by MonteQuest » Sun 18 Jan 2009, 20:29:29
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '3'). You can have growth without using energy.
You can have growth with less energy.
Yes, then you soon run into the law of diminishing returns.
What do you mean by that?
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
by MonteQuest » Sun 18 Jan 2009, 20:33:01
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bratticus', ' ') 5b. When CO[sub]2[/sub] is increasing it causes global warming but when CO[sub]2[/sub] is falling it does not diminish global warming.
Not a myth. It is now generally believed that a substantial fraction of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere will remain in the atmosphere for decades to centuries, and about 15-30% will remain for thousands of years. Thus, even with a reduction in CO2, the greenhouse effect of global warming will continue for some time to come.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
-
MonteQuest
- Expert
-
- Posts: 16593
- Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Westboro, MO
-
by PenultimateManStanding » Sun 18 Jan 2009, 21:27:58
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', 'O')ver the centuries humanity has always discovered and utilized a new energy source as a replacement for the ones being depleted and we always will.
When there is nothing left to burn, there's nothing left to burn. Nothing 'always' about it. Sorry.
Turn those Machines back On! - Don Ameche in Trading Places
-
PenultimateManStanding
- Expert
-
- Posts: 11363
- Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
- Location: Neither Here Nor There
-
by eastbay » Sun 18 Jan 2009, 21:55:50
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', 'O')ver the centuries humanity has always discovered and utilized a new energy source as a replacement for the ones being depleted and we always will.
When there is nothing left to burn, there's nothing left to burn. Nothing 'always' about it. Sorry.
No kidding... try telling 'them' that. People generally believe 'something new' will arise to save the day in the event we run out of the Good Stuff.
Got Dharma?
Everything is Impermanent. Shakyamuni Buddha
by Narz » Sun 18 Jan 2009, 23:52:52
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '3'). You can have growth without using energy.
You can have growth with less energy.
Yes, then you soon run into the law of diminishing returns.
What do you mean by that?
Conservation and efficiency gains are subject to the law of diminishing returns. Diminishing returns being the operative words.
by Narz » Sun 18 Jan 2009, 23:58:30
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', 'N')o kidding... try telling 'them' that. People generally believe 'something new' will arise to save the day in the event we run out of the Good Stuff.
Humans are pretty innovative. Some of us will survive & thrive unless global warming & ocean acidification or Mayans back from the dead destroy the Earth's capacity to support any life at all. Certainly a lot of people are in trouble though & lifestyles will have to change.
I think the blase "meh, we'll figure it out" & the fanatical "we're just gonna roll over & die" crowd are both equally annoying.
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
-
Narz
- Intermediate Crude
-
- Posts: 2360
- Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
- Location: the belly of the beast (New Jersey)
-
by MonteQuest » Mon 19 Jan 2009, 00:18:06
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', ' ')I'm still not following, can you give a real world example or two?
google law of diminishing returns
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
-
MonteQuest
- Expert
-
- Posts: 16593
- Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Westboro, MO
-
by Narz » Mon 19 Jan 2009, 00:52:05
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', ' ')I'm still not following, can you give a real world example or two?
google law of diminishing returns
I'm aware of the term & know what it means.
Can you explain how it appeals to say... the efficiency of computing speed (and communications in general) and also how it applies to non-material growth & knowledge.
For example, downloading music (legally lets assume) uses far less energy than manufacturing a CD, sealing it in plastic & having to drive to the mall to buy it.
Not sure what "diminishing returns" has to do with any of this.
The problem is that there has been no real concerted effort towards efficiency since the 20th century has been so abundent.
And I know the debunked "Jevons paradox" (yesplease had some good numbers on it) is on the tip of your tongue but that won't apply to a culture in energy decline. The reason people kept using more & more coal is because there was so damn much of it.
People during scarce times conserve, whether on a desert island or during a major war. The problem is that our culture has made conservation into some sort of sin.
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
by bratticus » Mon 19 Jan 2009, 07:04:45
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bratticus', ' ') 5b. When CO[sub]2[/sub] is increasing it causes global warming but when CO[sub]2[/sub] is falling it does not diminish global warming.
Not a myth. It is now generally believed that a substantial fraction of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere will remain in the atmosphere for decades to centuries, and about 15-30% will remain for thousands of years. Thus, even with a reduction in CO2, the greenhouse effect of global warming will continue for some time to come
See how effective a myth it is? No amount of evidence to the contrary shakes it. You will believe in it even as you die of hypothermia.
Plus, 5c. Global warming makes it colder.
It's the equivalent of
epicycles. More and more outrageous nonsense is needed to support the "facts."
by bratticus » Mon 19 Jan 2009, 11:02:04
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bratticus', 'M')ore and more outrageous nonsense is needed to support the "facts."
You're on the losing end of this debate. Being rudely dismissive is not a very good rebuttal of global warming, but it tends to be the one normally used by deniers.
You can argue with predictions but you can't argue with the climate.
Debate is not really useful in this case.
Losing is only possible when you oppose the reality of the situation.
Opposing those who support invalid forecasts is not important.
Read back at what I really posted. Did I at any point deny global warming?
by bratticus » Mon 19 Jan 2009, 12:13:38
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bratticus', 'D')id I at any point deny global warming?
You tell me. What does "it" refer to in your statement: $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bratticus', 'S')ee how effective a
myth it is?
5b. When CO[sub]2[/sub] is increasing it causes global warming but when CO[sub]2[/sub] is falling it does not diminish global warming.
by MonteQuest » Mon 19 Jan 2009, 12:30:55
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', ' ')I'm aware of the term & know what it means.
Can you explain how it appeals to say... the efficiency of computing speed (and communications in general) and also how it applies to non-material growth & knowledge.
For example, downloading music (legally lets assume) uses far less energy than manufacturing a CD, sealing it in plastic & having to drive to the mall to buy it. Not sure what "diminishing returns" has to do with any of this.
It means
eventually, you will have to use
more energy to grow.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd I know the debunked "Jevons paradox" (yesplease had some good numbers on it) is on the tip of your tongue but that won't apply to a culture in energy decline.
No? If we increase efficiency and conservation efforts as we decline, won't that lower the price "relative" to what it would have been otherwise? Why wouldn't more "available" supply not lower the price?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')The problem is that our culture has made conservation into some sort of sin.
It's called the Paradox of Thriift and that is why the govt wants everybody to go out and spend and not conserve.
"Reduced economic activity" or "conservation" implodes the economy. Haven't you noticed the effects lately?
Conservation and a debt-based economy are like oil and water, they do not mix.
Could you imagine the effects embracing energy conservation would have on the economy about now? Not saying we shouldn't, but we had better be prepared to adapt to the consequences.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
