Oklahoma Charges through the Nose: Solar Success Attracts Fees

[bcroe]

Sorry to confuse you with facts, but according to BP, we only got about 100 years of coal reserves. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporat...-reserves.html

Hardly a long run solution.

Despite what an oil co may say, I read the USA has a huge portion of the world's
coal reserves, and a lot more than 80 years. And there is plenty of uranium worldwide.

Bruce Roe

[JCP]

Despite what an oil co may say, I read the USA has a huge portion of the world's
coal reserves, and a lot more than 80 years. And there is plenty of uranium worldwide.

Bruce Roe

I love this kind of argument. Ignore the facts and make some new ones up when it's convenient.

[pleppik]

I don't question that climate is changing. The effects of the various components of the atmosphere and how they all interact with the general environment is NOT known. Anyone that says it is fully understood - aerosol effect for example - is full of BS.

That's why scientists provide error bars and confidence intervals. We understand the science well enough to be over 95% certain that the global climate is changing as a direct result of human activity. Look it up.

Any Chem E knows that if they stop to think about it. There are many new concepts thrown into the calculations along with SWAGs and a whole lot of WAGS - then various parties fudge the outcome to suit what they had already decided - if you don't like that then go blow smoke up your own backside.

Did you bother to learn anything about climate science before making this statement? Or are you claiming to be smarter and more informed than the people who study this as their life's work?

As anyone can guess, I am not a member of the Holy Church of Climate Change - that is all the current chatter is - religion plus people like Al Bore getting rich.

And here we have the real problem: you disagree with the politics, and therefore you refuse to believe the science and ignore evidence contrary to your beliefs.

Recommended Reading: Confirmation bias, Dunning-Kruger effect, IPCC 2013 Summary for Policymakers

[inetdog]

There is good evidence available from things like rock samples and ice cores to show that the CO₂ level in the Earth's atmosphere has fluctuated over a very wide range in the past. In the same order of magnitude as the fluctuations we are seeing now.
However, those fluctuations took place over tens of thousands of years or more. Geologic time. And associated with very extreme changes in the plant and animal life on the planet.
The changes we have recorded over the last 400 years or so have been at a rate which is several orders of magnitude greater than any of the historic fluctuations.
I will bet that those pesky industrialized humans currently clinging to the crust of the planet have something do to with that.
And if the rate of change continues, the overall excursion in the CO₂ content will be larger than anything in the historic record for the several million years in which humanoid life has been present on the planet.

Just sayin'....

[SunEagle]

There is good evidence available from things like rock samples and ice cores to show that the CO₂ level in the Earth's atmosphere has fluctuated over a very wide range in the past. In the same order of magnitude as the fluctuations we are seeing now.
However, those fluctuations took place over tens of thousands of years or more. Geologic time. And associated with very extreme changes in the plant and animal life on the planet.
The changes we have recorded over the last 400 years or so have been at a rate which is several orders of magnitude greater than any of the historic fluctuations.
I will bet that those pesky industrialized humans currently clinging to the crust of the planet have something do to with that.
And if the rate of change continues, the overall excursion in the CO₂ content will be larger than anything in the historic record for the several million years in which humanoid life has been present on the planet.

Just sayin'....

I have not doubt that those pesky humans are contributing to CO2 buildup. What I am saying is that I do not totally believe (along with a lot of people) that CO2 is the main cause of climate change. I think you have a few people that have manipulated and convinced the masses that CO2 is the main reason for climate change. When it comes to scare tactics a little "truth" can be expressed in a way that makes people believe in anything.

Even if the US completely stopped adding carbon to our air (which would bankrupt us) I just don't believe it would be a major reduction in the total amount being released due to the other high carbon output countries. And even if the amount of carbon is significantly cut I don't believe it will make a difference to affect climate change to go back the other way.

If you are concerned about global temperature rise then find a way to cool the planet. Stopping carbon output won't be enough to stop the temperature rise. There are other natural occurrences at work affecting the climate change that us humans have little to no control over.

[Ian S]

There is good evidence available from things like rock samples and ice cores to show that the CO₂ level in the Earth's atmosphere has fluctuated over a very wide range in the past. In the same order of magnitude as the fluctuations we are seeing now.
However, those fluctuations took place over tens of thousands of years or more. Geologic time. And associated with very extreme changes in the plant and animal life on the planet.
The changes we have recorded over the last 400 years or so have been at a rate which is several orders of magnitude greater than any of the historic fluctuations.
I will bet that those pesky industrialized humans currently clinging to the crust of the planet have something do to with that.
And if the rate of change continues, the overall excursion in the CO₂ content will be larger than anything in the historic record for the several million years in which humanoid life has been present on the planet.

Just sayin'....

Well put. Now I'll just give a small example of the trouble we could be in due to the rapid rise in global temperature. One might think that if our farmlands in the midwest become too hot and dry to support agriculture, we can just move everything north into Canada to a more temperate climate. But there's a problem. Most of the areas that might thus acquire a more favorable climate for agriculture have another serious problem: it's called the Great Canadian Shield. That land is entirely unsuited to agriculture with poor rocky soils. And we'll have no time to wait for it to change naturally because the climate is changing too fast. Where are we going to get the grain we depend on?

[bcroe]

I love this kind of argument. Ignore the facts and make some new ones up when it's convenient.

Yea, except the US having more coal than any other country is an old fact. Of course
if we export it all, it won't last so long. Bruce Roe

[russ]

That's why scientists provide error bars and confidence intervals. We understand the science well enough to be over 95% certain that the global climate is changing as a direct result of human activity.

We - So you are one of the clowns giving guarantees to the 0.1°C or even +-2° how much it will change?

You can post all the religious crap you want - this is all new territory and no one knows.

You clowns that are so certain of your religion are a bit sickening.

The only thing we know for certain is record of the past few years where good instruments have been used and no one has to "adjust" the data "because".

[Sunking]

Interesting fact hid from the public by the media. Scientist come basically in 2 flavors. One is Chocolate and those guys work for a Government who's bread is buttered by the Government and live and die by Government handouts to support the Government line. The other is Vanilla and work in the Private Sector who make considerable more money than chocolate does because they have superior skills and better educated. Sort of like teachers and professors.

Now what is interesting to note is when polled about climate change between the two groups, you get two different answers. Chocolate say it is man made, and Vanilla says it is the normal process earth has gone through for eons.

[Ian S]

Interesting fact hid from the public by the media. Scientist come basically in 2 flavors. One is Chocolate and those guys work for a Government who's bread is buttered by the Government and live and die by Government handouts to support the Government line. The other is Vanilla and work in the Private Sector who make considerable more money than chocolate does because they have superior skills and better educated. Sort of like teachers and professors.

Now what is interesting to note is when polled about climate change between the two groups, you get two different answers. Chocolate say it is man made, and Vanilla says it is the normal process earth has gone through for eons.

ROTFLMAO! That's just about the silliest thing I've seen posted on this forum! The few cranks who are AGW deniers invariably have connections to the fossil foolish industry. It wasn't so long ago that they were denying any increase in temperature at all. Now they admit it but deny we can do anything. Progress of a sort, I suppose.

[russ]

ROTFLMAO! That's just about the silliest thing I've seen posted on this forum! The few cranks who are AGW deniers invariably have connections to the fossil foolish industry. It wasn't so long ago that they were denying any increase in temperature at all. Now they admit it but deny we can do anything. Progress of a sort, I suppose.

Better than we can say about the members of the HCGW (Holy Church of Global Warming) - impossible for them to do anything except parrot the key phrases they have been taught. No independent thought process allowed by their relgion.

The is some truth in what Sunking said - not all "scientists" are like that but too many. Those that feed at the government trough learn quickly where the easy feed comes from.

[J.P.M.]

Better than we can say about the members of the HCGW (Holy Church of Global Warming) - impossible for them to do anything except parrot the key phrases they have been taught. No independent thought process allowed by their relgion.

The is some truth in what Sunking said - not all "scientists" are like that but too many. Those that feed at the government trough learn quickly where the easy feed comes from.

I once had a set of corollaries to Murphy's law posted in my office in an out of the way place. One of them: "Always remember - You don't know .01% about anything."

[russ]

I once had a set of corollaries to Murphy's law posted in my office in an out of the way place. One of them: "Always remember - You don't know .01% about anything."

The chemistry involved and the scale of it is mind boggling! In process we have operated for 50 years under very controlled conditions we still don't understand it all. It becomes better all the time - programs like Aspen+ are wonderful in many ways - one of those ways is they show you how much you don't know/understand.

To be as positive as these clowns are on first time and unproven methodology/approaches is really quite cute - in a rather sick way.

[JCP]

I once had a set of corollaries to Murphy's law posted in my office in an out of the way place. One of them: "Always remember - You don't know .01% about anything."

The problem with climate change doubters is that they refuse to look at the facts and come to reasonable conclusions simply because that collides with their politics. That's just sad. Climate change should not be a political football, no more than renewable energy should be some kind of new age religion. Facts are pretty clear: we won't have non renewable energy for too long (a century or two max) and the earth is getting warmer.

Smart people look at the above and try to figure a way to fix this. The dumb ones choose to ignore it. Pick a camp.

[JCP]

Yea, except the US having more coal than any other country is an old fact. Of course
if we export it all, it won't last so long. Bruce Roe

So what? It buys us another 30, 40, 50 years of acid rain? Do you call this a long term solution? BTW, all the fracking companies are lobbying really hard right now to get the right to export natural gas derived from fracking. All those mothballed LNG plants are being retooled for exports. If the government grants our dear oil companies gas export licenses, we can kiss goodbye to the current low natural gas prices.