• 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!

New York Times Goes Pro Nuke

LowDown

Curmudgeon
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,767
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
'Beliefs that solar and wind power can displace fossil fuels amount to 'hallucinatory delusions'

...But even as the consensus among experts builds that coal and other fossil fuels must be sharply reduced and eventually removed from the energy matrix, there is no agreement on what sources of energy could feasibly take their place, and how to get from here to there.

As in the 1970s, environmental activists remain enthralled by the sun and the wind. But three decades’ worth of renewable energy dreams have yielded too little to entrust them with the job of replacing fossil fuels.

Today renewable energy supplies only about 6 percent of American demand. And most of that comes from water flowing through dams. Solar energy contributes next to nothing.

Averting climate change is likely to require much less eco-friendly sources of power. This includes natural gas, of course, which emits about half the carbon dioxide of coal. But over the long term it is likely to require much more investment in a big bugaboo of the environmental movement: nuclear power.
The experience of Germany is instructive. Relying too much on wind and solar has left them in danger of days long blackouts, especially in the winters when the sky is overcast and air is motionless over all of Europe for 3 to 5 days at a time. So they had to go back to coal.

But, of course, all this anguish over carbon emissions may well be misplaced anyway. There is now a lot of evidence that human carbon emissions don't even matter, that natural CO2 sources dwarf human ones and that those natural sources are independent of human activity.
 

davidtaylorjr

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
1,123
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The experience of Germany is instructive. Relying too much on wind and solar has left them in danger of days long blackouts, especially in the winters when the sky is overcast and air is motionless over all of Europe for 3 to 5 days at a time. So they had to go back to coal.

But, of course, all this anguish over carbon emissions may well be misplaced anyway. There is now a lot of evidence that human carbon emissions don't even matter, that natural CO2 sources dwarf human ones and that those natural sources are independent of human activity.
Shhhhh you are pointing out reality again....they might not take it well!
 

longview

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
28,331
Reaction score
9,795
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Unless we find better ways to store solar and wind energy,
nuclear power appears to be the only long term game in town.
I still hold out hope for storing excess energy as hydrocarbons,
but that will take a change in thinking.
Fueling the Fleet, Navy Looks to the Seas - U.S. Naval Research Laboratory
The alternative is a world that only feeds about 1 billion people.

Sometimes necessity is the mother of invention,
Sometimes it's just a mother.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,637
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Shhhhh you are pointing out reality again....they might not take it well!
You are right. That would not go over well in most quarters here in Germany. But that is changing. The price of electricity is risng and the population is beginning to realize they were lied to. The population seems to begetting a little restive.
 

Wiseone

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,551
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent


Ya look at that big back track in renewable energy
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,669
Reaction score
33,253
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The experience of Germany is instructive. Relying too much on wind and solar has left them in danger of days long blackouts, especially in the winters when the sky is overcast and air is motionless over all of Europe for 3 to 5 days at a time. So they had to go back to coal.
They didn't have to. Nuclear power is literally the safest form of power that exists. Solar power causes more deaths than nuclear!

But, of course, all this anguish over carbon emissions may well be misplaced anyway. There is now a lot of evidence that human carbon emissions don't even matter, that natural CO2 sources dwarf human ones and that those natural sources are independent of human activity.
There has always been evidence that nature emits more CO2 than we do. That isn't a new revelation. But you're missing a piece: the part where nature also absorbs CO2.
 

KevinKohler

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
21,943
Reaction score
9,978
Location
CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Nuclear power is how the rest of the solar system, and known universe does it....



Just saying.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,669
Reaction score
33,253
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Nuclear power is how the rest of the solar system, and known universe does it....
Just saying.
Well we haven't really worked out that fusion thing yet.
 

LowDown

Curmudgeon
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,767
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
They didn't have to. Nuclear power is literally the safest form of power that exists. Solar power causes more deaths than nuclear!
Yes, but the Japanese reactor accident stampeded them into giving up their nukes. That left them with nowhere to go but coal.



There has always been evidence that nature emits more CO2 than we do. That isn't a new revelation. But you're missing a piece: the part where nature also absorbs CO2.
No, the work I'm talking about is about net production or absorption of CO2 by natural sources. It turns out that this follows temperature. So CO2 net production and therefore atmospheric levels follow changes in temperature in modern times just like it did in the ice cores according to these investigators.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,669
Reaction score
33,253
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes, but the Japanese reactor accident stampeded them into giving up their nukes. That left them with nowhere to go but coal.





No, the work I'm talking about is about net production or absorption of CO2 by natural sources. It turns out that this follows temperature. So CO2 net production and therefore atmospheric levels follow changes in temperature in modern times just like it did in the ice cores according to these investigators.
This doesn't support your argument nearly as much as you think it does...
 
Top Bottom