General

Now You Know Some of the Cost to Address Climate Change

edited November -1 in General
Zac and Jesse talk about the cost to mitigate climate change on America's coastlines.



This will drive ole Mitch out of his mind.
«1

Comments

  • edited November -1
    Yes, Jesse and Zac did another outstanding discussion showing how urgent action on AGW/Climate Emergency is. Not enough money to build the walls necessary to thwart sea level rise projected, and that is just one facet of the problem. Much better to act, and one can start by taking personal responsibility for ones own actions by purchasing EVs (Tesla's), solar panels, and Powerwall batteries. Many of us posting on the forum have chosen to go down that path, while advocating for a responsible government that will lead a national/international effort to do more than just talk about it. Our current idiot POTUS has abdicated his responsibility to act on this pressing and urgent issue.
  • edited July 2019
    The United States subsidizes fossil fuel exploration and production at some $20.5 billion every year.

    If we redirected that money to mitigating the affects of Climate Change we'd be well on the way to eliminating it altogether.
  • edited July 2019
    +100 to all posters. I don’t know what kind of world we are leaving to our children, but at the current rate of climate change, even I will still be around to see its disastrous effects. Hell, it’s happening right now!

    You can’t teach the blind to see . . .
  • edited November -1
    @BuffaloBillsFan
    "You can’t teach the blind to see . . ."

    Maybe so, but - There are none so blind as those who will not see.
  • edited November -1
    @blue adept, yes agree totally, doing away with all fossil fuel subsidies should be a major priority of any democratic administration going forward. I do not want any of my tax dollars going to these scumbag corporations destroying the habitability of the planet.
  • edited July 2019
    My prescription:
    1. End fossil fuel subsidies and transfer those funds to promoting growth of renewables.
    2. Triple funding for the National Science Foundation with emphasis on increasing efficiency of POV cells plus making better batteries and exploring other means to store energy for when the sun isn't shining and/or wind isn't blowing.
    3. Restore the federal tax credit for EV purchases for cars made by all manufacturers with a sunset provision of 2023-2024 when EVs can be sold for the same price or cheaper than ICE vehicles.
    4. Install EV charging stations at all rest stops along federal highways. Implement a grant program to encourage local governments to install EV chargers in cities and towns.
    5. Test and establish a standard plug connection for EVs, whichever works best.
    6. Do not end and increase tax breaks for individuals installing rooftop solar. Mandate that HOAs and local ordinances cannot prevent installations. Increase the tax break from the current 30% to 40-50%.
    7. Mandate that developers install rooftop solar or micro solar systems in new subdivisions where practical.
    8. Tighten up regulations to ensure all new construction is energy efficient.
    9. Provide tax credits to individuals for remodeling to improve the energy efficiency of their homes and the same for business.
    10. Tax carbon polluters (i.e. utilities) for the pollution they dump in the air, provide incentives to go renewable, and rebate the funds collected to individuals to alleviate any increases on their electric bills utilities implement to fund converting to renewables.
    11. Rebuild the electrical grid.
    12. Plant a lot of trees. If Johnny Appleseed made the history books planting apple trees across the land, then we can do it by expanding forest cover in the U.S.
    13. Rejoin the Paris Climate accords and once again become a global leader in addressing this crisis.
    14. End the flood plain insurance scam. The federally funded insurance program as structured encourages homeowners to rebuild homes destroyed by hurricanes, perennial flooding; in some cases the same homes have been rebuilt several times after storms. You get one rebuild and out for existing homes. IOW, if a hurricane flattens your beach house where a home shouldn't have been built in the first place, then you cannot use the insurance money to rebuild. You must move to a safer location. The vacated property then becomes either state or federally owned and further building prohibited.
    15. Build seawalls, berms, levees etc to protect threatened cities.
    16. Construct a nationwide water management system consisting of pipelines to transport water from areas that regularly flood (i.e. the midwest along the Mississippi River) to areas that have too little water or where water supplies are threatened (i.e. the Colorado River due to declining snowpacks in the Rockies).

    I'm sure there are plenty of other good ideas, but those are top of my mind.
  • edited July 2019
    @dmm1240....+100.......that's an impressive list that should be very "doable".
  • edited July 2019
    @dmm. Another great post. Thanks
  • edited November -1
    @dmm1240 +100; agree with your list.
  • edited July 2019
    @BuffaloBillsFan

    It's not that they're 'blind', it's that they're selfish and greedy, the evidence of their behavior proves that.
  • edited July 2019
    @dmm1240

    I only have issue with one of your proposals, #5, inasmuch as it would enable non-Tesla vehicles to make use of Tesla charging stations, thereby creating the potential for actual Tesla owners to be unable to access them when needed because an off-brand owner is occupying the charger.

    A solid list otherwise.
  • edited November -1
    @blue, a problem that doesn’t seem to be happening, groan. But I agree, from a Mission Statement POV, that Elon needs to put some of his brainpower into solving that problem...

    Get legacy automakers to agree, or just takeover the whole EV market.

    Hard to get the former, NADA and entrenched automakers.
    The latter, too big for Tesla.

    Going to get ugly before it gets better...
  • edited July 2019
    End fossil fuel subsidies? I'm all for it. Are the Americans ready for the price hike at the pumps?
    Our govt has kept the price at the pump low through the subsidies and govt military protection
    and intervention in the oil producing locations.

    About time we pay the true cost of the fuel we consume. And start the change to EV's.
  • edited July 2019
    @NKYTA

    Or...Tesla can just simply keep on doing what they're doing and let everyone else figure it out for themselves on their own inasmuch as it only makes sense for a non-related, third-party utility provider to cater to the masses with universal adapter capability while manufacturers maintain their brand-specific accessibility to ensure availability.
  • edited July 2019
    @nwfan

    It is, afterall, highly illogical to continue to throw so damn much money at something whose very use results in the preventable, premature deaths of ever increasing thousands yearly when there is a readily available and easily implemented technology that has already rendered the former obsolete.
  • edited July 2019
    @dmm1240, great list, although with the current administration this has zero chance to occur. Good news though next year we have election year, and we can get an administration in place that will be more forward thinking, and not redo the same mistakes that have failed every time its been tried.

    @blue adept, I disagree, yes the existing Tesla Network would see more use, but that is not always a bad thing. Some areas constituently have free chargers. The other side of this also with a single solution like CCS in Europe, Tesla owners could also use alternative locations and not be limited to just the Supercharger network.
  • edited November -1
    but trump digs coal ....
  • edited July 2019
    @Techy James

    Tesla owners, like moi, are already able to charge at third party utility sites given that we're furnished with charging adapters suitable for accommodating a variety of situations/charge solutions:

    https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation/mobile-connector

    Tesla owners buy into more than merely ('merely', ha!) the most technologically advanced and mechanically engineered zero emission vehicle on the planet, they're also buying into the privilege of assured access to proprietary charging facilities which serves to circumvent the potential for a whole host of potential technical issues that could arise with universal charging facilities.

    Don't misunderstand me, I can recognize the inherent benefit of universalized charging facilities, but I also realize that they're not going to be much of a benefit unless EVERYONE is on the same page and, given the current atmosphere of the industry, everyone simply isn't.

    Nice sentiment though.
  • edited July 2019
    @rhj. So you have climate change deniers in Finland that publish factless crap?
    What is the point of your post???
    Idiot!!!!
    Flagged!!!!
  • edited July 2019
    From Time Magazine:

    "Melting ice sheets in the Antarctic, particularly one of the largest and unstable glaciers in the region, could significantly accelerate global sea level rise, according to a new report.
    The climate scientists who measured likely outcomes of glacial melting at the bottom of the world focused the study on the Thwaites glacier, an area as large as Florida in western Antarctica that is considered the most unstable in the continent.
    The study found that even if no further climate change happens in the future, more Antarctic ice sheets are likely to become unstable. It also states that as destabilization of glaciers in Antarctica continues, it’s increasingly likely that sea levels will rise more rapidly.
    “Due to our past changes in climate there is a certain amount of sea level rise that will definitely occur in the future,” Alex Robel, a glaciologist and assistant professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology, tells TIME. He and two other scientists from the California Institute of Technology and the University of Washington wrote the report published by the National Academy of Sciences."

    We have a choice: Do what we can to reverse/mitigate the effects or continue soldiering on attempting to adjust as the crisis escalates. Of the two, attempting to adjust is by far the more expensive.

    In other words, a pound of prevention is by far the better course because the cure will be a ton and cost the same.
  • edited July 2019
    @nwfan

    Actually, that $20.5 Billion in subsidies that the oil industry gets every year is applied at the front end towards the exploration, securing, extraction, refining, processing and distribution, not at the back/consumer end of the ground-to-pump cycle, whereas the only time a "hike" is experienced at the pumps is when there has been some typically weather related disruption in the supply chain inasmuch as each country has it's own "reserves" to draw from in times of severe interruption, e.g., war, that are separate from the overall supply chain.

    Shifting those funds from the oil industry to EV's/renewables would mark the start of the worldwide conversion to EV's and prices at the pump would actually drop as suppliers and retailers would endeavor to squeeze every last dollar that they could out of what they had on hand as they sought to eek out as much return on their investment as possible while demand for it would dwindle to nothing in conjunction with the increased adoption of EV's.

    So, yes, BRING. IT. ON!
  • edited July 2019
    @blue adept, don't forget the hidden cost of providing security to the tankers.
    US Navy is deployed to the Perisan Gulf. Wonder what the cost is for a Carrier Battle Group
    6 month deployment?
  • edited July 2019
    @jimglas "but trump digs coal ...."

    What he needs to do is actually go dig for coal. For a year or two. Then let him tweet from the bottom of a coal mine if he can even get cell phone reception.
Sign In or Register to comment.