• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Climate talk shifts from curbing CO2 to adapting

mpg

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
7,795
Reaction score
1,784
Location
Milford, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Climate talk shifts from curbing CO2 to adapting


WASHINGTON (AP) — Efforts to curb global warming have quietly shifted as greenhouse gases inexorably rise.

The conversation is no longer solely about how to save the planet by cutting carbon emissions. It's becoming more about how to save ourselves from the warming planet's wild weather.
It was Mayor Michael Bloomberg's announcement last week of an ambitious plan to stave off New York City's rising seas with flood gates, levees and more that brought this transition into full focus.
After years of losing the fight against rising global emissions of heat-trapping gases, governments around the world are emphasizing what a U.N. Foundation scientific report calls "managing the unavoidable."
It's called adaptation and it's about as sexy but as necessary as insurance, experts say.
It's also a message that once was taboo among climate activists such as former Vice President Al Gore.
In his 1992 book "Earth in the Balance," Gore compared talk of adapting to climate change to laziness that would distract from necessary efforts.
But in his 2013 book "The Future," Gore writes bluntly: "I was wrong." He talks about how coping with rising seas and temperatures is just as important as trying to prevent global warming by cutting emissions.
overdue?
 

fmw

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
12,361
Reaction score
3,358
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I don't think so. I have always viewed it as a political issue. If they can't get the money for reducing CO2 then they will try to get it for something else. So far, all I've seen in the past 15 years since this stuff started is a little average cooling and sea levels right where they were 15 years ago. Much ado about nothing, as the bard said.
 

CalGun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,039
Reaction score
3,268
Location
Denio Junction
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
It's about growing government, redistributing wealth, and curbing capitalism. Nothing here has changed that.
 

DDD

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
12,351
Reaction score
1,918
Location
Republic of Dardania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Most CO2 reduction plans seemed inadequate.
This inadequate "solution" from chemists converts CO2 to methanol by using researchers' made catalysts such as: borane & phosphine. Sounds good but at present making hydroborane is very expensive from the energetic standpoint required to synthesize it. More expensive than methanol it's prime product.

They are working on it though. Cheaper ways to create hydroborane and we can trap all the CO2 of our cars (and other CO2 emission human made stations), turn it to methanol, and sell it to the market, buy more gas with that money, and so on and so forth.

Drive and sell anyone?

References:

Courtemanche, M., Légaré, M., Maron, L., & Fontaine, F. (2013). A highly active phosphine–borane organocatalyst for the reduction of CO2 to methanol using hydroboranes. Journal of the American Chemical Society, : 130614080103007 DOI: 10.1021/ja404585p

Too green to be true? Highly effective method for converting CO2 into methanol
 

tererun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 19, 2012
Messages
4,905
Reaction score
1,577
Location
The darkside of the moon
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
Let me ask the question for the right since they are not able to put their true thoughts into words due to cowardice. Why the hell should we care? Seriously, it is quite inconvenient to give a damn about future problems old white people will not have to face. A few decades from now they will be dead anyway. Even if they are not they will be pissing themselves and trying to remember their own names. They are not teenagers and they face death much sooner than the youth of today. Those are those youthful kids they hate so damned much anyway for supporting gays, blacks, immigrants, and any other god forsaken group that happens to just want to live. It is what those kids deserve for not running to their party anyway. So why not live it up now? They will not have to face the future. I am sure god will handle it because he seems to be really up on granting wishes and saving people.

So stop pestering the right about this. It is not an issue that effects them. They have no concern about their actions, and they live purely for their own gratification at the expense of others. It is terribly bothersome for you to guilt them about the future of a world they will never see.
 

mpg

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
7,795
Reaction score
1,784
Location
Milford, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Let me ask the question for the right since they are not able to put their true thoughts into words due to cowardice. Why the hell should we care? Seriously, it is quite inconvenient to give a damn about future problems old white people will not have to face. A few decades from now they will be dead anyway. Even if they are not they will be pissing themselves and trying to remember their own names. They are not teenagers and they face death much sooner than the youth of today. Those are those youthful kids they hate so damned much anyway for supporting gays, blacks, immigrants, and any other god forsaken group that happens to just want to live. It is what those kids deserve for not running to their party anyway. So why not live it up now? They will not have to face the future. I am sure god will handle it because he seems to be really up on granting wishes and saving people.

So stop pestering the right about this. It is not an issue that effects them. They have no concern about their actions, and they live purely for their own gratification at the expense of others. It is terribly bothersome for you to guilt them about the future of a world they will never see.
quote 86.jpg
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This inadequate "solution" from chemists
converts CO2 to methanol by using researchers' made catalysts such as: borane & phosphine. Sounds good but at present making hydroborane is very expensive from the energetic standpoint required to synthesize it. More expensive than methanol it's prime product.

They are working on it though. Cheaper ways to create hydroborane and we can trap all the CO2 of our cars (and other CO2 emission human made stations), turn it to methanol, and sell it to the market, buy more gas with that money, and so on and so forth.

Drive and sell anyone?

References:

Courtemanche, M., Légaré, M., Maron, L., & Fontaine, F. (2013). A highly active phosphine–borane organocatalyst for the reduction of CO2 to methanol using hydroboranes. Journal of the American Chemical Society, : 130614080103007 DOI: 10.1021/ja404585p

Too green to be true? Highly effective method for converting CO2 into methanol
That's ridiculous.

Never going to happen, never going to be feasable, and if they were truly concerned about CO2 emissions they would have embrased Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology instead of loading up Obama's buddies with Billions so their green energy fronts could fail, and they could pocket the change.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
------------------

Maybe overdue is the wrong word.
Conceding to the reality is more descriptive.
Most CO2 reduction plans seemed inadequate.
This world's not being weaned away from fossil fuels anytime soon.
We will adapt.
This.

Man made or not man made is beyond the point to me. The reality is that our entire structure in this country is too ingrained with fossil fuels to make any true sizable shift from it in any type of recent future, and you have multiple emerging countries like China and India who are going to be latching onto Fossil Fuels in a major way. Even with a fairly "swift" change on the part of the U.S., say 10 years, it's still unlikely to have any significant impact even if "Man" is the primary element causing the warming.

Is it wrong or bad to ENCOURAGE and PROMOTE "Green Energy" and a move away from fossil fuels? Absolutely not. But attempting to massively legislate and regulate it and make it a primary focus is like trying to put ones finger into a hole in a dike while the water level is set to go over top of the wall anyways.

One of the greatest features of the Human Race is our ability to adapt to our environment. As much, if not more, focus needs to be on responding to that and helping adapt.

There was a technology that was in the news some years back. A group had been working on cement that could "eat" CO2 emissions. Another was working on using insects and/or bacteria to process waste into crude oil. These are great types of technology that could massively help in the future while keeping out infastructure from needing a radical rework...but they're things largely ignored becuase it's not been about adapting, it's not been about realism, it's about a slavish adherence to a notion of "Green".
 

longview

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
28,293
Reaction score
9,791
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Let me ask the question for the right since they are not able to put their true thoughts into words due to cowardice. Why the hell should we care? Seriously, it is quite inconvenient to give a damn about future problems old white people will not have to face. A few decades from now they will be dead anyway. Even if they are not they will be pissing themselves and trying to remember their own names. They are not teenagers and they face death much sooner than the youth of today. Those are those youthful kids they hate so damned much anyway for supporting gays, blacks, immigrants, and any other god forsaken group that happens to just want to live. It is what those kids deserve for not running to their party anyway. So why not live it up now? They will not have to face the future. I am sure god will handle it because he seems to be really up on granting wishes and saving people.

So stop pestering the right about this. It is not an issue that effects them. They have no concern about their actions, and they live purely for their own gratification at the expense of others. It is terribly bothersome for you to guilt them about the future of a world they will never see.
Come on Tererun, don't sugar coat it, tell us what you really think.
Seriously, do you really think that just because someone is older, they do not care about
what kind of world they leave behind?
One of the cornerstones of good behavior, is that if you borrow something, return it in as good
or better shape then when you received it. It counts for the the little things and the big ones (earth).
If people are passionate about resisting much of the proposed regulation, maybe it is because,
it would not help, or help so little as to not be worth the effort.
A real solution will be one that people choose, because it saves them money,
if it happens to be good for the environment, thats a win win.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,660
Reaction score
33,248
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This.

Man made or not man made is beyond the point to me. The reality is that our entire structure in this country is too ingrained with fossil fuels to make any true sizable shift from it in any type of recent future, and you have multiple emerging countries like China and India who are going to be latching onto Fossil Fuels in a major way. Even with a fairly "swift" change on the part of the U.S., say 10 years, it's still unlikely to have any significant impact even if "Man" is the primary element causing the warming.

Is it wrong or bad to ENCOURAGE and PROMOTE "Green Energy" and a move away from fossil fuels? Absolutely not. But attempting to massively legislate and regulate it and make it a primary focus is like trying to put ones finger into a hole in a dike while the water level is set to go over top of the wall anyways.

One of the greatest features of the Human Race is our ability to adapt to our environment. As much, if not more, focus needs to be on responding to that and helping adapt.

There was a technology that was in the news some years back. A group had been working on cement that could "eat" CO2 emissions. Another was working on using insects and/or bacteria to process waste into crude oil. These are great types of technology that could massively help in the future while keeping out infastructure from needing a radical rework...but they're things largely ignored becuase it's not been about adapting, it's not been about realism, it's about a slavish adherence to a notion of "Green".
No, they're largely ignored because there's a crowd of people who absolutely flip their **** when you suggest anything that might be one penny more expensive for the glorious, sacred job creators.

Digging up pre-made hydrocarbons is cheaper and easier than making them ourselves. And God forbid we do anything that might hurt profit margins. YER KILLIN JERBS!
 

longview

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
28,293
Reaction score
9,791
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
No, they're largely ignored because there's a crowd of people who absolutely flip their **** when you suggest anything that might be one penny more expensive for the glorious, sacred job creators.

Digging up pre-made hydrocarbons is cheaper and easier than making them ourselves. And God forbid we do anything that might hurt profit margins. YER KILLIN JERBS!
There is a realization coming, the organic hydrocarbons are a large but finite supply,
without which four out five people will starve to death.
One of my issues, is that I don't think most of the regulations proposed would change
much of anything,other than restricting freedom, and generating more tax revenue.
Most people are selfish, and will follow the path of least resistance.
 

DDD

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
12,351
Reaction score
1,918
Location
Republic of Dardania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That's ridiculous.

Never going to happen, never going to be feasable, and if they were truly concerned about CO2 emissions they would have embrased Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology instead of loading up Obama's buddies with Billions so their green energy fronts could fail, and they could pocket the change.
I agree.

But, I would not mind freeing pockets in various depths of earths crust of dino-fuel if this technology would be available. This along with hydrogen cells of course.

I sometimes imagine that perhaps it was meant to be for us to find ways to burn dino-fossil-fuels so as to un-trap their souls free into the air. This global climate change may be a cause of dinosaur ghost aggression still alive after all those years ;)
 

Fenton

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
29,771
Reaction score
12,231
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I agree.


But, I would not mind freeing pockets in various depths of earths crust of dino-fuel if this technology would be available. This along with hydrogen cells of course.

I sometimes imagine that perhaps it was meant to be for us to find ways to burn dino-fossil-fuels so as to un-trap their souls free into the air. This global climate change may be a cause of dinosaur ghost aggression still alive after all those years ;)
The alternative energy agenda has been destroyed by the left politicizing and manipulation.

The best idea's, the most feasable and dependable are the result of real demand addressed with private freedom.

The push for inneffecient and expensive and not eco-friendly solar and battery power rose out of the false claims, demagogy and doom of the left wing agenda.

Too much CO2 and we must do something NOW, including you paying us more of your hard earned money.

Future Fusion reactors, current fissile reactors and hydrogen fuel cell should be the obvious course, but again, the bureaucrats decided wasting billions and building cars no one wanted was the right choice.
 

tererun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 19, 2012
Messages
4,905
Reaction score
1,577
Location
The darkside of the moon
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
You see, that is a personal judgment you apply because you feel guilty. I did not say they were jerks for doing it, I just said they feel that way. They do not have to face the consequences of their living so it really does not matter to them. The problems of pollution will not get terrible enough that they cannot move to a new area that is cleaner during their lifetime. Sure it might suck for the ones trapped in cities with heavy pollution, or the coast, but there are tons of places to move to where pollution is low and the effects of climate change are not going to get drastic before they die anyway. I understand you feel guilty and insulted because your attitude may be seen as greedy and selfish by others, but what do you care? Those people don't matter as much as your gas guzzling car and old light bulbs anyway.

Let us not beat around the Bush and pretend like you care. You do not have to. These problems will not be faced by you, and your life is more important to you than the future of some people you don't even know. If you feel guilty you can always pretend god will be there to save those people when things break. Just admit to it. Pollution exists and is only increasing. Therefor it is a problem in a finite world. You do not have to care because there is enough for you to live your life out without too much problem. If that makes you feel a little crappy about yourself, that is your judgment.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,660
Reaction score
33,248
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The alternative energy agenda has been destroyed by the left politicizing and manipulation.

The best idea's, the most feasable and dependable are the result of real demand addressed with private freedom.

The push for inneffecient and expensive and not eco-friendly solar and battery power rose out of the false claims, demagogy and doom of the left wing agenda.

Too much CO2 and we must do something NOW, including you paying us more of your hard earned money.

Future Fusion reactors, current fissile reactors and hydrogen fuel cell should be the obvious course, but again, the bureaucrats decided wasting billions and building cars no one wanted was the right choice.
Private industry gravitates towards the cheaper option. This is rarely the cleaner option.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
This.

Man made or not man made is beyond the point to me. The reality is that our entire structure in this country is too ingrained with fossil fuels to make any true sizable shift from it in any type of recent future, and you have multiple emerging countries like China and India who are going to be latching onto Fossil Fuels in a major way. Even with a fairly "swift" change on the part of the U.S., say 10 years, it's still unlikely to have any significant impact even if "Man" is the primary element causing the warming.

Is it wrong or bad to ENCOURAGE and PROMOTE "Green Energy" and a move away from fossil fuels? Absolutely not. But attempting to massively legislate and regulate it and make it a primary focus is like trying to put ones finger into a hole in a dike while the water level is set to go over top of the wall anyways.

One of the greatest features of the Human Race is our ability to adapt to our environment. As much, if not more, focus needs to be on responding to that and helping adapt.

There was a technology that was in the news some years back. A group had been working on cement that could "eat" CO2 emissions. Another was working on using insects and/or bacteria to process waste into crude oil. These are great types of technology that could massively help in the future while keeping out infastructure from needing a radical rework...but they're things largely ignored becuase it's not been about adapting, it's not been about realism, it's about a slavish adherence to a notion of "Green".
You're a reason fellow and I always like reading your posts, but slavish works both ways. There's also a slavish adherence to the notion that continuing any way we want to is fine as there is no problem.
 

mpg

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
7,795
Reaction score
1,784
Location
Milford, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
You see, that is a personal judgment you apply because you feel guilty. I did not say they were jerks for doing it, I just said they feel that way. They do not have to face the consequences of their living so it really does not matter to them. The problems of pollution will not get terrible enough that they cannot move to a new area that is cleaner during their lifetime. Sure it might suck for the ones trapped in cities with heavy pollution, or the coast, but there are tons of places to move to where pollution is low and the effects of climate change are not going to get drastic before they die anyway. I understand you feel guilty and insulted because your attitude may be seen as greedy and selfish by others, but what do you care? Those people don't matter as much as your gas guzzling car and old light bulbs anyway.

Let us not beat around the Bush and pretend like you care. You do not have to. These problems will not be faced by you, and your life is more important to you than the future of some people you don't even know. If you feel guilty you can always pretend god will be there to save those people when things break. Just admit to it. Pollution exists and is only increasing. Therefor it is a problem in a finite world. You do not have to care because there is enough for you to live your life out without too much problem. If that makes you feel a little crappy about yourself, that is your judgment.
Ideally, people in this thread would only talk about climate change and what to do about it. Typically, people on this site talk about the topic at hand AND attack each other. You've chosen to attack only, and you've made incredibly specific accusations about someone who you know nothing about. You may as well accuse me of torturing Siamese kittens and 9 1/2 week old Beagle puppies.
 
Last edited:

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Ideally, people in this thread would only talk about climate change and what to do about it. Typically, people on this site talk about the topic at hand AND attack each other. You've chosen to attack only, and you've you've made incredibly specific accusations about someone who you know nothing about. You may as well accuse me of torturing Siamese kittens and 9 1/2 week old Beagle puppies.
I'm ok with the kittens (hate cats), but not the puppies!!!
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Let me ask the question for the right since they are not able to put their true thoughts into words due to cowardice. Why the hell should we care? Seriously, it is quite inconvenient to give a damn about future problems old white people will not have to face. A few decades from now they will be dead anyway. Even if they are not they will be pissing themselves and trying to remember their own names. They are not teenagers and they face death much sooner than the youth of today. Those are those youthful kids they hate so damned much anyway for supporting gays, blacks, immigrants, and any other god forsaken group that happens to just want to live. It is what those kids deserve for not running to their party anyway. So why not live it up now? They will not have to face the future. I am sure god will handle it because he seems to be really up on granting wishes and saving people.

So stop pestering the right about this. It is not an issue that effects them. They have no concern about their actions, and they live purely for their own gratification at the expense of others. It is terribly bothersome for you to guilt them about the future of a world they will never see.
Didn't take long for it to become a race thing. Nice!!
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
This.

Man made or not man made is beyond the point to me. The reality is that our entire structure in this country is too ingrained with fossil fuels to make any true sizable shift from it in any type of recent future, and you have multiple emerging countries like China and India who are going to be latching onto Fossil Fuels in a major way. Even with a fairly "swift" change on the part of the U.S., say 10 years, it's still unlikely to have any significant impact even if "Man" is the primary element causing the warming.

Is it wrong or bad to ENCOURAGE and PROMOTE "Green Energy" and a move away from fossil fuels? Absolutely not. But attempting to massively legislate and regulate it and make it a primary focus is like trying to put ones finger into a hole in a dike while the water level is set to go over top of the wall anyways.

One of the greatest features of the Human Race is our ability to adapt to our environment. As much, if not more, focus needs to be on responding to that and helping adapt.

There was a technology that was in the news some years back. A group had been working on cement that could "eat" CO2 emissions. Another was working on using insects and/or bacteria to process waste into crude oil. These are great types of technology that could massively help in the future while keeping out infastructure from needing a radical rework...but they're things largely ignored becuase it's not been about adapting, it's not been about realism, it's about a slavish adherence to a notion of "Green".
The, "notion of 'Green'", has nothing to do with saving the environment. It has to do with organizing the populace behind a government apparatus that excercises more control over the people and thereby pushing it's actual agenda. In the first part of the 20th Century, the Leftists used war as the crisis de'jour. Now, it's "Climate Change".
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The, "notion of 'Green'", has nothing to do with saving the environment. It has to do with organizing the populace behind a government apparatus that excercises more control over the people and thereby pushing it's actual agenda. In the first part of the 20th Century, the Leftists used war as the crisis de'jour. Now, it's "Climate Change".
:roll::roll::shock:
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
117,855
Reaction score
33,969
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The, "notion of 'Green'", has nothing to do with saving the environment. It has to do with organizing the populace behind a government apparatus that excercises more control over the people and thereby pushing it's actual agenda.
The notion of 'republican' has nothing to do with individual liberty and responsibility. It has to do with organizing the populace behind a government apparatus that exercises more control over the people and thereby pushing it's actual agenda of oppressing the poor and racism.

The notion of 'democrat' has nothing to do with justice. It has to do with organizing... blah blah blah.

The notion of 'Christian' has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with organizing... blah blah blah.



See how that works?
 
Top Bottom