You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #13: Wikipedia has a wealth of information, the problem is that they're all costly. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
joshcryer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-16-10 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Wikipedia has a wealth of information, the problem is that they're all costly.
The cheapest most effective way to mitigate climate change is to ... not have to deal with climate change. You do this by reducing CO2 emissions overnight (in a decade or so). Carbon taxes, export controls. Make CO2 as costly as possible now, because the future costs are going to be astronomical.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_mitigation

Build 1500 or so nuclear reactors. Or build a million wind turbines and two billion rooftop PV installations along with 100k 300MW solar plants. You have a decade to do it.

What is happening now is this generation is forcing my generation and my childrens' generation to deal with their problem. It's fucking bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -World Nuclear Generation Stagnates - capacity drops for second year in a row bananas  Mar-15-10 02:13 AM   #0 
  - Won't continue though.  joshcryer   Mar-15-10 05:26 AM   #1 
  - there is no indication that the economics are going to do anything but get worse for nuclear.  kristopher   Mar-15-10 12:35 PM   #2 
  - I wonder what they used to replace those closed reactors  NickB79   Mar-15-10 04:08 PM   #3 
     - Only "good" news is Japan has a reactor coming online in 2011  Statistical   Mar-15-10 04:41 PM   #4 
        - Well there certainly isn't any good news from Texas  kristopher   Mar-15-10 04:59 PM   #5 
           - The two prices in South Texas are apples and oranges.  Statistical   Mar-15-10 05:44 PM   #6 
              - Not even close...  kristopher   Mar-15-10 08:35 PM   #7 
              - Kick  kristopher   Mar-16-10 04:35 PM   #8 
              - Thanks for the information. Like AGW, it will prove itself out.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 04:58 PM   #9 
                 - Has there been any studies to see what can be done to bring us back from the brink.  Statistical   Mar-16-10 05:14 PM   #10 
                    - The first step is stop increasing emissions.  kristopher   Mar-16-10 05:19 PM   #11 
                    - Maybe we could cool the planet with super strong air compressors?  Statistical   Mar-16-10 05:23 PM   #12 
                    - There is a lot of research into mitigation.  kristopher   Mar-16-10 05:31 PM   #15 
                    - No mitigation is happening, assuming you actually paid attention to COP15.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:33 PM   #17 
                       - Are you brain damaged?  kristopher   Mar-16-10 05:37 PM   #20 
                          - Oh right, I forgot, you don't think wind will save us.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:38 PM   #22 
                             - I don't know if anything will "save us"  kristopher   Mar-16-10 05:40 PM   #25 
                                - ONLY if your highly pessimistic numbers for new nuclear bore out.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:41 PM   #27 
                                   - Right....  kristopher   Mar-16-10 05:54 PM   #32 
                                      - No new nuclear has even broken ground in the US.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:56 PM   #33 
                                         - Riiiiight...  kristopher   Mar-16-10 06:05 PM   #34 
                                         - Given the regulatory changes yes, it would only be sane to critique nuclear based on actual...  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 07:14 PM   #41 
                                         - Your fighting faith man.  Statistical   Mar-16-10 06:07 PM   #36 
                                            - it is logical to reject ANOTHER 100 billion into a failed technology when we need it elsewhere.  kristopher   Mar-16-10 06:12 PM   #37 
                                            - Debunked. You know it. links have been posted before.  Statistical   Mar-16-10 06:20 PM   #38 
                                            - The situation is WORSE.  kristopher   Mar-16-10 06:50 PM   #39 
                                            - His disinformation doesn't get to the actual environmentalists on this forum.  joshcryer   Mar-17-10 04:34 AM   #43 
                                            - Yes, if he actually believed it was non-viable he would drop the rhetoric.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 07:13 PM   #40 
                    - We are going well above 500ppm and probably will hit our wonderful 3.0C target in spades.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:32 PM   #16 
                       - But if it gets to 500ppm or higher can we ever get it back or will it be runaway.  Statistical   Mar-16-10 05:34 PM   #18 
                          - Geoengineering then becomes the only solution, which is why the elites like it so much.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:37 PM   #21 
                          - If you are angling for another justification for nuclear, you will not find it there...  kristopher   Mar-16-10 05:39 PM   #23 
                             - It's always about money for you.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:40 PM   #26 
                                - No, it's about reducing CO2.  kristopher   Mar-16-10 05:46 PM   #29 
                                   - But the "cost of nuclear" thread I started debunked your dishonest statements.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:50 PM   #31 
                                      - .  kristopher   Mar-16-10 06:06 PM   #35 
                    - Do you have any projections for emission decreases going this route?  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:29 PM   #14 
                       - Another disjointed nnadsesque blurt of nonsense.  kristopher   Mar-16-10 05:36 PM   #19 
                          - Pfft, and here you were lecturing me about "political realities" months ago.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:39 PM   #24 
                             - Again you rewrite what others think.  kristopher   Mar-16-10 05:44 PM   #28 
                                - If wind worked best and the magical markets were going to get us free of CO2...  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:49 PM   #30 
                    - Wikipedia has a wealth of information, the problem is that they're all costly.  joshcryer   Mar-16-10 05:28 PM   #13 
                       - 1500 nuclear reactors won't come close to stopping climate change.  bananas   Mar-17-10 03:06 AM   #42 
                          - You're right, I should hve said "5000 or so."  joshcryer   Mar-17-10 04:38 AM   #44 
                             - Where are we going to get the rest of the power?  kristopher   Mar-17-10 08:45 PM   #45 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC