Comments on: Can technology alone stop global warming?

By: Dr. Will S. Johnson

Dr. Will S. Johnson — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:15:06 +0000

we need climate changes. ppl need to understand that the world is going to end because of global warming. stop using fossil fuels and start using energy!!!!!!!!!!! :@ and if we want that vote 4 barack obama 2!!!!!! ppl, listen to me. im a dr. prffesor and many more!
everybody stop using fossil fuels and use energy!!!!!!

dr. and proffesor Will S. Johnson
Princeton Uneversity

By: David B. Benson

David B. Benson — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 00:03:55 +0000

Peter Foley wrote “…While climate changes “threatens” millions, every year WHO allows 500,000 plus dead Africans from Malaria.” Which is a strange thing to write. WHO has no resources to do otherwise. A current goal of some NGOs is to distribute mosquito nets in areas (not just in Africa) in malarial mosquisitos. Some progress is reported on biological elimination of those species of mosquitos which carry malaria in favor of those species which do not.

But the increase in tropical diseases may well simp[ly ovrwhelm the (limited) willingness of the developed world to aid the disadvantaged.

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 18:12:57 +0000

Robert, the U.S. doesn’t see itself as a defacto global government, but that’s what it is. It’s the world’s 800 pound gorilla. Everyone has to deal with it. The United Nations can continue to draft greenhouse gas cutting agreements till the end of time. It won’t matter without China and the United States.

Separate your dislike of the United States from the reality that the United States more or less pays the piper. Americans don’t want to be a global government. But the decisions on global warming over the next three years that come from Washington will determine how the fight plays out.

You said you wanted a global government. I’m just saying you have one. It’s just not the one you wanted, but the Americans don’t wan the role either.

Be careful what you wish for.

By: Peter Foley

Peter Foley — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 15:55:31 +0000

How did the crazy idea “cheap” commodities should be taxed come about? As economies grow the demand for will change and thus prices. constant interference with prices leads to black markets and crony capitalism as rational actors attempt to limit the damage/profit from the acts of interventionist government. Nobody wins a war? Ask Gen. Custer or Geronimo. We’re losing the border War right now with Mexico. Look and see how warped the French national Psyche is from losing three out of three wars with Germany. Ask the North Vietnamese if winning the mid Seventies War with China was important? Free Tibet anyone? If you can read, thank a teacher, if you can read English thank a soldier.
Robert, you are expressing the thoughts of a social parasite.
Regarding the “chickens coming home to roost” If the voters don’t continue to elect a group of tax and spend and spend some more dummies we’ll be okay.
The US has no desire to run the world, If we did, there would be a US flag over 95% of the former British empire, North Africa, Europe, Japan, Philippines, Vietnam, and Korea.
Obviously you didn’t see the interview with the agent who debriefed Saddam Hussein–”I was going to build NBC weapons as soon as I got enough funds together from the Western traitors that were buying black market oil”.
While the management of the peace in Iraq was bungled. The death rate has been and will remain well below the death rates during any period of Saddam’s dictatorship–both the U.K. and the US can and should be proud of giving a people an opportunity to be free. Just how Green was Hussein’s regime?
The world is welcome to “join” our community at any time.
Only a retarded nation would forward any type of world government that would reduce its own sovereignty.(what’s up with keeping the pound? Hmmm?) I don’t to want exist at the whim of 2 Billion Chindains.
Are we(USA) at war with the IPCC? It is damaging us(USA) much more than the thankfully incompetent boogiemen terrorists-I’ll give Homeland Security a heads ups. No more Green magazines on airplanes– they’ll have to develop an alternate techniques to replace water-boarding in the drought stricken areas in the coming “Hell and High Water”.
P.S. The war was sanctioned by the UN.
Have you read the latest releases from the IPCC?
Why cooperate over an imaginary issue, save the political capital for real issues.

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:07:11 +0000

Tom,

I think you are out of date. China does not rely on exports to the US so much these days.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/ china/ 2008-01/ 25/ content_6419841.htm

“We expect the Chinese economy to grow by 10 percent this year despite a US-led global economic slowdown,” said Liang Hong, an economist with Goldman Sachs in Hong Kong. “Strong domestic demand, especially investment growth, is expected to sustain the overall GDP growth, though the export growth is set to slow down.”

The US may see itself as the defacto world government, but no-one else does. This was very obvious from the events leading up to the Iraq war when the US basically fought and eventually ignored the UN. The UK was stupid enough to follow, but I trust we won’t make that mistake again.

Similarly, the US has fought the UN-founded IPCC and is now the only country in the world to have refused to ratify Kyoto.

I hope your new President tries a little harder to join the world community. It will make cooperation over climate change a slightly less distant prospect

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:34:58 +0000

“Robert Says:

April 7th, 2008 at 5:14 am
Tom

…As a UK citizen I think you are seriously out of touch with how the world views you … The US is starting to look like the sick man of the world and most certainly not its defacto government. But thanks for offering…”

Robert, few Americans have any illusion about the world’s view of their country (trust me. I recently moved here after more than a decade in Europe and Asia). As was once the case with Britain, policy made in the United States impacts the entire world, whether the rest of the planet likes it or not.

You said the world needs a global government, and I pointed out we have one, however unloved and undemocratic it may be. If Washington decides it will put a high tariff on carbon-intensive imports from a country that has no policy in place to cut greenhouse gas emissions, that country will almost certainly change its policy. Asian economies have weak domestic demand and probably would have little choice but to comply.

The U.S. is the world’s Wal-Mart (or Tesco or Asda). The world’s biggest retailer drives policy for huge portions of the U.S. economy due to its sheer girth. When it abandoned a ‘Made in America’ image 15 years ago and demanded suppliers push their prices as low as possible, U.S. imports from China began to soar.

When Washington dangles the threat of restricting access to the world’s most lucrative market, the rest of the world will respond.

Is that democratic? No. Is it pleasant? No. Is it a de facto global government? Sort of – at least the closest thing the world has.

Does that make the posters here U.S.-centric? Maybe, but that’s the reality of the world. What’s the point of discussing Norway’s push to become carbon neutral or U.K. tidal power research? Global warming will in general be won or lost in the United States and China — and probably Washington in particular.

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 07:25:20 +0000

Peter – you make a lot of points. I’ll comment on a few of them.

I think history shows you that wars generally are a waste of time with no eventual winners. The genetic make up of all populations changes over time – it always has and always will. The same applies in the US which is entirely made up of immigrants with an inflow today that shows no signs of abating.

Dollar hegemony is a two edged sword. In the past it has bolstered the US’s position in the world and enabled it to borrow huge quantities of funds from other countries through the issue of T-notes. The signs now are that your chickens are coming home to roost. The weak dollar (mainly due to expensive oil, priced in dollars) is making other countires question the sanity of keeping their reserves in dollars. If/when this financial dam breaks the consequences on the US will be devastating.

Likewise, cheap, largely untaxed oil must have semed a great idea when oil was abundant, but it has caused the US to use it like water. Now it is expensive there is no quick way to re-rig your infrastructure to use less.

By: Dano

Dano — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 02:32:22 +0000

I see the marginal screenwriters are still out of work.

Fortunately, they are keeping “up” their “chops” on The Internets, creating parody characters like “Peter” “Foley”.

Hopefully your seedy little hotel 2 blocks off of Sunset will soon be a bad memory, and your choice to keep in practice by writing on climate change blogs will have paid off, son.

Best,

By: elbarto

elbarto — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 02:25:21 +0000

Peter,

Clearly you don’t know a thing about mining.

The invisible hand of the free market has already decided on electric for mining equipment. Most of the worlds mining equipment already runs on electric motors. Electricity is typically generated by on-board diesel generators but it is not difficult to supply equipment directly by cable and overhead powerline. Large draglines ALREADY operate on grid power fed by fixed cable and it wouldn’t take much to hook up cables to already electric rope shovels and shut-off the diesel generators for everything but relocation / initial positioning.

Half the job is already done. It will be a minor technical adjustment to have mining operations almost all grid-electric. Suppling electricity to some of the large mobile equipment will be a little tricky, but we have electric trains and trams so similar techniques could be employed eg. overhead lines along haul roads. The beauty is most of the big trucks already have electric motors so it is only a retrofit to existing infrastructure.

Hydraulic and pneumatic drives were abandoned some time ago due to being unreliable and inefficient. Here are some links. Or you could google “electric mining equipment”.

http://www.phmining.com/equipment/shovels.html
http://www.komatsu.com/ CompanyInfo/ press/ 2006110214270222514.html
http://www.mining-technology.com/ projects/ morenci/ index.html#morenci2
http://www.miningaustralia.com.au/ articles/ Towards-an-automated-electric-rope-shovel_z62341.htm
http://www.bluescopesteel.com.au/ go/ case-study/ bucyrus-australia-s-world-first-dragline
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragline

My apologies to other posters for this divergence. I know one shouldn’t feed the trolls.

By: Peter Foley

Peter Foley — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:14:32 +0000

David B. Benson, While climate changes “threatens” millions, every year WHO allows 500,000 plus dead Africans from Malaria.

Elbarto, let the invisible hand of the free market determine what powers mining equipment, be it compressed air, Hydraulics, electrical, or liquid hydrocarbons. Compare the increase in copper to oil price ratio. How many would die from electrocution? or electrically caused explosions? I like the Pneumatic as the exhaust is mostly breathable and provides emergency air. In the US the safest is usually the cheapest after legal expenses are considered.
Fossil oil lower yes, oil lower, who knows? Let the market work and tax the wealth created for necessary actions needed, not some green pipe dreams.

Malthusian Communist= double dumb.