Sea level rise

@metal-brain said
You said " its generally too-little-too-late".

Too late for what? Be specific.

To significantly reduce our carbon footprint in the short term, say, within the next 5 years.

@humy said
To significantly reduce our carbon footprint in the short term, say, within the next 5 years.

Define significantly.

@metal-brain said
Define significantly.

In this case, say, reduce by at least 20%. If we keep doing that every 5 years then it wouldn't be long (about 14 years) before CO2 emissions is cut by more than half. And then, of course, we should just keep on reducing it.

@humy said
In this case, say, reduce by at least 20%. If we keep doing that every 5 years then it wouldn't be long (about 14 years) before CO2 emissions is cut by more than half. And then, of course, we should just keep on reducing it.

That is possible with improved efficiency standards. Why do you want to wait for a tax? There is no reason to wait. A tax is not necessary and you are condoning inaction. Why are you condoning inaction? Have you given up on everything but a carbon tax? It doesn't seem like you have true resolve. You are doing nothing and expecting everything.

@metal-brain said
That is possible with improved efficiency standards. Why do you want to wait for a tax?

As I already clearly told you MANY times before here, I am NOT waiting for a tax nor do I agree with a tax. And I am NOT against improved efficiency standards but rather FOR that. Exactly which part of that can you not comprehend? Is it the word "NOT"?

@humy said
As I already clearly told you MANY times before here, I am NOT waiting for a tax nor do I agree with a tax. And I am NOT against improved efficiency standards but rather FOR that. Exactly which part of that can you not comprehend? Is it the word "NOT"?

You are condoning inaction. You do not practice what you preach.

@metal-brain said
You are condoning inaction.

No, and never have done. I am condoning action; Improve efficiency standards, reduce carbon footprint, etc. And I have already taken action to reduce my personal carbon footprint. Have you?

@humy said
No, and never have done. I am condoning action; Improve efficiency standards, reduce carbon footprint, etc. And I have already taken action to reduce my personal carbon footprint. Have you?

Then write your politicians instead of wasting time denying science. Electricity is being wasted and you are doing nothing about it.

@metal-brain said
write your politicians instead of wasting time denying science.

Why don't you do that?

@metal-brain said
There is no such thing as free power. Even a simple device to tap into an available energy source would cost money to build.

If you are talking about Tesla I'm not sure he really proposed free energy. There is a lot of misinformation out there. You might find this video interesting though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZZywivrUw4

This guy claims President Trum ...[text shortened]... s death and used the information. He claims this information can be accessed from the FBI's website.

Thanks for this :-)

@humy said
Why don't you do that?

Because I don't have problem with CO2 increasing in the atmosphere. I think it is one of the best things to happen to the planet. Crops will grow faster and we will have more food to eat and more lumber to cut. If the climate keeps warming we will have more rainfall and less drought and that means crops will produce more food.

Besides, my government clearly doesn't care about fuel waste, just taxation. They could have reduced electricity consumption a long time ago. It is obvious to me that is not their goal.

@medullah said
Thanks for this :-)

No problem. He presents some interesting information. Here is the FBI web link too. I havn't looked at it yet, but I will get around to it sooner or later.

https://vault.fbi.gov/nikola-tesla

@metal-brain said
Because I don't have problem with CO2 increasing in the atmosphere.

that's because you reject science while I (and we) don't.

@humy said
that's because you reject science while I (and we) don't.

Rumor is not science.

@metal-brain said
You said this:

"Democrats didn't even propose it for the entirety of the Obama administration"

Obama is a democrat and he proposed it. I proved you wrong.

I think there is a distinction between what people say in a speech vs. what they actually propose/do for energy efficiency. The track record seems very clear that liberal politicians have been much stronger proponents of efficiency standards, while conservatives have fought to roll back lighbulb and fuel and appliance efficiency standards.