Putin: global warming is a fraud

[StLucieBengal]

http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/29/russias-putin-says-global-warming-is-a-fraud/

There are several funny parts of this... But he makes one point that I think may be discussion. Worthy.

I can not copy to quote.... But it basically says that global warming is a fraud to restrict industrial development of several countries.... Including Russia.

Now on this point.... It does seem like we are holding back these under developed nations. Not real sure about Russia's claim they are one of them. But the African nations certainly fall into that category. Obama went there and told them they can't have big houses with air conditioning . Basically telling them that they can not enjoy what Americans enjoy.

How much is climate change holding back these low end nations?

Shouldn't we be letting them pollute and do whatever so they can bolster their economy?

[fredtoast]

If Putin was my ass I would scratch him.

[RoyleRedlegs]

IDK if it is holding back Russia, but I know places like India seem to hate all this crap because they need fossil fuels more than "developed" nations. They are well on their way and the availability of cheap fuels is a big reason. It's messy but it's how countries can get out of poverty and join the ranks of North America and Europe.

[Benton]

Benton: Putin is a fraud.

[Benton]

(11-30-2015, 04:11 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: IDK if it is holding back Russia, but I know places like India seem to hate all this crap because they need fossil fuels more than "developed" nations. They are well on their way and the availability of cheap fuels is a big reason. It's messy but it's how countries can get out of poverty and join the ranks of North America and Europe.

I don't see how it harms Russia any more than it harms us or any other industrialized nation. Part of the reason we lose companies to China or Mexico is because of our self-mandated regulations. There are things we can do domestically to improve that attrition, like repealing NAFTA and other trade agreements that harm our economy more than help it. But companies are still going to seek out using the absolute cheapest manufacturing possible, so if they can move to Mexico and burn coal to produce electricity as opposed to paying 3-4 times as much for it here, they will.

Mainly, Putin doesn't want to talk about global warming because Russia is #2 in oil exports and the only one country close to the Saudis. They're also in the top 5 in coal exporters. Most of the oil and coal are owned by the government, and they make a large chunk of change by exporting it to less developed countries.

Putin is looking out for Russia's export interests, which is understandable. But it doesn't make him any less full of Putin.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-30-2015, 04:41 PM)Benton Wrote: I don't see how it harms Russia any more than it harms us or any other industrialized nation. Part of the reason we lose companies to China or Mexico is because of our self-mandated regulations. There are things we can do domestically to improve that attrition, like repealing NAFTA and other trade agreements that harm our economy more than help it. But companies are still going to seek out using the absolute cheapest manufacturing possible, so if they can move to Mexico and burn coal to produce electricity as opposed to paying 3-4 times as much for it here, they will.

Mainly, Putin doesn't want to talk about global warming because Russia is #2 in oil exports and the only one country close to the Saudis. They're also in the top 5 in coal exporters. Most of the oil and coal are owned by the government, and they make a large chunk of change by exporting it to less developed countries.

Putin is looking out for Russia's export interests, which is understandable. But it doesn't make him any less full of Putin.

Oh I don't disagree at all about Putin being a turd...literally and figuratively...Rumor is he's #3 behind Bono....

But I do get how these types of things could hurt countries like India that don't export it but need to import cheap fuels to grow. 

[Arturo Bandini]

Well, today Putin declared in Paris that he wants an agreement and that it is very important for future generations to make something about climate change.

Weird.

But reading the headnews of your source shows how much this is good journalist jobs. Never seen so much BS on headlines anywhere.
 
http://dailycaller.com 

What's this ? Information or what ? 

[Yojimbo]

So pretty much the same reason it's called a fraud here. Acknowledging it means a hit to profits and we all know that profits trump everything.

An economy driven by green energy can be just as healthy and profitable as one driven by fossil fuels, the problem is the fossil fuel cartels are spending their money to fight this, instead of investing and taking over the green energy industry.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-30-2015, 05:11 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: So pretty much the same reason it's called a fraud here. Acknowledging it means a hit to profits and we all know that profits trump everything.

An economy driven by green energy can be just as healthy and profitable as one driven by fossil fuels, the problem is the fossil fuel cartels are spending their money to fight this, instead of investing and taking over the green energy industry.

Is there any actual evidence to that or is it all "in theory"

[Benton]

(11-30-2015, 05:43 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Is there any actual evidence to that or is it all "in theory"

I don't know on a large scale. On small scale, it can be. Businesses utilizing solar and wind power can cut their energy costs by a significant amount (how much that amount is varies as electric rates nationally are far from uniform).

The problem is the up front costs. For hydroelectric you've got tens of millions in a dam. It's higher for wind. According to the link below, we've subsidized $30 billion in wind energy research the last 35 years... and it still only produces about 4% of what we consume. That's a horrible ROI. Solar has a pretty decent return, but I have no idea what kind of investment it would take for significant industrial production.

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost-wind-power-321480



We should keep exploring clean energy, but we also need to do better than throwing money at everything and hoping one works out.

[RoyleRedlegs]

(11-30-2015, 06:09 PM)Benton Wrote: I don't know on a large scale. On small scale, it can be. Businesses utilizing solar and wind power can cut their energy costs by a significant amount (how much that amount is varies as electric rates nationally are far from uniform).

The problem is the up front costs. For hydroelectric you've got tens of millions in a dam. It's higher for wind. According to the link below, we've subsidized $30 billion in wind energy research the last 35 years... and it still only produces about 4% of what we consume. That's a horrible ROI. Solar has a pretty decent return, but I have no idea what kind of investment it would take for significant industrial production.

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost-wind-power-321480



We should keep exploring clean energy, but we also need to do better than throwing money at everything and hoping one works out.

So it would basically be useless for countries trying to go through their own industrial revolutions like India, to realistically put significant resources into this as the backbone of their economy?

It seems like the small scale is key. Companies may choose to use these to reduce costs but it seems unlikely in the near future that it would be ideal for countries (especially ones as large as the US) to go to a green energy dominated economy. 

[Benton]

(11-30-2015, 06:14 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: So it would basically be useless for countries trying to go through their own industrial revolutions like India, to realistically put significant resources into this as the backbone of their economy?

It seems like the small scale is key. Companies may choose to use these to reduce costs but it seems unlikely in the near future that it would be ideal for countries (especially ones as large as the US) to go to a green energy dominated economy. 

A lot of it depends on the country. Just looking at two familiar ones, we've got the US and Russia. Russia owns and exports a lot of its resources. The country makes money and in turn businesses and people benefit (or at least that's how it's supposed to work). For the US, private business owns resources and the country subsidizes those assets, with the lost tax money getting passed on to the consumer in the form of lower rates (or at least that's how it's supposed to work). In either one, it's easier for a country to subsidize/produce energy or resources if they're cheaper to create.

In a country where government isn't as involved and has more of a free market than the US, my opinion is it would be a lot harder to build dams or put up significant turbines to create wind power. But the businesses themselves could come together and do it for their own interest. Like instead of the Army Corps of Engineers building a dam here at taxpayer expense for lower energy costs, you might have a cooperative of energy producers go together to build a hydroelectric dam.

Smaller countries should put more pressure on those who can (industrialized countries like Russia and the US) to work on renewable energy if those countries are going to pressure them into being cleaner. Once one country figures it out, everybody will eventually benefit.

[fredtoast]

I will look for the exact numbers, but China's GDP is one-third of the United States, but they invests over ten times more into solar energy research and development than us.

The only reason it is is not cost efficient yet is because there has not been a profit motive.  Fossil fuels are cheaper today, but solar is the future.  And I think China is going to be way ahead of us when that day comes. 

[BmorePat87]

(11-30-2015, 04:29 PM)Benton Wrote: Benton: Putin is a fraud.

Bmorepat87: Benton is a fraud.

[Benton]

(11-30-2015, 11:47 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Bmorepat87: Benton is a fraud.

Benton: Bmorepat87 is in my airspace. 

[Rotobeast]

(12-01-2015, 01:06 AM)Benton Wrote: Benton: Bmorepat87 is in my airspace. 

Ummmm... re-read that with a dirty mind.

Don't choke...

[RoyleRedlegs]

Guys settle down before any safe-spaces are violated and we have to call for Benton and all the other mods to resign in disgrace and demand a new safe space made for people.

[Au165]

(11-30-2015, 10:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I will look for the exact numbers, but China's GDP is one-third of the United States, but they invests over ten times more into solar energy research and development than us.

The only reason it is is not cost efficient yet is because there has not been a profit motive.  Fossil fuels are cheaper today, but solar is the future.  And I think China is going to be way ahead of us when that day comes. 

Part of the issue is solar panels only convert 10%-20% of energy into electricity. Supposedly this new material they are working on can convert between 40%-50% to electricity which would be a game changer for Solar power.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-30-2015, 10:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I will look for the exact numbers, but China's GDP is one-third of the United States, but they invests over ten times more into solar energy research and development than us.

The only reason it is is not cost efficient yet is because there has not been a profit motive.  Fossil fuels are cheaper today, but solar is the future.  And I think China is going to be way ahead of us when that day comes. 

Good. Let them figure something out for once and we will then steal it from them.