Yesterday at work I overheard part of a consversation that hurt my brain.

Customer: It's so warm today!

Worker 1: Must be global warming.

Worker 2: Global warming isn't real.

Worker 1: Yes, it is.  Go back to school.

Worker 2: Do you believe in God?

Worker 1: Yeah.  Yeah. 

Worker 2:  [looks skeptical]

Worker 1: Yes, I do. Why would I lie about that?

To my great dismay, I missed the part where Worker 2 explains how his belief in God conteracts the Greenhouse Effect.  It kind of shocked me that they would talk about something politicized, like climate change, at work.  I was blown away when Worker 2 brought up God. 

Has anyone else encountered this kind of God-trumps-climate-change thinking?  What do you think the Climate Change Skeptic/Theist would have said next?  For my edification and general amusement, please tell me, how does this work?

Tags: Change, Climate, Global, Warming, change, climate, denial, unprofessional, work

Views: 865

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

@ G. Mirror

"...if the United States alone put $500 billion into developing fusion power and getting Helium-3 from the moon for fuel. (That's less than 0.1% of the GDP..."

Actually 500 Billion is not 0.1% of the GDP it's over 300 times that amount coming in at 3.33 percent of a 15 Trillion GDP.

I agree with both GM and Greg with two g's. You are both right. I look around this redneck town and hear all about how bad they hate communist Chinese, where are our jobs, boo hoo? And every weekend (ok 24-7) they flock down to walmart and spend 90% of their cash. They don't care, it's cheap, just like oil.

THAT is why we need Government. Business will do the wrong thing, it almost has to. Government is supposed to do the right things. There lies the rub.

500 B against 70 T is .7 not .1.

Let's talk about how many Kilowatt hours your 500 B investment represents.

The US uses around 4T Kw's per year, about 3T of this is Hydrocarbon Fuel, so the question is;  How much of this is your 500 B dollar investment going to replace?

FWikipedia: F is the sixth letter in the ISO basic Latin alphabet.

Then there is the Bull in the China Shop that you have to deal with Transportation.

As your own charts point out, cars, trucks, buses, trains are for the most part run on Hydrocarbon Fuels.  Replacing these millions of vehicles with electric will most likely run into the hundreds of Billions if not Trillions.  In addition there will be an immediate need for a few more Trillions of Kw hours in electrical power production ie. more fusion plants (ie. lots more investment dollars).

AREAIRES, ICAO airline code

We have about 250 million fuel cars on the road today, next years sales of new cars estimated at 13 to 14 million of primarily fuel cars.

Tesla has 6,500 pre-orders not really a candidate for changing out 250 million fuel cars.

Yes. So where's the problem?

Money, money, money, where's the money going to come from?

Then there is the Bull in the China Shop that you have to deal with Transportation.

As your own charts point out, cars, trucks, buses, trains are for the most part run on Hydrocarbon Fuels.  Replacing these millions of vehicles with electric will most likely run into the hundreds of Billions if not Trillions.  In addition there will be an immediate need for a few more Trillions of Kw hours in electrical power production ie. more fusion plants (ie. lots more investment dollars).

It is more than the bull in the china shop, it's the elephant in the room.

Unfortunately no current existing battery technology can possibly replace gasoline for anything but short trips... and you'd better live in a warm climate, too, as batteries don't like the cold (there is a reason GM tested their EV car in LA and Phoenix).  Also, making batteries is very much a chemical industry with all the attendant pollution it entails.  And it depends on rare minerals.  Most lithium comes from Bolivia, for example.  And notice the price of the cars... and the word is not in on how often you will end up having to replace all the batteries (thousands of dollars all at once) because they are worn out from being cycled over and over.

GM actually loses money on every Volt it sells in spite of heavy federal subsidies and a high price tag: http://www.nbcnews.com/business/gm-losing-much-49-000-volt-sold-989680 (please note this is NBC news, not the "right wing" media).  The correct sticker price for this car to recoup production costs is upwards of 89 thousand dollars.

Until batteries last longer, hold much more charge per unit weight, don't lose half their power just because it's cold, and recharge quickly, they will only be useful in certain niches.
But here is an idea that is somewhat interesting.  What if fusion power were used to take CO2 out of the air, combine it with water, and produce.... gasoline!  (Or methanol.  Or propane.)  This would take a LOT of energy to do, but we are assuming plentiful fusion power, right?  Burning this gasoline would not increase CO2 levels in the atmosphere, because the carbon in the gasoline came from the atmosphere in the first place!
Of course there is one tiny problem with that--fusion power is probably even further off than a battery that doesn't suck.  It's estimated that it's 30 years off.  Well that has been the estimate since the 1970s!  So I am afraid I won't believe it until ten years afterwards when they are calling for it to be around in only 20 more years.
Gallup's Mirror has called for a Manhattan project for Fusion power.  I would maintain that we already have one.  The Manhattan Project cost about 2 billion dollars, that's 26 billion in today's dollars.  The total amount of money spent on fusion research over the last 57 years of it being only 30 years away, is 29 billion (or more:  http://focusfusion.org/index.php/site/reframe/373 these folks seem uncertain about their inflation adjustment, but they are sure they want to see more money spent).   We have already spent more on fusion research than was spent on the Manhattan Project, and it is STILL 30 years away.
It's still worth pursuing both better batteries and fusion power... but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting.for either of them.
On the other hand, there is always the chance of an unexpected breakthrough in one or both of these categories.  No, I don't know what it would be--it would be unexpected after all.  The one thing I do know is that doing no research at all would be the wrong thing to do.

Yep, elephant.

I'm glad you opened the battery can-o-worms, I didn't want to add that one into an already crowded mix.

But your are correct sir, that is indeed another missing piece of the puzzle.

Are we talking of 500 billion dollars a year, or just 500 billion in total - spread across ten years that might not be too painful...

How much do you think each 2 gigawatt reactor will cost to build?

You will need 500 of them to replace the 3T Kw currently being produced by Hydrocarbon Fuels.

For the sake of argument let's say that we can built a 2GW fusion plant for $20 B @ 500 plants that's $10 T.  Not an insurmountable problem but still a very large one and that's just the US.

It still remains a global problem requiring a global solution with a very short window before it becomes an insurmountable problem.

Given the history of humankind I am very doubtful that we will see a solution before the SHTF day.

If I were going to pursue nuclear energy I'd go with Molten Salt Reactors, better bang for the buck, uses cheaper more abundant fuel and can use up the current nuclear waste.

That's where I'd dump my research money and efforts.

Pretty soon you'll have................

-Alligators working their way up the Mississippi. Hey, lets check out Cleveland!

-Banana plantations in Iowa. Hey mista tally mon banana, beauty aye?

-The birds will fly North of the North, for the summer

-Hurricanes in NY (oh yeah, we already have that)

All Y'all Yankees are gonna have to get a drawl and drink sun tea. You like yer trees full o moss. Oh and mango trees make a real mess...You'll are gonna have to slow down. It's too damm hot foe all that running around. And you put put lime on your beer to shoo flies, not because it tastes good!

That's why the lime in the beer bottle?

RSS

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service