Since you now admit that there is indeed risk, then we can both agree that your earlier statement that there is no risk is in fact utter crapola. Thanks for that.
Every Human activity has risks, the risks must be weighed against their costs.
That depends on how much Republicans continue to block efforts to do something about the climate crisis. If you don't wanna fix the problem, fine. If you prevent the rest of us from fixing the problem, shame on you.
If Republicans are blocking zealots from unnecessary regulations, they are doing their job.
That you perceive a climate crisis, does not make it true.
It's about 2.8, as paleo studies show (e.g. Royer 2007). This is in the middle of the IPCC range.
There are many studies, they range from under 1C to over 4 C, the more recent ones are trending down.
I think Lewis and Curry Came up with an ECS of less than 1.8 C.
https://niclewis.files.wordpress.co..._clim-dyn2014_accepted-reformatted-edited.pdf
What do you consider a viable alternative to jet fuel, or ship or tractor diesel?
And what makes you think we're going to suddenly stop burning fossil carbon in 2040, when you're working so hard against that?
I am using an extreme case, it will likely happen much sooner, the current glut of oil is based on
technology that increases well production at the expense of well life.
It would happen a lot sooner if carbon had to pay its external costs. Right now it's getting a free ride.
That's exactly why we tax at the wellhead, the mine, and the import terminal.
What is the rush? Oil will increase on it's own without coercive taxes, that could harm the economy.
Electricity accounts for 60% of US emissions, and oil is already priced out of that market. The real question is when will natural gas price itself out of the market, or more correctly, when will we force it to do so by paying its way on external costs.
The problem with the alternative energy sources, is up until recently they lacked storage and density.
Storing surplus alternative energy as hydrocarbon fuels, allows the energy to be accumulated,
in a energy dense package compatible with existing needs for later use, perhaps several years later.
long term storage is a game changer for alternate energy, it now makes them viable.
What we need now if for the Government to improve the rules to allow solar rooftops to expand rapidly.
Synfuels will require little or no refining. Expect refineries to fight tooth and nail to prevent a carbon tax. And in fact they already are: witness the deep funding of climate denial "think tanks" by the oil industry.
So many words with so little thinking, When Audi wanted to experiment with Synfuels, they bought an old refinery.
Audi Transforming Wind Power into e-Gas for New A3 g-Tron | TheDetroitBureau.com
The olefin process used to extract greater ratios of needed fuels from oil, is very close to
the process to make the fuels from scratch,( CO2, water, and energy).
Also, guess who already owns refineries, and distribution infrastructures for fuels?
Who do you think can bring a viable fuel product to market first, the startup with no infrastructure,
or the oil company with a century of distribution under their belt?
The exploration/extraction portion of the oil business has always been the most volatile,
causing great risk and uncertainty.
Businesses like predictability, oil's risks, discovery or not, war in the middle east, or not, ect,
caused great uncertainty.
large segments of people lost and gained jobs in the boom and bust cycles.
Stability of their feedstock price and availability, would be a welcome change for the oil industry.
It is not like people are going to stop needing fuel anytime soon!
