Posted on 01/15/2018 7:38:31 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Climate change is first and foremost a threat to human society.
That fact has been somewhat obscured in regular discourse, in favor of a false dichotomy portraying climate policy as an upper-middle-class noblesse oblige idea for anxious birders and other environmentalist types, and hardheaded economists who think building up yet more wealth is more important.
In reality, one obvious way that threat to humanity is going to be expressed is through economic damage. In other words, unchecked climate change is going to be terrifically expensive.
It drives home the fact that dawdling on climate policy, as Democrats did when they had majorities in 2009-10 — or denying it's even necessary, as virtually every person of consequence in the Republican Party does — is not going to be some profitable venture. Poor countries will be hit worse, but American cities will be wrecked, much critical infrastructure will be destroyed, and many insurance companies and programs will be bankrupted. It will require endless expensive bailouts and reconstruction packages simply to stay ahead of the damage.
Conversely, the faster we move on climate policy, the cheaper it will be. The International Energy Agency has roughly estimated that every year of delay adds $500 billion to the world total of necessary investment to head off climate change. (A stitch in time saves nine, as the saying goes.)
On the most important issue facing humanity, the United States is becoming dangerously close to a rogue state. Let us hope we can soon rejoin the world community and start acting like sensible, moral adults again.
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
Exactly! A lot of what is said about the dangers and costs of climate change are correct. However, the premise that we need to give up fossil fuels in order to mitigate the problem is the real hoax.
How is climate change, if it were actually not a scam for more money, costly???
It seems we all would save money since food could be grown in more regions and there would be less need for heating.
"We pretend to work, they pretend to pay us."
It’s going to cost a lot of individuals and organizations their reputation. Gore won’t care. It could be a disaster for others. They will be the prime example of “bad science” for generations.
If climate change
Then total world wide government control of all human activity
Simple logic.
Fortunately:
Climate Change = False
...Unchecked boobs are stupendous...
As edited by NBC political editors.
Is that picture from the movie “Them”? Classic Sci Fi.
Oh really?
I have a lot of doubt. Nothing but doubt, in fact.
Therefore, your statement is false.
That right there has to be the most arrogant, ignorant, self grandeur, idiotic, unscientific, declaration ever. Like man has the ability to check or uncheck the relationship between the sun, space, and earth, and the weather their dynamics it creates?
Suckers born every second I suppose who just have to live Chicken Littles public declarations.
... is a pleonasm masquerading as a redundancy.
Not merely nuclear, but nuclear energy production based on Thorium-fueled Molten Salt plants, virtually giving up altogether on Uranium-fueled Light Water plants.
There is approximately four times as much Thorium in the earth’s crust as Uranium, and extraction is both easier, and preparation for use less expensive. Thorium, in and of itself, cannot become fissile, making it useless for the production of nuclear weapons (and the reason it was never adopted), but with the addition of some “seed” fissile elements, from “spent” Uranium fuel rods, a sustained but controllable chain reaction may be initiated, providing a long-lasting power source for the generation of electricity and means of producing potable water from sea water and otherwise polluted water.
It is impossible for a Thorium-fueled Molten Salt plant to go into a China Syndrome kind of meltdown, and the eventual production of “spent” atomic waste is much lower than with a Uranium-fueled Light Water plant.
Almost ever objection to using atomic energy to power our national economy is overcome by using the Thorium-fueled Molten Salt reactors, which in addition to being less dangerous, may be scaled in size and put in closer to point of consumption of power, thus eliminating the vulnerability of widespread grids bringing power from hundreds of miles away.
Check,please!
First rule of Dunning Krieger club is, "You don't know you're in the Dunning Krieger club." Maybe someone should point out his membership to him.
If only there was some positive to warmer weather and a longer growing season.
No. The Greatest threat to humanity is socialist liars trying to use propaganda to stampeded stupid people into giving them power.
This is why we need nuclear.
1. The technology really has gotten incredibly much better since the 3-mile-island days
2. Local nuclear accidents (like in Japan) do NOT have the capability to end the world unlike “climate change” which according-to-them DOES.
3. It definitely has a low “carbon footprint”.
So if you REALLY believe in Climate Apocalypse, you would support nuclear power TODAY!
Unchecked climate change is going to be stupendously expensive
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.