. But yourreligion - the HCGW or HCCC demand that everyone believe the BS spewed out by positive know nothings.

Wow. Basically, you don't like the facts, so you decide that people who believe them are a bunch of dogmatic lefties. "Positive know nothing"
Frankly, after reading your arguments, it's clear that you have zero credibility. You don't like the facts or the science, so you choose to ignore them. It would be funny if you were just one of those fringe lunatics, but sadly, you're not the only one.

[russ]

Wow. Basically, you don't like the facts, so you decide that people who believe them are a bunch of dogmatic lefties. "Positive know nothing"
Frankly, after reading your arguments, it's clear that you have zero credibility. You don't like the facts or the science, so you choose to ignore them. It would be funny if you were just one of those fringe lunatics, but sadly, you're not the only one.

The loony left chips in.

[JCP]

The loony left chips in.

Certainly not. The fact is that with a few minutes of googling around I won the argument on this topic, by a mile. But you're too dogmatic to admit it, so you'd rather attack the messenger than discuss the facts.

I won this argument. Case closed.

[SunEagle]

Ok. Big questions. How much CO2 needs to be eliminated "world wide" to reverse climate change and lower the surface and ocean temperature?

And how much of that will be covered by the 30% reduction of 2005 levels targeted by the EPA for the US?

Or is this whole thing just a big wild a** guess and they hope things turn out ok when it is all said and done. And if not then oh sorry so many people lost their jobs with our experiment.

Maybe our time, money and effort should be put towards finding a concrete way of lowering the temperature instead of putting the coal industry out to pasture.

[billvon]

Maybe our time, money and effort should be put towards finding a concrete way of lowering the temperature instead of putting the coal industry out to pasture.

Cooling an entire planet would be pretty expensive. It would make the Apollo and Manhattan projects look like a bad tip at a greasy spoon diner. But if we want to spend the money it might be an option. Do you have a proposal?

To me this whole issue is like a fat man looking at lose-weight-quick pills, Internet tummy toner creams, surgery etc instead of just eating less and exercising. He always has a million excuses why diet and exercise just won't work.

[Sunking]

Hey all of you believe we are running out of fissile fuel so what is the problem? It will fix itself.

[billvon]

Hey all of you believe we are running out of fissile fuel so what is the problem? It will fix itself.

We have centuries worth of fissile fuel. We have enough uranium to last us 40-50 years and enough thorium to last us centuries if we want to use that. (Requires a different reactor but will work just fine.)

As for fossil fuels, we are running out of them, primarily oil. But with the availability of shale oil, and the leveling off of our oil demand, we have enough for decades - enough to make the transition less painful.

[SunEagle]

Cooling an entire planet would be pretty expensive. It would make the Apollo and Manhattan projects look like a bad tip at a greasy spoon diner. But if we want to spend the money it might be an option. Do you have a proposal?

To me this whole issue is like a fat man looking at lose-weight-quick pills, Internet tummy toner creams, surgery etc instead of just eating less and exercising. He always has a million excuses why diet and exercise just won't work.

I wish I had an idea. It would be nice to know (instead of guessing) what is truely causing the temperature to rise and then try to mitigate it.

Maybe looking at a way to reflect the sun's energy similar to what volcanic ash does without the harmful affects of those air born particles.

Unfortunately blocking the sunlight would put a big dent in the renewable solar business so not a good idea.

I would rather the solution create a new industry and jobs to go with it than distroy an industry and lose jobs.

[Sunking]

We have centuries worth of fissile fuel. We have enough uranium to last us 40-50 years and enough thorium to last us centuries if we want to use that. (Requires a different reactor but will work just fine.)

As for fossil fuels, we are running out of them, primarily oil. But with the availability of shale oil, and the leveling off of our oil demand, we have enough for decades - enough to make the transition less painful.

That should have been fossil fuel. Damn auto correct.

[JCP]

I wish I had an idea. It would be nice to know (instead of guessing) what is truely causing the temperature to rise and then try to mitigate it.

Maybe looking at a way to reflect the sun's energy similar to what volcanic ash does without the harmful affects of those air born particles.

Unfortunately blocking the sunlight would put a big dent in the renewable solar business so not a good idea.

I would rather the solution create a new industry and jobs to go with it than distroy an industry and lose jobs.

http://freakonomics.com/2011/09/02/finally-a-garden-hose-to-the-sky/

That's how capitalism works: creative destruction. The car replaced the horse. The internet killed the post office. Etc. And yet, our economy has kept growing and generating jobs throughout. While the individual impact might be harsh at times, that's how the system works.

[russ]

Certainly not. The fact is that with a few minutes of googling around I won the argument on this topic, by a mile. But you're too dogmatic to admit it, so you'd rather attack the messenger than discuss the facts.

I won this argument. Case closed.

BS - Your only promoting the Holy Church of Climate Change. If anyone doesn't agree with your religious meaasge then they are wrong and you have the holy book (so called scientific data) to back you up.