07 Aug 13
Originally posted by KazetNagorraWhich renewables?
Germany's heavy investment in renewables has been quite disastrous. Expensive, unreliable power, and what do they have to show for it?
And higher greenhouse emissions.
How does that happen? (not being skeptical, I just want to know).
The US would do well to invest heavily in nuclear (even if the shale gas boom will likely see the US turn into a net oil exporter by the end of this decade), but that's not likely to happen even under a Republican administration.
I saw a talk that basically said the red tape for nuclear in the US makes it too expensive for anyone to want to invest in and discourages new designs. He thought that China would develop and test the new designs and only after that would they be used in the US.
The US also has plenty of resources for renewable energy. They could become totally reliant on renewables in about 20 years if they wanted to.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
07 Aug 13
Originally posted by DeepThoughtWell I was taking it as a given that we don't use crap reactor designs...
The nuclear option isn't straightforward. You are making a several hundred year commitment with each station. I don't want them building a bunch of PWRs, AGRs are much safer because there is no possibility of a Hydrogen-Zirconium reaction. A Magnox in the UK had a fuel rod cladding melt and leaked fuel pellets into the reactor containment vessel - it ...[text shortened]... efore 1980 so they'd need to use a new design, as they tended to overcomplicate in the 70s.
Personally I would go for liquid thorium salt reactors which don't have any of those problems.
07 Aug 13
Originally posted by googlefudgeI am not convinced nuclear out performs modern renewable energy sources. Do you have any stats on the matter? Remember that nuclear comes with quite a lot of overhead costs to do with regulation, so it would require quite significant government encouragement to get liquid thorium salt reactors going, wouldn't the same investment in renewables be a better investment?
Personally I would go for liquid thorium salt reactors which don't have any of those problems.
07 Aug 13
2 edits
Originally posted by sonhouseActually, I fear he might be saying it would be a good thing that WE humans make ourselves extinct.
Which part do you think is good? The biggest mass extinction since the dinosaurs or the loss of land that will kill all beachfront cities?
Many creationists actually want this to happen because, in (and only in ) their delusional minds, this would confirm their religion.
This shows how uncompassionate they really are -and how dangerous.
07 Aug 13
Originally posted by humyIf we off ourselves that would be like committing suicide which would go against the bible wouldn't it? Not sure how creationists would view that as ok.
Actually, I fear he might be saying it would be a good thing that WE humans make ourselves extinct.
Many creationists actually want this to happen because, in (and only in ) their delusional minds, this would confirm their religion.
This shows how uncompassionate they really are -and how dangerous.
08 Aug 13
Originally posted by sonhouseThe temperatures are only rising a couple degrees. That might be enough to keep plants from freezing in early Spring, some people from freezing to death in the Winter, and water pipes from freezing and causing damage. There could be many beneficial results of this global warming that we have not thought of yet.
Which part do you think is good? The biggest mass extinction since the dinosaurs or the loss of land that will kill all beachfront cities?
The Instructor
08 Aug 13
Originally posted by RJHindsMore people die of heat in summer than die of cold in winter.
The temperatures are only rising a couple degrees. That might be enough to keep plants from freezing in early Spring, some people from freezing to death in the Winter, and water pipes from freezing and causing damage. There could be many beneficial results of this global warming that we have not thought of yet.
The Instructor
10 Aug 13
Originally posted by DeepThoughtMore people die from floods than either of those.
More people die of heat in summer than die of cold in winter.
But hey, if you are prepared neither the heat of summer nor the cold of winter will kill you. Get an air conditioner and you can survive the hottest of summers. Of course not drinking so much alcohol would help too.
Originally posted by RJHindsWhat you don't get is that temperature rise of a couple degrees would cause serious problems including more intense hurricanes, sea level rises, greater variability in local temperatures with temperatures going from one extreme to the other, and the weather oscillating between droughts and heat waves in some years and and flooding in others. It would not be so much the average temperature itself that would do the damage but its indirect but much more devastating effects on climate.
The temperatures are only rising a couple degrees. That might be enough to keep plants from freezing in early Spring, some people from freezing to death in the Winter, and water pipes from freezing and causing damage. There could be many beneficial results of this global warming that we have not thought of yet.
The Instructor
19 Aug 13
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/19/2013-is-a-record-low-year-for-u-s-tornadoes/
While many climate alarmists still try to tell us that global warming will increase tornadoes, we are in the middle of a tornado drought, and well below normal. Normally we’d see 1221 tornadoes in the USA, so far for 2013, only 716 have been reported.
19 Aug 13
1 edit
Originally posted by Eladartornadoes are not one of the main issues with global warming. Sea level rises and climate oscillating from one devastating extreme to the other (usually drought followed by flooding but also extremes of temperature) are the main issues. There is nothing 'alarmist' about that because we know these devastating effects will happen.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/19/2013-is-a-record-low-year-for-u-s-tornadoes/
[b]While many climate alarmists still try to tell us that global warming will increase tornadoes, we are in the middle of a tornado drought, and well below normal. Normally we’d see 1221 tornadoes in the USA, so far for 2013, only 716 have been reported.[/b]
Originally posted by humyThese devastating events have been happening for all of time.
tornadoes are not one of the main issues with global warming. Sea level rises and climate oscillating from one devastating extreme to the other (usually drought followed by flooding but also extremes of temperature) are the main issues. There is nothing 'alarmist' about that because we know these devastating effects will happen.
It is called weather.
19 Aug 13
4 edits
Originally posted by Eladar
These devastating events have been happening for all of time.
It is called weather.
These devastating events have been happening for all of time.
not at the increase frequency that has been happening in recent years. What global warming will do and should already be starting to do already is increase the frequency of extreme whether events -just like what we all have been observing including climate scientists that have done statistical analysis on the data and confirmed that these extreme weather events are definitely occurring at an increased frequency. there is no doubt that, if we do nothing, global warming will continue and these extreme weather events events will occur at ever greater frequency -and that is not even to mention the damage from sea level rise which is observed to be happening right now.
Originally posted by humyOk, as long as you say so. Bad weather has never happened before and people are always to blame. Of course if anything goes against what you are saying, then it is just weather.These devastating events have been happening for all of time.
not at the increase frequency that has been happening in recent years. What global warming will do and should already be starting to do already is increase the frequency of extreme whether events -just like what we all have been observing including climate scientists tha ...[text shortened]... not even to mention the damage from sea level rise which is observed to be happening right now.
Right, gotcha.
Yes, we are also to believe the climate scientists because they don't derive their funding from global warming claims. Yeah, that's the ticket.