Is The Sun Causing The Current Climate Change?

[Jerry Rapp]

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

there isn't any money if we want to keep living as we do. You can't keep borrowing that you will never pay back.

I said a while back to take the national budget and cut everything 10% and then see where we were. I got laughed at.

The government is out of control again. Common sense.

Money does not grow on trees.

[Justin Spencer]

I agree Jerry, but if energy rates increase it will hurt us at first and then we will get smarter and learn to conserve and much like higher gas prices we will adjust to a new normal and new technology will even things out with the environment being the beneficiary. Higher energy prices will lead to more private solar arrays and that is what can make a difference one installation at a time. Money will be invested as these new technologies gain popularity and this can all be done in the private sector, it may take carbon taxes to bring about this change, and that will hurt for a while, but we can give up our smart phones, netflix, and hbo if we have to.

[jeb]

However, whatever you call it, the majority of scientists agree that human activity is somehow contributing to it.

Yep, I think we all know what their opinion is. The fly in the ointment though is the fact that they hang their hat on CO2 emissions being the trigger. And it's now quite evident that rising CO2 levels do not bring with them the "alarming" rises in global temperatures they were predicting. So they need to come up with a better theory to support their opinions, and start getting the science on their side.

Let me lay out the end-of-the-world, worst-case scenario. The "alarmists" and "commies" get their way. America launches a national effort in pursuit of green energy on the level of the space program. Tons of jobs are created, and we become a global leader in green research and development. Top scientists and engineers around the world travel to the US, and companies flock here, just as they did during the tech boom. Jobs are indeed lost in the area of coal and oil, but are created as well. (This has always been the case with new technology, and the people to embrace the change that is destined to come anyway will ultimately thrive). The global market for oil begins to dry up, and America and it's allies are leading the way in energy (rather than buying oil from [indirectly] say...idk...Iran).

That is a nice dream, I agree. But reality is the problem. The reality is that we've been on the path you describe for a number of years already, and it is not bringing those benefits. The reason is those green energy technologies make no economic sense at this point in time. All we're doing by forcing this on ourselves is making us less competitive on the world market for jobs. One of the sad things is that many of the jobs we hoped it would create here are going overseas, like building our solar panels and wind turbines.

The irony of our current "leadership" in trying to force fossil fuel energy prices higher (to make green energy more competitive) is that it's made extracting oil and NG from formerly marginal sources economically viable. There is quite a fossil fuel boom going on in North America thanks to those policies, and the current world reserves are very impressive.

We're just not living in the same world we were 20+ years ago. We were the kings and everyone knew it. The aftermath of WWII was very good to us. But as our current president has made pains to point out over the years, there was no good reason for it. We are no more exceptional than anyone else, is how he put it, I believe. So it was just a matter of time until we were dethroned. It's been a sad thing to watch happen. Forcing higher energy costs and more regulations on ourselves has proven to be the wrong path back to greatness, IMO, and has hastened the decline.

This country is run by idiots.

You got that right. What smart person would want to run for office in this political environment? And even if they did start out with integrity, the process of getting elected to any federal office is an absolutely corrupting one these days.

[jeb]

and that will hurt for a while, but we can give up our smart phones, netflix, and hbo if we have to.

I doubt it. But this brings up a good point. The green energy agenda is being sold to the public as a "it won't hurt YOU" thing. They're being told it will all be very painless, evil companies will have to pay more taxes, the govt will subsidize it for you, it'll all be okay. But I guarantee you when the pain hits John Q Public and he/she are told they can only afford enough energy to keep the lights on, no more "smart phones, netflix and hbo" as you put it, there will be a political revolution in this country. There won't be any jobs left here either, so they'll have plenty of time to get involved at that point.

[stlfisher]

The data are bearing that out. Data is plural, baring is naked.

Part of the problem is that it is almost impossible to make predictions about what the climate is likely to do as a result of anthropogenic induced climate change. In the 70s we were heading for an ice age. In the 90s-00s we are heading for a baked planet. Too many variables to make an accurate prediction. There are many scientists that are predicting cooling now, even though it has been branded "global warming" (http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/

06/29/scientists-and-studies-predict-imminent-global-cooling-ahead-drop-in-global-temps-almost-a-slam-dunk/).

However, whatever you call it, the majority of scientists agree that human activity is somehow contributing to it.

Let me lay out the end-of-the-world, worst-case scenario. The "alarmists" and "commies" get their way. America launches a national effort in pursuit of green energy on the level of the space program. Tons of jobs are created, and we become a global leader in green research and development. Top scientists and engineers around the world travel to the US, and companies flock here, just as they did during the tech boom. Jobs are indeed lost in the area of coal and oil, but are created as well. (This has always been the case with new technology, and the people to embrace the change that is destined to come anyway will ultimately thrive). The global market for oil begins to dry up, and America and it's allies are leading the way in energy (rather than buying oil from [indirectly] say...idk...Iran).

Oh... and emissions levels and oil/coal associated pollution plummet. Your air and environment (that you hunt and fish in) are less toxic. Your grandchildren inherit a cleaner, more sustainable earth.

What a horrible world that would be!!! Please oh please don't let it happen!!!

come on people.

We've spent $1.1 trillion to illogically dismantle Iraq (and now ISIS has moved in, and we're heading back). We've spent a little over 1 billion on clean energy R&D (1/1000 of one war) This country is run by idiots.

Exactly.

[Justin Spencer]

I doubt it. But this brings up a good point. The green energy agenda is being sold to the public as a "it won't hurt YOU" thing. They're being told it will all be very painless, evil companies will have to pay more taxes, the govt will subsidize it for you, it'll all be okay. But I guarantee you when the pain hits John Q Public and he/she are told they can only afford enough energy to keep the lights on, no more "smart phones, netflix and hbo" as you put it, there will be a political revolution in this country. There won't be any jobs left here either, so they'll have plenty of time to get involved at that point.

I agree with some of that. I wish politicians could just be truthful and tell us that changes need to be made that will make things tougher on everyone but sacrifices must be made. The problem is whichever side says anything negative the other side goes on the attack and makes them the bad party ultimately costing them elections. Campaign contributions stand between the two parties agreeing on a cleaner environment, if the parties could agree that we need to clean up our pollution the nation would have no choice but to get behind it and the "green" industries would pick up jobs that might be lost elsewhere. The "win at all cost" attitude of the parties is bringing our nation down. Each party shares the blame equally, and right now I don't trust either party to successfully run the country because it takes cooperation to get anything done, and right now cooperation is a four letter word in Washington.

[Jerry Rapp]

here is something that we can all do to help save the planet...

http://news.yahoo.com/science-save-earth-peeing-shower-190635500.html

[Justin Spencer]

here is something that we can all do to help save the planet...

http://news.yahoo.com/science-save-earth-peeing-shower-190635500.html

done

[Fly_Guy]

That is a nice dream, I agree. But reality is the problem. The reality is that we've been on the path you describe for a number of years already, and it is not bringing those benefits. The reason is those green energy technologies make no economic sense at this point in time. All we're doing by forcing this on ourselves is making us less competitive on the world market for jobs. One of the sad things is that many of the jobs we hoped it would create here are going overseas, like building our solar panels and wind turbines.

We have been unwilling to invest the capital it would take. Again, we spent 1.1 trillion (and counting) to kill people who never did anything to us, and we invest 1/1000 of that into green technology. I promise you that if we tackled this problem with true conviction, America would see it done. Instead, it's all political bickering and point scoring.

NASA was created in 1958, and 11 years later a man was walking on the moon. In the 1960s, we spent 25 billion on the apollo missions. And we can manage just 1/25th of that in todays money to tackle green energy?? No wonder the technology is lagging, and the jobs are going overseas. We need a government program dedicated to this problem (just as NASA was - how many private companies landed on the moon in the 1960s?).

American can do exceptional things, but the country has to support the investment, and the politicians have to be willing the put themselves into something greater.

We're just not living in the same world we were 20+ years ago. We were the kings and everyone knew it. The aftermath of WWII was very good to us. But as our current president has made pains to point out over the years, there was no good reason for it. We are no more exceptional than anyone else, is how he put it, I believe. So it was just a matter of time until we were dethroned. It's been a sad thing to watch happen. Forcing higher energy costs and more regulations on ourselves has proven to be the wrong path back to greatness, IMO, and has hastened the decline.

Here we do agree. Apologizing for American at every turn is no way to rally a country.

here is something that we can all do to help save the planet...

http://news.yahoo.co...-190635500.html

Glad to help!

[jeb]

We have been unwilling to invest the capital it would take. Again, we spent 1.1 trillion (and counting) to kill people who never did anything to us, and we invest 1/1000 of that into green technology. I promise you that if we tackled this problem with true conviction, America would see it done. Instead, it's all political bickering and point scoring.

I'm not sure where you're getting your investment numbers, but the ones I see are around $30 billion in the USA. And I very much doubt that takes into account all the govt spending on R&D, tax incentives, etc.

At any rate, again, the problem is the economics of it. There needs to be some major advancements in storage capacity, efficiency, etc before it makes any sense from a dollars and cents standpoint. Sure, there may be a few out there that are willing to pay much more for their power to get it from a supposedly greener source, but most will not willing do so. That would be especially true in the competitive international job market. Researchers have been trying to crack those problems for decades now, with very little real results.

I tell people when they can get the kind of storage and reserve power of a typical car or boat battery into a package the size of a D cell battery and the cost of it is reasonable, then we can start to make sense of solar and wind. But really, vehicle batteries have changed very little since I started driving back in the mid-70's. Sure, you can drop big bucks on a lighter lithium, and they are more reliable. But the size and capacity have changed very little. And lead/acid is still the most common type. I wonder if we ever will make that leap that is required in the storage area. You can believe the govt, colleges and industry has been trying HARD to do that for a lot of years now. Can you imagine the patent income from a company inventing something like that?

NASA was created in 1958, and 11 years later a man was walking on the moon. In the 1960s, we spent 25 billion on the apollo missions. And we can manage just 1/25th of that in todays money to tackle green energy?? No wonder the technology is lagging, and the jobs are going overseas. We need a government program dedicated to this problem (just as NASA was - how many private companies landed on the moon in the 1960s?).

As many as could make money doing it. So none. Although some companies made a lot of money helping to get us to the moon. But that was tax payer money. I agree that some new technology was spawned from it. But if were so good for us economically, we'd still be doing it. Heck, the current administration has stripped us of any ability to even get men to space now. Hitching a ride with the Russians is just depressing from a national pride perspective, IMO.