Far-Right Climate Denial Is Scary. Far-Right Climate Acceptance Might Be Scarier. - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Any other minor ideologies.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15013926
Godstud wrote:Yes, but the racists argue that it's race and genetics, not education, nutrition, etc. I think you've missed some of the IQ debates here on Pofo, or you'd understand what I am saying.

How you use the information determines racism, and IQ is frequently a tool in the racist toolshed.


Yes very true. The far right racists use IQ as a racist tool i agree.
#15013946
Pants-of-dog wrote:So, yes, you are saying that they use crappier turbines, which then reduces their energy output for the entire life cycle of the station.

The amount of extra energy being expended to mine rare earth magnets, make them, and clean up after for these wind turbines is probably less than the extra energy they end up making.


Well that's a breathtakingly stupid comment. :knife: If rare earths were more efficient big coal would definitely be using them.

This is why wind has a better EROI ratio than fossil fuels when looking at life cycles of electricity generation stations.


We already went through all the problems with EROI estimates, your denial has gone from obtuse to braindead at this point.
#15013948
James Hansen and Shellenberger explain why renewables are shit and that nuclear is the only feasible alternative:

James Hansen & Michael Shellenberger: Nuclear Power? Are Renewables Enough?
#15013950
Rugoz wrote:What part of "look at newly installed capacity" did you not understand? For years now the majority of newly installed power capacity worldwide has been renewables. Inevitably, this will lead to renewables taking over when old power plants are being decomissioned. The transition is happening right now.


:knife:


Over the last decade, journalists have held up Germany’s renewables energy transition, the Energiewende, as an environmental model for the world.

“Many poor countries, once intent on building coal-fired power plants to bring electricity to their people, are discussing whether they might leapfrog the fossil age and build clean grids from the outset,” thanks to the Energiewende, wrote a New York Times reporter in 2014.


With Germany as inspiration, the United Nations and World Bank poured billions into renewables like wind, solar, and hydro in developing nations like Kenya.

But then, last year, Germany was forced to acknowledge that it had to delay its phase-out of coal, and would not meet its 2020 greenhouse gas reduction commitments. It announced plans to bulldoze an ancient church and forest in order to get at the coal underneath it.

After renewables investors and advocates, including Al Gore and Greenpeace, criticized Germany, journalists came to the country’s defense. “Germany has fallen short of its emission targets in part because its targets were so ambitious,” one of them argued last summer.

“If the rest of the world made just half Germany’s effort, the future for our planet would look less bleak,” she wrote. “So Germany, don’t give up. And also: Thank you.”

But Germany didn’t just fall short of its climate targets. Its emissions have flat-lined since 2009.

Now comes a major article in the country’s largest newsweekly magazine, Der Spiegel, titled, “A Botched Job in Germany” ("Murks in Germany"). The magazine’s cover shows broken wind turbines and incomplete electrical transmission towers against a dark silhouette of Berlin.

“The Energiewende — the biggest political project since reunification — threatens to fail,” write Der Spiegel’s Frank Dohmen, Alexander Jung, Stefan Schultz, Gerald Traufetter in their a 5,700-word investigative story.

Over the past five years alone, the Energiewende has cost Germany €32 billion ($36 billion) annually, and opposition to renewables is growing in the German countryside.

“The politicians fear citizen resistance” Der Spiegel reports. “There is hardly a wind energy project that is not fought.”

In response, politicians sometimes order “electrical lines be buried underground but that is many times more expensive and takes years longer.”

As a result, the deployment of renewables and related transmission lines is slowing rapidly. Less than half as many wind turbines (743) were installed in 2018 as were installed in 2017, and just 30 kilometers of new transmission were added in 2017.

Solar and wind advocates say cheaper solar panels and wind turbines will make the future growth in renewables cheaper than past growth but there are reasons to believe the opposite will be the case.


As a result, the deployment of renewables and related transmission lines is slowing rapidly. Less than half as many wind turbines (743) were installed in 2018 as were installed in 2017, and just 30 kilometers of new transmission were added in 2017.

It will cost Germany $3-$4 trillion to increase renewables as share of electricity from today's 35% to 100% between 2025-2050


AG ENERGIEBINLANZEN
Der Spiegel cites a recent estimate that it would cost Germany “€3.4 trillion ($3.8 trillion),” or seven times more than it spent from 2000 to 2025, to increase solar and wind three to five-fold by 2050.

Between 2000 and 2019, Germany grew renewables from 7% to 35% of its electricity. And as much of Germany's renewable electricity comes from biomass, which scientists view as polluting and environmentally degrading, as from solar.

Of the 7,700 new kilometers of transmission lines needed, only 8% have been built, while large-scale electricity storage remains inefficient and expensive. “A large part of the energy used is lost,” the reporters note of a much-hyped hydrogen gas project, “and the efficiency is below 40%... No viable business model can be developed from this.”

Meanwhile, the 20-year subsidies granted to wind, solar, and biogas since 2000 will start coming to an end next year. “The wind power boom is over,” Der Spiegel concludes.

All of which raises a question: if renewables can’t cheaply power Germany, one of the richest and most technologically advanced countries in the world, how could a developing nation like Kenya ever expect them to allow it to “leapfrog” fossil fuels?

Michael Shellenberger is an American author, environmental policy writer, cofounder of Breakthrough Institute and founder of Environmental Progress. He was named a Time magazine Heroes of the Environment (2008),[1] winner of the 2008 Green Book Award,[2] co-editor of Love Your Monsters (2011) and co-author of Break Through (Houghton Mifflin 2007) and The Death of Environmentalism (2004).[3] He and his co-author Ted Nordhaus have been described as "ecological modernists"[4] and "eco-pragmatists."[5] In 2015, Shellenberger joined with 18 other self-described ecomodernists to coauthor An Ecomodernist Manifesto.[6] On November 30, 2017, he announced during a New York Times conference that he would run for Governor of California in 2018.[7][8]



__________________________________________


German Failure on the Road to a Renewable Future
In 2011, German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced the country was turning away from nuclear energy in favor of a renewable future. Since then, however, progress has been limited. Berlin has wasted billions of euros and resistance is mounting.

The so-called Energiewende, the shift away from nuclear in favor of renewables, the greatest political project undertaken here since Germany's reunification, is facing failure. In the eight years since Fukushima, none of Germany's leaders in Berlin have fully thrown themselves into the project, not least the chancellor. Lawmakers have introduced laws, decrees and guidelines, but there is nobody to coordinate the Energiewende, much less speed it up. And all of them are terrified of resistance from the voters, whenever a wind turbine needs to be erected or a new high-voltage transmission line needs to be laid out.

Analysts from McKinsey have been following the Energiewende since 2012, and their latest report is damning. Germany, it says, "is far from meeting the targets it set for itself."

Germany's Federal Court of Auditors is even more forthright about the failures. The shift to renewables, the federal auditors say, has cost at least 160 billion euros in the last five years. Meanwhile, the expenditures "are in extreme disproportion to the results," Federal Court of Auditors President Kay Scheller said last fall, although his assessment went largely unheard in the political arena. Scheller is even concerned that voters could soon lose all faith in the government because of this massive failure.

Surveys document the transformation of this grand idea into an even grander frustration. Despite being hugely accepting initially, Germans now see it as being too expensive, too chaotic and too unfair.

But the grand transformation has lost its way. The expansion of wind parks and solar facilities isn't moving forward. There is a lack of grids and electricity storage -- but for the most part there is a lack of political will and effective management. The German government has dropped the ball.

More than a decade ago, the German government passed a resolution to quickly build the necessary high-voltage transmission lines, with experts today saying there is a need for 7,700 kilometers (4,800 miles) of such lines. But only 950 have been built. And in 2017, only 30 kilometers of lines were built across the whole country.

https://www.spiegel.de/international/ge ... 586-2.html
#15013978
Godstud wrote:Yes, but the racists argue that it's race and genetics, not education, nutrition, etc. I think you've missed some of the IQ debates here on Pofo, or you'd understand what I am saying.

How you use the information determines racism, and IQ is frequently a tool in the racist toolshed.

Nobody was making that claim, however. The claim was that IQ is often used as a tool for racism. It is.

Racist take advantage of the IQ data to reaffirm their racist views. No one denies that!
IQ only refers to the average if a group. At the individual level a single individual of African heritage can be much more intelligent than an East Asian. That is why Ayn Rand was correct on her views on racism.

The left wants to help the poor and reject IQ. It turns out low IQ is the best predictor for poverty regardless of racial group. The left wants to desperately help the poor by assuming all people have the same intelligence and that anyone can be a rocket scientist.
#15013988
Julian658 wrote: The left wants to desperately help the poor by assuming all people have the same intelligence and that anyone can be a rocket scientist.
Where do you pull this crap out of? :lol: Please provide a source for this claim.
#15013989
Sivad wrote:Well that's a breathtakingly stupid comment. :knife: If rare earths were more efficient big coal would definitely be using them.


....and then coal would have the same negative impacts from using rate earth materials, which would then render your criticisms moot.

We already went through all the problems with EROI estimates, your denial has gone from obtuse to braindead at this point.


No, we did not. If you wish to link to that, please do so.

As far as I can remember, you posted some images from Forbes that merely corroborated the fact that wind, hydro, nuclear, and solar are all more efficient (on average) than fossil fuels if we look at the entire life cycle of the electricity generation system.
#15013994
Godstud wrote:Where do you pull this crap out of? :lol: Please provide a source for this claim.

They refute IQ and imply difference in achievement must be due to racism. IMO that is MUCH worse than climate change denial.
This denial also creates programs to help the poor that have no chance for success since they are not based on solid science.
#15014004
Julian658 wrote:They refute IQ and imply difference in achievement must be due to racism. IMO that is MUCH worse than climate change denial.
This denial also creates programs to help the poor that have no chance for success since they are not based on solid science.


There are many instances of people debating the whole race IQ thing here on PoFo. If you are correct, PoFo should be full of examples of “them” doing this. Can you provide examples of anyone doing this?

Progressives argue that IQ is a real thing, but that the tests have culturally specific questions and other built in advantages for Europeans and North Americans, or that the claims about Africans having lower IQs is based on faulty data.
#15014028
Pants-of-dog wrote:Progressives argue that IQ is a real thing,

Many claim it isn't.
but that the tests have culturally specific questions and other built in advantages for Europeans and North Americans,

Which presumably explains why East Asians score higher than Europeans and North Americans….
or that the claims about Africans having lower IQs is based on faulty data.

It is indisputable that Africans have lower IQs. That's what the numbers consistently say. The question is why, which generally comes down to some combination of three possibilities: faulty measures, genetics, or environment. That the tests themselves may be faulty in some way is shown by the observation that an African with a measured IQ of 70 -- two sigmas below the mean -- is probably nevertheless cognitively functional, while a European or East Asian with a measured IQ of 70 rarely is. It has been suggested that Africans are more likely to interpret the easiest test items as being somehow dishonest or "trick" questions, and consequently choose answers other than the obviously correct one.
#15014099
Pants-of-dog wrote:15. Do not deliberately take conversations off-topic. Avoid bringing irrelevant issues into a conversation that will take conversation away from the topic addressed by the opening post.

rules

That is correct, the topic is a bit off. However, it is interesting how the left also has people that deny science.
#15014105
Julian658 wrote:That is correct, the topic is a bit off. However, it is interesting how the left also has people that deny science.


Yes, people often claim that as a tu quoque fallacy, in order to avoid debate about how the right is deliberately stifling and obfuscating the climate debate.
#15014106
Pants-of-dog wrote:Yes, people often claim that as a tu quoque fallacy, in order to avoid debate about how the right is deliberately stifling and obfuscating the climate debate.


We are on our 3rd type pf atmosphere. We will survey the climate change. It may very well be survival of the fittest.
There is a lot of money to be made in other energy producing schemes. Therefore, capitalism will solve the climate issue just as it is reducing world poverty.

The reasons many right wingers pretend to be dumb about this:
1. The left wants to use climate change to abolish fossil fuel use. That is not a realistic goal in 2019. However,
we should all be driving electric cars and using public transportation.
2. The left wants to go back to an agricultural self sustaining economy because communism works in small agricultural communes.
3. The AOC types of the world are simply not intelligent and it would be risky to have people like her
run the system.

BTW, Germany has been going all out to be a clean energy country. How are they doing? It someone could --------it would be the Germans.
#15014111
Julian658 wrote:We are on our 3rd type pf atmosphere. We will survey the climate change. It may very well be survival of the fittest.
There is a lot of money to be made in other energy producing schemes. Therefore, capitalism will solve the climate issue just as it is reducing world poverty.


We long ago had the resources to eradicate world poverty. The only reason it still exists is because of capitalism. In this respect, it is comparable to the climate change problem. The solutions have been lying around for decades. We just refuse to use these solutions because they cannot be shown to be profitable.

The reasons many right wingers pretend to be dumb about this:
1. The left wants to use climate change to abolish fossil fuel use. That is not a realistic goal in 2019. However, we should all be driving electric cars and using public transportation.


If we had started implementing the technology when it was invented decades ago, it would be.

Having said that, there is no reason to not start abolishing fossil fuel use right now.

2. The left wants to go back to an agricultural self sustaining economy because communism works in small agricultural communes.


No. The Chinese are not trying to do this. The Soviets sent people into space. Cubans have modern industries and urban living. And us anti-colonial leftists want to give the land back to indigenous people.

3. The AOC types of the world are simply not intelligent and it would be risky to have people like her run the system.


Calling people names is not an argument.

BTW, Germany has been going all out to be a clean energy country. How are they doing? It someone could --------it would be the Germans.


I have no idea. How do you think they are doing? How does that relate to anthropogenic climate change?
#15014138
Pants-of-dog wrote:We long ago had the resources to eradicate world poverty. The only reason it still exists is because of capitalism. In this respect, it is comparable to the climate change problem. The solutions have been lying around for decades. We just refuse to use these solutions because they cannot be shown to be profitable.


In socialist countries the poverty is always much greater. In Russia, the crown jewel of communism a middle class Russian had less
than a poor person in America during the heyday of communism.
BTW, poverty is even going down in Africa:

Image


If we had started implementing the technology when it was invented decades ago, it would be.


That is a good point. But, as i said the change will come when capitalists think there is money to be made.

Having said that, there is no reason to not start abolishing fossil fuel use right now.


It has to be done very gradually. If done fast you could destroy the poor people in the 3rd world that still have primitive technology that relies on fossil fuel.
Third world countries are not like Germany.

Image

Germany continues to rely on coal despite trying very hard not to.

Cubans have modern industries and urban living. And us anti-colonial leftists want to give the land back to indigenous people.

Cuba has allowed some capitalism. Nevertheless a poor Cuban in Miami on public assistance is better off.



Calling people names is not an argument.

I agree, my bad.
#15014153
Julian658 wrote:That is a good point. But, as i said the change will come when capitalists think there is money to be made.


Yes, that is what I said, and I also sad that this is why nothing is being done nor will be done for the foreseeable future. There is little profit in fighting climate change.

It has to be done very gradually. If done fast you could destroy the poor people in the 3rd world that still have primitive technology that relies on fossil fuel.
Third world countries are not like Germany.


I appreciate the concern for the developing world. If you are concerned about their well being and their future, would you support a program where the developed world pays for them to upgrade or build infrastructure with sustainable technology?

Image

Germany continues to rely on coal despite trying very hard not to.


Are you arguing that if Germany finds it hard to switch to renewables, it will be even harder for everyone else?

Cuba has allowed some capitalism. Nevertheless a poor Cuban in Miami on public assistance is better off.


Your ideas about Cuba are irrelevant. The point is that you are wrong about Marxists or environmentalists wanting to return anyone to an agricultural society.
#15014154
Developing countries(Thailand, for example) are moving in the right direction, even without leadership from rich countries like USA. Saying USA can't do more, to work towards a future without fossil fuel consumption, is ridiculous.

Thailand’s Renewable Energy Transitions: A Pathway to Realize Thailand 4.0
After three years of revision, Thailand recently unveiled its updated power development plan (PDP 2018–2037), which explicitly shows the country’s ambition to embrace renewable energy.

Thailand currently generates around 10 percent of its electricity from renewable sources, with a total energy generation capacity of 45,000 MW. As of April 2018, renewable energy supplied about 15 percent of total power consumption in Thailand. The Thai government has also decided to raise the non-hydro renewable target from 20 percent to 30 percent by 2036. Regarding the capacity for renewable energy generation, Thailand’s solar energy accounts for about 3,300 MW, which has more than doubled since 2014 and is halfway toward its 2036 solar target of 6,000 MW. Notably, Thailand’s solar capacity accounts for more than 60 percent of the total installed capacity in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Though Thailand’s wind capacity is not as large as that for solar, it is over 600 MW, which is a fifth of its 2036 wind target of 3,000 MW.

https://thediplomat.com/2019/03/thailan ... iland-4-0/

Note: Thailand has already banned import of vehicles with large engines. You're lucky if you can find a 2.8L truck in Thailand. You will not find 8L trucks like those seen in North America.

We have a solar farm about 13 km from us. Chinese solar engineers built it about 4 years ago.
#15014174
Godstud wrote:Developing countries(Thailand, for example) are moving in the right direction, even without leadership from rich countries like USA. Saying USA can't do more, to work towards a future without fossil fuel consumption, is ridiculous.

The USA is leading everyone while hardly trying.

Godstud wrote:Note: Thailand has already banned import of vehicles with large engines. You're lucky if you can find a 2.8L truck in Thailand. You will not find 8L trucks like those seen in North America.

I am so glad I don't live in Thailand.
Praise the Lord.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 12

@Verv You sympathize with statists and fascist[…]

Wake up. Your wife is a CIA agent. You might th[…]

EU-BREXIT

I just love the French way of doing politics on t[…]

CO2-output is a sign of wealth, the enviromentalis[…]