Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 123

Thread: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

  1. #81
    Advisor nijato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Charm City, USA
    Last Seen
    01-19-12 @ 03:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    417
    Blog Entries
    2
    Here's my 2 cents...

    First, peak oil is real, just like agw, evolution, and all of that other sciency stuff. If you're a denier/cornucopian, please read up, because everyone from the IEA to the USGS and Total to BP and even the US and German military academies are in agreement. Pessimists point to the IEA documented conventional oil global peak in 2006, and extreme optimists like CERA put peak total oil out to the middle of this century. But no one- no one- thinks it will not happen.

    In other words, it's here.

    The best irony to me is the fact that PV cells are made from hydrocarbons. This is just one small example of why we should all beware the techno-triumphalist ruse that promises life (and GDP growth) will continue on just as it has just as soon as we find some new fairie dust the cars will all run on. Oil is that farie dust, and it's in twilight.

    Just one more thing... don't forget that the drastic price spike of 2008 preceded the financial meltdown. Energy is a fundamental input to... everything.
    "A witty saying proves nothing." Voltaire

  2. #82
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    If we use our resources and purchase from Canada, China will not impact our ability to have resources as we would produce our own.
    No, that's not how it works. Oil is bought and sold on an international market. The oil is sold by corporations. They don't turn down or accept customers on the basis of their nationality.

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    We disagree on the cause and effect. If global warming is a natural result of nature, changing to alterative fuels by 2060 versus 2030 will not have significant impact.
    That is not logically sound. If X amount of carbon emissions cause Y amount of warming, the impact of reducing carbon emissions is the same either way. In fact, if there is natural warming, then the problem is even more urgent because increasing the temperature 6 degrees isn't twice as bad as 3 degrees, it's many times as bad. 3 degrees maybe we can adapt to, although it will be costly. 6 degrees means mass famines and collapsing nations and countries and states going under water.

  3. #83
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,189

    Re: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    No, that's not how it works. Oil is bought and sold on an international market. The oil is sold by corporations. They don't turn down or accept customers on the basis of their nationality.
    How things have worked and how they could work are two different things. I would imagine that U.S. oil companies could be persuaded to sell their oil only in the U.S.

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    That is not logically sound. If X amount of carbon emissions cause Y amount of warming, the impact of reducing carbon emissions is the same either way. In fact, if there is natural warming, then the problem is even more urgent because increasing the temperature 6 degrees isn't twice as bad as 3 degrees, it's many times as bad. 3 degrees maybe we can adapt to, although it will be costly. 6 degrees means mass famines and collapsing nations and countries and states going under water.
    Not logically sound? Oh boy! I have explained my position and I see no reason to repeat it a third or fourth time. We disagree.

  4. #84
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,189

    Re: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by nijato View Post
    Here's my 2 cents...

    First, peak oil is real, just like agw, evolution, and all of that other sciency stuff. If you're a denier/cornucopian, please read up, because everyone from the IEA to the USGS and Total to BP and even the US and German military academies are in agreement. Pessimists point to the IEA documented conventional oil global peak in 2006, and extreme optimists like CERA put peak total oil out to the middle of this century. But no one- no one- thinks it will not happen.

    In other words, it's here.

    The best irony to me is the fact that PV cells are made from hydrocarbons. This is just one small example of why we should all beware the techno-triumphalist ruse that promises life (and GDP growth) will continue on just as it has just as soon as we find some new fairie dust the cars will all run on. Oil is that farie dust, and it's in twilight.

    Just one more thing... don't forget that the drastic price spike of 2008 preceded the financial meltdown. Energy is a fundamental input to... everything.
    You are speaking of the world market and I am not. I agree that energy is needed to allow the economy to churn. That is partially why I want to explore, drill, and refine oil and gas, while at the same time having companies develop alternative energies.

  5. #85
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    How things have worked and how they could work are two different things. I would imagine that U.S. oil companies could be persuaded to sell their oil only in the U.S.
    Certainly not without government intervention far beyond anything the government has done or considered doing with regards to green energy... If you're against that, I would assume you would be against something this radical too, no?

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    Not logically sound? Oh boy! I have explained my position and I see no reason to repeat it a third or fourth time. We disagree.
    Are you contending that if there are also natural causes of global warming that reducing carbon emissions would mean a smaller reduction in temperature? Or that it would mean the same reduction in temperature, but that that would matter less? Either way, why?

  6. #86
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,803

    Re: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Certainly not without government intervention far beyond anything the government has done or considered doing with regards to green energy... If you're against that, I would assume you would be against something this radical too, no?



    Are you contending that if there are also natural causes of global warming that reducing carbon emissions would mean a smaller reduction in temperature? Or that it would mean the same reduction in temperature, but that that would matter less? Either way, why?
    He seems to be contending that natural vs. artificial warming is a binary question, that only one of the two can be true.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  7. #87
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,189

    Re: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Certainly not without government intervention far beyond anything the government has done or considered doing with regards to green energy... If you're against that, I would assume you would be against something this radical too, no?
    I'm not sure what you are imagining me wanting the government to do, but I think the President and the oil companies could work out a deal where a great deal of new oil and gas would be produced in the U.S. with an understanding that we would guarantee some price to the oil and gas companies, but they would need to keep it in the U.S.

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Are you contending that if there are also natural causes of global warming that reducing carbon emissions would mean a smaller reduction in temperature? Or that it would mean the same reduction in temperature, but that that would matter less? Either way, why?
    I am saying neither. I am saying that I don't know whether or not carbon emissions are causing any part of the global warming. Since I do not know, I do not want to spend money in a rash way to prevent something that may not be preventable. Also, fifty, sixty, or even eighty years is a short time span for life on earth. If alternative fuels are viable, there is no reason why they should not be up and running in an efficient and cost-effective way in that time span. If carbon emissions does cause some portion of the warming, then it would be reduced greatly when the alternative fuels came on-line.

  8. #88
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,189

    Re: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    He seems to be contending that natural vs. artificial warming is a binary question, that only one of the two can be true.
    No, that's not true. Teamosil took the right approach when he asked me which it was. Please do not assume.

  9. #89
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    I'm not sure what you are imagining me wanting the government to do, but I think the President and the oil companies could work out a deal where a great deal of new oil and gas would be produced in the U.S. with an understanding that we would guarantee some price to the oil and gas companies, but they would need to keep it in the U.S.
    That seems like WAAAY more interference with the free market than just giving a loan to a company. Trade protectionism like that is generally considered to be so over the top in terms of interfering with the market that it can warrant retaliatory trade practices and whatnot. Conventionally that is seen as the most extreme form of market interference. Between states, that sort of thing is the only sort of market interference that is categorically forbidden in our constitution for that reason. The sort of market distortion caused by setting up a separate sub market that is limited to a subset of customers would be enormous. A loan, on the other hand, doesn't really distort the market much. The company's products are still competing freely with other companies' products, it's a loan, not a subsidy, so they can't use it to undercut prices of their competitors, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    I am saying neither. I am saying that I don't know whether or not carbon emissions are causing any part of the global warming. Since I do not know, I do not want to spend money in a rash way to prevent something that may not be preventable. Also, fifty, sixty, or even eighty years is a short time span for life on earth. If alternative fuels are viable, there is no reason why they should not be up and running in an efficient and cost-effective way in that time span. If carbon emissions does cause some portion of the warming, then it would be reduced greatly when the alternative fuels came on-line.
    I thought you were saying that you did believe in AGW before. If not, I really think you need to examine the issue more closely. Scientifically, the verdict is firmly in.

    80 years is a short time as far as the earth is concerned, but a very long time as far as humans are concerned. If we raise the temperature significantly for 80 years, the drop it back down 80 years from now, if anything that might even be worse than just raising it once because we'd need to adapt to the increase in temp, then later adapt again to the decrease. That means, for example, moving and retooling our farms twice instead of once. And, 80 years of intensified hurricanes, dramatically higher sea levels, famine, etc, is pretty devastating.

    Now, if you really want to worry about something, the worst case scenario is that we burn the oil up like gangbusters and right around the time the worst of the global warming consequences are kicking in and we're reeling from that, oil starts to run out. That's when the possibility of taking a serious step back to lower levels of technology and becoming a third world country really come on the table.

    Anyways, with the stakes being that high for the future of our country I just am not worried about whether a few loans here and there might be going to slightly sub-optimal companies or something. In 100 years people are going to look back at our time and be completely unable to comprehend why we didn't do anything while there was still time.

  10. #90
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:41 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,189

    Re: Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    That seems like WAAAY more interference with the free market than just giving a loan to a company. Trade protectionism like that is generally considered to be so over the top in terms of interfering with the market that it can warrant retaliatory trade practices and whatnot. Conventionally that is seen as the most extreme form of market interference. Between states, that sort of thing is the only sort of market interference that is categorically forbidden in our constitution for that reason. The sort of market distortion caused by setting up a separate sub market that is limited to a subset of customers would be enormous. A loan, on the other hand, doesn't really distort the market much. The company's products are still competing freely with other companies' products, it's a loan, not a subsidy, so they can't use it to undercut prices of their competitors, etc.
    You are correct. I had a flashback to my liberal days. Woof! That hurt. Loans by private institutions are fine, but no government guarantees. Oil and gas companies could sell to anyone, but would verbally encourage selling domestically.

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    I thought you were saying that you did believe in AGW before. If not, I really think you need to examine the issue more closely. Scientifically, the verdict is firmly in.
    Here is exactly what I said previously, "Does global warming exist? Most likely."

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    80 years is a short time as far as the earth is concerned, but a very long time as far as humans are concerned. If we raise the temperature significantly for 80 years, the drop it back down 80 years from now, if anything that might even be worse than just raising it once because we'd need to adapt to the increase in temp, then later adapt again to the decrease. That means, for example, moving and retooling our farms twice instead of once. And, 80 years of intensified hurricanes, dramatically higher sea levels, famine, etc, is pretty devastating.
    Intensified hurricanes? We have had major hurricanes many years ago. I have yet to see higher sea levels. As for famine, there has been famine during every century.

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Now, if you really want to worry about something, the worst case scenario is that we burn the oil up like gangbusters and right around the time the worst of the global warming consequences are kicking in and we're reeling from that, oil starts to run out. That's when the possibility of taking a serious step back to lower levels of technology and becoming a third world country really come on the table.
    That cannot happen. Remember, we have alternative energy that will become efficient and cost-effective before that happens. If that is not possible, then alternative energy has been hyped and is not a real solution. As for the fear-mongering, I'll leave that to you folks.

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Anyways, with the stakes being that high for the future of our country I just am not worried about whether a few loans here and there might be going to slightly sub-optimal companies or something. In 100 years people are going to look back at our time and be completely unable to comprehend why we didn't do anything while there was still time.
    Just like it will be in 2019, heh?
    Last edited by LesGovt; 09-07-11 at 07:09 PM.

Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •