Green New Deal - like all progressive ideas, it will win history

[Bigdog]

does.

Those are predictions and models, based on the scientific data they are collecting.

Predictions and models are not science. The climate is unpredictable. Soothsayers simply bet on the current trends, like did during the 70's cooling period.
S

 

[cawacko]

I have always thought that it's a shame that protecting this planet somehow became a partisan, left/right issue.

You would think it would be the one thing we could all come together on. As they say, there is no Planet B. Without this one, every other issue that we argue about is meaningless.

I'm hoping that changes. I wouldn't want to see the Green New Deal go through Congress like the ACA. I think we need to have a bipartisan effort.

There's 7.5 billion people on the planet. There's zero chance you're going to get that many people to agree there's only one thing we can do. And same if you want to discuss only the U.S. Like The Economist article said there are multiple ways to address climate change and not everyone agrees on the different methods. So it's not as simple as saying 'let's save the planet by doing x'.

 

[Into the Night]

It will win history regardless of what happens.

History is not a point in a game. It's not something you win or lose.

It will be either future generations looking back and saying "we should have," or (hopefully) "we're glad we did."

You don't get to speak for future generations. You only get to speak for you.

Promoting renewable energy,

We already do. Oil, natural gas, hydroelectric, wind, and solar are all renewable sources of energy. Coal is cheap. That means there's plenty of it, even though it is not known if coal is renewable. Nuclear fuel is expensive, but reactors don't use much of it. A little goes a long ways. Spent nuclear fuel can be put in a different style of reactor to get the last remaining energy out of it. The waste product of this reactor can be discarded safely in a landfill.

Wind is expensive. It's piddle power. It requires large tracts of land. The wind is not always blowing at a compatible speed. They can be useful for pumping water for irrigation and the like, but as a power source they suck.
Solar is even more expensive. It's piddle power. It requires expensive solar panels to work, and these require maintenance and protections from the weather to last the few years they will operate. The Sun is not always available to such power stations. They must shut down at night.
Hydroelectric can produce plenty of power, but it will only work in places compatible with building a dam and generating station. You can't put it just anywhere.

a smart grid,

Grids are already smart. This is a buzzword.

energy efficiency,

Always a good thing. It saves money, but only if the extra cost of that efficiency is worth it.

new infrastructure & transportation.

A bridge is a bridge and road is a road. Nothing's changed here except for the increased use of plasticizers in asphalt and concrete to lengthen their life span and to make roads quieter.

..how are these "radical ideas?"

They aren't. They are already happening.

What kind of country are we if these are on the fringe,

They aren't on the fringe.

and continued abuse of the planet

Define 'abuse of the planet'.

and exhausting FINITE fuel sources

There is actually nothing wrong with this. The market will decide. You don't get to dictate the marketplace.

somehow represent common sense?

The energy market is common sense. People will decide what they want to buy. You don't get to dictate it. If you want an electric car, go buy one. If you want a windmill, go buy one. You don't get to dictate to others what they can buy. You are not the king.

As has been stated, it's a framework. It represents a commitment, but would come out of Congress looking much different and likely with timelines that wouldn't negatively impact jobs or the economy.

Congress isn't a dictator either. They have no authority in this area.

And one thing conservatives never mention - the jobs that would be CREATED with emphasis on renewables & new infrastructure.

No. Jobs are lost in dictatorships. When you force a business to buy energy that is expensive or in a form they don't want, that business will leave and take it's jobs with it.

This is an opportunity to do for the American economy now what tech did for it in the '90's.

Tech did what it did because people decided to buy it. You don't get to dictate what people will buy. You are not the king.

We need to change our thinking on the environment.

...such as? Void argument fallacy.

The planet keeps yelling at us that we need to change, and we're just not listening yet.

The planet does not yell, speak, or have any intelligence.

 

[Into the Night]

Hello BartenderElite,



Green jobs are the fastest growing sector.

The GND is just a little ahead of it's time, sadly, as far as acceptance goes. As far as the need goes, we should have done this when Jimmy Carter was President. Carter was right. He put solar panels on the WH.

Define 'green job'. People will choose to buy the energy they want in the form they want it. You don't get to dictate that. You are not the king.

 

[Rusty Bell 65]

Hello BartenderElite,



Green jobs are the fastest growing sector.

The GND is just a little ahead of it's time, sadly, as far as acceptance goes. As far as the need goes, we should have done this when Jimmy Carter was President. Carter was right. He put solar panels on the WH.

 

[Into the Night]

Science can not predict the weather a 100 years from now, much less the climate.

If implemented, You will never be able to scientifically prove that the GND worked ... or NOT. But you will be able to measure the devastating poverty, misery and death it will cause.

Science does not predict anything. it can't. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. It has no power of prediction. To gain that power, a theory has to be formalized into a closed functional system (usually mathematics). The resulting equation is called a 'law'.
It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. We don't have anywhere near enough thermometers. The ones that we do have are not uniformly placed. Location grouping is significant. They are not read at the same time by the same authority. Time is significant. Both factors must be eliminated from the collection method.

The effects of CO2 in the atmosphere is already known. It is zero. No gas or vapor can magickally create energy out of nothing. CO2 has absolutely no effect on the temperature of the Earth. It can't.

You are quite right that the Church of Green and the Church of Global Warming both stem from the Church of Karl Marx. They are excuses to implement socialism. They are being used by Democrats to accomplish nothing less than the overthrow of the Constitution of the United States and to replace it with fascism by oligarchy.

 

[Into the Night]

The alternative is before us right now;
forest fires,

Wildfire happens in the SOTC. The environmentalist movement there (the Democrats) prevent management of the brush and forests in the SOTC. The result is inevitable...wildfire. Antifa arsonists starting a lot of these fires didn't help either. Define 'climate change.

stronger hurricanes, derecho.

Hurricanes are not more frequent or stronger. See the data a the National Hurricane Center.

It's either the GND or bye-bye planet earth.

False dichotomy fallacy. The Green New Deal is not going to save anything. All it will do is bring misery. It is fascism.

Fuck the "markets".

Spoken like a true socialist. Fuck you.

They caused this disaster,

They did not cause any disaster. Define the 'disaster'.

and shouldn't be the ones we turn to for answers or input.

Markets are indeed the answer for best providing energy choices, energy conservation measures like double pane windows or more efficient and reliable cars and trucks, more efficient jet engines, etc.

You do not get to dictate the markets. You are not the king.

 

[TexanManWithPlans]

Science can not predict the weather a 100 years from now, much less the climate.

If implemented, You will never be able to scientifically prove that the GND worked ... or NOT. But you will be able to measure the devastating poverty, misery and death it will cause.

Wow. Only the most uneducated (or dishonest) right-winger would compare predicting the climate to predicting the weather.

Sure, you won't know the weather in Honolulu in a year from now, but you know that it won't be snowing eight inches there. I live in Pennsylvania and I know it won't be sunny and warm on Christmas here.

 

[Into the Night]

Disagree...the Onion is no longer relevant because Conservatism has taken the parody and put it into orthodoxy.

Like the head of the Coronavirus Task Force failing at his job by getting the President infected with a disease that wasn't supposed to exist or be worse than the flu.

Trump never said the virus does not exist. Trump never said it was no worse than the flu. You are making shit up again.

 

[Into the Night]

Sure it can...whether you accept it or not is the question.




I think not having Florida submerged would be scientific proof enough.

Denial of science. Science has no power to predict anything. It must turn to mathematics to gain the power of prediction. Science by itself only explains. It does not predict. A theory of science formalized into mathematical form creates an equation. Florida is not submerged. You are denying science and mathematics yet again.

 

[cancel2 2022]

I have always thought that it's a shame that protecting this planet somehow became a partisan, left/right issue.

You would think it would be the one thing we could all come together on. As they say, there is no Planet B. Without this one, every other issue that we argue about is meaningless.

I'm hoping that changes. I wouldn't want to see the Green New Deal go through Congress like the ACA. I think we need to have a bipartisan effort.

Emotional bullshit, all this 'data' you speak of comes from CMIP5 climate models, there is precious little empirical evidence to prove that anything other than mild warming is occurring. Indeed much of that is to be expected coming out of a mini Ice Age. Just because your feels tell you means nothing, the world of science and hard evidence cares little for your feels. How about you show some falsifiable evidence that proves there is anything more than a slight anthropogenic signal in the data? Even NASA say that sea levels are rising no more than 3.0 mm per year or around 30cms per century, terrifying...not! The Maldives and Vanuatu were predicted to be underwater by now, so what happened to those predictions? Al Gordo said that the Arctic would be totally ice free in Summer by 2013, what happened to that one?

 

[katzgar]

Emotional bullshit, all this 'data' you speak of comes from CMIP5 climate models, there is precious little empirical evidence to prove that anything other than mild warming is occurring. Indeed much of that is to be expected coming out of a mini Ice Age. Just because your feels tell you means nothing, the world of science and hard evidence cares little for your feels. How about you show some falsifiable evidence that proves there is anything more than a slight anthropogenic signal in the data? Even NASA say that sea levels are rising no more than 3.0 mm per year or around 30cms per century, terrifying...not!

You're assertion that the new green economy will create massive numbers of jobs is correct

 

[cancel2 2022]

You're assertion that the new green economy will create massive numbers of jobs is correct

My assertion that you're a pathetic geriatric old sod is deadly accurate!

 

[dukkha]

Substituting high-carbon energy sources like coal for cleaner ones like natural gas, nuclear and bioenergy would do a great deal to push America towards decarbonisation. But insisting on decarbonisation within a decade—with renewable capacity still limited—would push up electricity costs rapidly

natural gas has already caused the USA to be the leader in decarbonizaton..Im fine with tax credits and so forth to make renewables more affordable, but forcing them on the market is a disaster, The Paris Accords are even a bigger disaster giving China and India an artificial support system

 

[Into the Night]

Wow. Only the most uneducated (or dishonest) right-winger would compare predicting the climate to predicting the weather.

Sure, you won't know the weather in Honolulu in a year from now, but you know that it won't be snowing eight inches there. I live in Pennsylvania and I know it won't be sunny and warm on Christmas here.

So a tropical climate is still a tropical climat3e. A desert climate is still a desert climate. What has changed? Define 'climate change'.

 

[Into the Night]

natural gas has already caused the USA to be the leader in decarbonizaton..Im fine with tax credits and so forth to make renewables more affordable, but forcing them on the market is a disaster, The Paris Accords are even a bigger disaster giving China and India an artificial support system

No. Tax credits to encourage 'renewables'. is theft. Using the tax code to direct public behavior is theft. It is fascism.

 

[CFM]

It will win history regardless of what happens. It will be either future generations looking back and saying "we should have," or (hopefully) "we're glad we did."

Promoting renewable energy, a smart grid, energy efficiency, new infrastructure & transportation...how are these "radical ideas?" What kind of country are we if these are on the fringe, and continued abuse of the planet and exhausting FINITE fuel sources somehow represent common sense?

As has been stated, it's a framework. It represents a commitment, but would come out of Congress looking much different and likely with timelines that wouldn't negatively impact jobs or the economy.

And one thing conservatives never mention - the jobs that would be CREATED with emphasis on renewables & new infrastructure. This is an opportunity to do for the American economy now what tech did for it in the '90's.

We need to change our thinking on the environment. The planet keeps yelling at us that we need to change, and we're just not listening yet.

Pie in the sky. Only a left wing fool would believe what you posted.

 

[Bigdog]

Wow. Only the most uneducated (or dishonest) right-winger would compare predicting the climate to predicting the weather.

Sure, you won't know the weather in Honolulu in a year from now, but you know that it won't be snowing eight inches there. I live in Pennsylvania and I know it won't be sunny and warm on Christmas here.

You don't even know what climate is.

You're talking out your ass, Pendejo.

Penn. has had sunny and warm Christmases. Hawaii had 6 inches of snow in 1938.

And you're the asshole that's going to tell me what the weather will be in these places a 100 years from now?

 

[CFM]

You're assertion that the new green economy will create massive numbers of jobs is correct

You're assertion that you're a n-lover is correct.

 

[CFM]

Wow. Only the most uneducated (or dishonest) right-winger would compare predicting the climate to predicting the weather.

Sure, you won't know the weather in Honolulu in a year from now, but you know that it won't be snowing eight inches there. I live in Pennsylvania and I know it won't be sunny and warm on Christmas here.

How do you know it won't be sunny there? How do you know it won't be warm? Are you saying it can't be cold and sunny at the same time? Warm and cold are relative terms.