tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5941560477618551520.post883927578396363568..comments2023-11-05T05:13:10.901-06:00Comments on Pete'sPlace On Global Warming/Climate Change: If Gore and Company Are Wrong About Global Warming, So What?Peterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12792460740514151650noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5941560477618551520.post-77104684473654052612007-04-20T14:16:00.000-05:002007-04-20T14:16:00.000-05:00robc,There are many good reasons to stop burning c...robc,<BR/>There are many good reasons to stop burning coal to generate electricity. I agree nuclear energy seems to be the best option. I agree we pay a huge price for being dependent on foreign oil, especially from places like the Middle East.<BR/>All of those issues are enormously difficult to solve. Flourescent light bulbs, turning down the thermostat, growing corn for ethanol, etc. just ain't gonna do it.<BR/><BR/>What really irritates me are the scare tactics and hysteria created by much of the media and people like Al Gore. They distort the facts and purposely mislead people. They're in this for themselves, not ordinary people, our country, or the good of our environment.<BR/><BR/>I think your goals make sense. It's the method of taxation and control that will cause it to fail.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12792460740514151650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5941560477618551520.post-82590342417215430312007-04-20T13:07:00.000-05:002007-04-20T13:07:00.000-05:00I'd like to offer two comments to Larry's post. F...I'd like to offer two comments to Larry's post. First, the science is a lot more settled than he thinks. The only climate factor that can explain the temperature rise since 1980 is greenhouse gas. I explain this in detail in a web page called <A HREF="http://gwperplexed.niof.org/" REL="nofollow">Global Warming: A Guide for the Perplexed</A>.<BR/><BR/>Second, the cost of correcting our present abuses of fossil fuels doesn't have to be high. 40% of our CO2 emissions come from burning fossil fuels for electricity. Nuclear energy is already cost-competitive with fossil-fuels, and wind power is nearly so, so the cost of conversion can be undetectable. Our options in the transportation sector are more limited, but setting higher fuel-efficiency standards is already cost-effective; the higher cost of high-efficiency cars is paid back well within their lifetimes through fuel savings. Such a change could save another 10%. About 7% of the US's CO2 emissions come from space heating. In most parts of the US, electric-powered heat pumps are already cost-competitive with natural gas and heating oil, so we could save as much as 5% there with no increased cost.<BR/><BR/>A whole other consideration is the externalized cost of using fossil fuels. Fuel customers don't pay for the health effects of pollution from fossil fuels through their fuel bills, nor the cost of military intervention in the world's oil-exporting regions. Those costs are paid, but aren't reflected in the fuel prices.<BR/><BR/>Think how much better off we'd be if the current efforts being made to derail the solution to global warming were directed instead toward developing a successful energy plan.RobChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08007193547999646015noreply@blogger.com