• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are There Any Conservatives Here Who Accept the Science of Climate Change?

longview said:
What you are missing is that it is not all that different, the smart phone changes required massive changes in the infrastructure,
but those changes were transparent for the most part to the end user.
.
Click to expand...

Okay.. please explain the massive changes in infrastructure for the smart phone.

The "roads and bridges, pumps, etc." are all the ones that already exists.
The price of electricity is falling in the US, and so to will the cost of man made fuels.
Click to expand...

Great.. please give me a list of readily available infrastructure so that I can go buy and drive an electric car. Please show me what I can do when my electric car battery loses charge in the woods. What then?

Or show me the developed infrastructure that will allow me to switch to a hydrogen car

Or whatever alternative you see us using.

so how about we start there.
 
Jack Hays said:
I'm quite aware of the origins of the digital processes that became the internet. I'm talking about the vast and revolutionary internet economy that destroys legacy companies and creates new ones, and trillions of dollars of new wealth. And yes, it's infrastructure.
Click to expand...

the "internet economy" is not infrastructure. The idea that it is infrastructure is absurd.


You are just throwing crap against the wall hoping it will stick.
 
jaeger19 said:
the "internet economy" is not infrastructure. The idea that it is infrastructure is absurd.


You are just throwing crap against the wall hoping it will stick.
Click to expand...

The fact that you do not understand the internet economy is infrastructure exposes your backward outlook.
 
jaeger19 said:
Okay.. please explain the massive changes in infrastructure for the smart phone.



Great.. please give me a list of readily available infrastructure so that I can go buy and drive an electric car. Please show me what I can do when my electric car battery loses charge in the woods. What then?

Or show me the developed infrastructure that will allow me to switch to a hydrogen car

Or whatever alternative you see us using.

so how about we start there.
Click to expand...

The original cell towers were set up for voice traffic and very small amounts of data, like text.
later that demands changed and so did all the equipment. several times over the last two decades.

As to the infrastructure, you are assuming the cars will be electric,
what I am talking about is using the electricity to make fuel for the existing cars and gas stations.
Does it really matter what package the energy is carried in, if the emissions are still reduced in a sustainable path forward?
In addition, the man made fuel would also address jets, ships and tractors, something decades away for battery technology.
Longer term I can see small gas reformers splitting hydrogen off of gasoline for fuel cells.
The current limit of hydrogen is packaging, but we already know how to carry liquid hydrocarbon fuels, and extracting hydrogen from them is straight forward.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Hydrogen could be a viable way to store extra solar or wind power. I'm just worried about trying to use it for transportation. It has to be compressed at too high of pressure which makes safety very difficult.

Use the excess electricity to make hydrogen, then when there is an electrical demand, use fuel cells to make electricity again.
Click to expand...

Supposedly the safety issues have been worked out. It's just not yet affordable enough to make it viable to sell the cars at a reasonable price at your local dealership. And they need the infratructure set up:


Hydrogen cars hit the highway | Shell Global
 
Threegoofs said:
But we did have thermometers. And we know the ocean is warmer, and we know warmer water intensifies hurricanes.

It's science that conflicts with your politics, so you won't understand.
Click to expand...

No...it's modern political correctness and politics that conflicts with yours. It is you that does not understand.
 
longview said:
Hurricane seasons are very cyclical, when conditions are right, quite a few can form.
https://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/top10.asp
2017 will only be special because of damage done, and that Harvey stalled.
Click to expand...

Yep. The best indicator of n active hurricane season is solar storms. Even Owl Gore is aware of that. That's why he released is idiotic sequel to his idiotic movie "An Inconveniant truth". His mistake was releasing the movie too soon, before Harvey and Irma Gore is also making billions in profits selling phony carbon credits to librul sheeple.
 
jaeger19 said:
Not sure what you mean by "kill the oil pig"..

We are probably the least likely to reduce our dependence on oil versus other countries.. because we will wait for market forces to dictated that and market forces are much slower to respond than government backed research and development.
Click to expand...

The reality is that we are most likely to be the first nation to get off the oil pig and everyone else will follow simply due to the market forces you just mentioned. Government backed research(the unpoliticized kind) can be helpful, however it does not go anywhere without market forces bringing the cost down to acceptable levels.


Case in point space travel.
Click to expand...

You just proved my above point. We have been putting people in space since the 1960s, however the costs are only starting to come down due to private industry getting involved in making and launching space vehicles for the sake of private sector ventures, tourism, etc, rather then just building space craft and handing the keys to NASA.

What makes for our urgency is the fact that RIGHT NOW.. we are negatively effected by fossil fuel use.
Click to expand...

Anyone who has ever driven in Southern California can find some truth in that. However it is not warming the planet.


We expend billions of dollars protecting areas and dealing with the middle east simply because we need access to those fossil fuels in the region. Worse.. we put our men and woman in harms way.. simply to protect access to that resource.
Click to expand...

However we are not doing so for the sake of oil we need. We are doing so because oil is at this point in time still the life blood of the world's economy. The US actually has more then enough of it's own oil reserves to maintain energy independence. We are actually producing nearly as much oil as Saudi Arabia.

and we KNOW without a doubt that the resource is finite. And we know that other countries are getting a jump on the technology for renewable energy and alternative energy and machines. We USED to have a sense of urgency when it came to America First.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily: America's Infinite Resource: Oil | CBN News

First to have nuclear power,, first in space.. first to the moon...

now.. we clap ourselves on the back.. and let other countries get ahead of us in many regions.. from education, to internet access, to economic development and social mobility. And now technology in renewable energy.

Name a big national project or advancement we have done in the last three decades? Bailing out the banks?


Each generation.. did something big for America infrastructure.. Start the country,, manifest destiny with Louisiana purchase, railroads, hydroelectric power, interstate highways, nuclear power, computers (yep.. started by the government research) and the space program.

Name what we have done since then.
Click to expand...



You are not very observant.

Energy is the next big race.. and we haven't even gotten to the starting line.
Click to expand...

Baloney. We have been there for a very long time. In the 1980s for instance, I took a field trip from work to the first experimental nuclear fusion plant....in California. I also visited one of the first solar power plants.....in the high desert in California. That is also where I first spotted windmill generated power stations. All of that aside, it does not matter which nation makes a breakthrough, the nation with the market forces to make it work on a massive scale is the USA.
 
Last edited:
ObamacareFail said:
Quote Originally Posted by Threegoofs View Post
But we did have thermometers. And we know the ocean is warmer, and we know warmer water intensifies hurricanes.

It's science that conflicts with your politics, so you won't understand.
Click to expand...
No...it's modern political correctness and politics that conflicts with yours. It is you that does not understand.
Click to expand...
LOL...

I wonder if he realizes how poor the SST record is until just recently.

No way to really compare with any accuracy, so it is a SWAG.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Still a long way to go on that, at least for automobiles.
Click to expand...

The process of running electricity through water and separating the oxygen from hydrogen is actually a simple one. If the storage problem is solved, people can buy a home device to create their own fuel of either their solar power and/or from the grid. It could even be built into the car.

Add tap water and electricity, make your own hydrogen.
 
The game may be changed

Posted on 20 Sep 17 by RICHARD DRAKE • 1 Comment
Climate sceptics, feast your eyes on two brilliant and rightly passionate articles in two best-selling UK tabloids this morning: Now that’s an inconvenient truth: Report shows the world isn’t as warm as the green doom-mongers warned. So will energy bills come down? Fat chance in the Daily Mail by Labour MP Graham Stringer How scientists … Continue

Climate sceptics, feast your eyes on two brilliant and rightly passionate articles in two best-selling UK tabloids this morning:

If you were to push me I’d say that Stringer’s is slightly better, because of the way it ends. . . . .

 
Jack Hays said:
The fact that you do not understand the internet economy is infrastructure exposes your backward outlook.
Click to expand...

Well then.. please explain to us all how the "internet economy" is infrastructure.
 
jaeger19 said:
Well then.. please explain to us all how the "internet economy" is infrastructure.
Click to expand...
I think I can cover this,
During Hurricane Harvey, ATT had one of it's main central offices flood, the CO contained one of the main SONET connections
for internet services in Houston. It took them a week and several tractor trailers of infrastructure equipment
to reestablish services. The internet economy is very dependent on the data highway the traffic flows on.
 
longview said:
The original cell towers were set up for voice traffic and very small amounts of data, like text.
later that demands changed and so did all the equipment. several times over the last two decades.

As to the infrastructure, you are assuming the cars will be electric,
what I am talking about is using the electricity to make fuel for the existing cars and gas stations.
Does it really matter what package the energy is carried in, if the emissions are still reduced in a sustainable path forward?
In addition, the man made fuel would also address jets, ships and tractors, something decades away for battery technology.
Longer term I can see small gas reformers splitting hydrogen off of gasoline for fuel cells.
The current limit of hydrogen is packaging, but we already know how to carry liquid hydrocarbon fuels, and extracting hydrogen from them is straight forward.
Click to expand...

in other words.. they built on the existing tower technology that's decades old.

Know.. I am not assuming that cars will be electric.

I asked you to explain how the infrastructure is "already there".

So far you haven't. You made a vague reference to using electricity to make fuel. Exactly what fuel.. and exactly why infrastructure will not have to change.
 
longview said:
I think I can cover this,
During Hurricane Harvey, ATT had one of it's main central offices flood, the CO contained one of the main SONET connections
for internet services in Houston. It took them a week and several tractor trailers of infrastructure equipment
to reestablish services. The internet economy is very dependent on the data highway the traffic flows on.
Click to expand...

The internet is infrastructure.. its the result of technology that was started decades ago.

He stated that apple, and amazon are the internet economy.. and represent infrastructure.. they don;'t. they simply USE the infrastructure that was developed decades ago.
 
jaeger19 said:
Well then.. please explain to us all how the "internet economy" is infrastructure.
Click to expand...

[h=3]Delivering Digital Infrastructure Advancing the Internet Economy ...[/h]www3.weforum.org/.../WEF_TC_DeliveringDigitalInfrastructure_InternetEconomy_...



Disputes over IP interconnection agreements – the deals that dictate how traffic is passed amonginternet infrastructure providers – could slow the online flow of data. ... This report examines the interaction between the digital economy and the infrastructure that supports it.
 
Lord of Planar said:
The process of running electricity through water and separating the oxygen from hydrogen is actually a simple one. If the storage problem is solved, people can buy a home device to create their own fuel of either their solar power and/or from the grid. It could even be built into the car.

Add tap water and electricity, make your own hydrogen.
Click to expand...

It will eventually get to that point.
 
jaeger19 said:
in other words.. they built on the existing tower technology that's decades old.

Know.. I am not assuming that cars will be electric.

I asked you to explain how the infrastructure is "already there".

So far you haven't. You made a vague reference to using electricity to make fuel. Exactly what fuel.. and exactly why infrastructure will not have to change.
Click to expand...

The physical towers were all that remained, everything the towers carried changed.
In post #251 you said,
Great.. please give me a list of readily available infrastructure so that I can go buy and drive an electric car. Please show me what I can do when my electric car battery loses charge in the woods. What then?
Click to expand...
That sort of sound like an assumption that cars will be electric.

As to the man made fuels.
Most oil refineries already have very large electrical grid connections, because they sell electricity (Co generation),
The same connections can bring surplus solar power to the refineries, (No change in infrastructure.)
The current refinery process known as cracking, where they break oil down to olefins to then reassemble into
desired liquid fuel products, is very close to the process to make artificial olefins like the Navy is doing.
(infrastructure changes, in plant only)
The olefin reassembly process is the same. (No change in infrastructure)
The finished man made fuel products, are distributed through the same distribution infrastructure use for the oil based products.
(No change in Infrastructure)
The existing gas stations already handle liquid hydrocarbon fuels, the man made variety will not require much change.
(Perhaps a different pump handle color, so people will know it is man made fuel.)
No change required in vehicles. (no infrastructure changes)
By switching the existing fuels to carbon neutral fuels, we can bypass most of the factors that would cause long term
delays to any new technology.
It would take decades to switch to an electric based transport, and would not cover
aircraft, ships, and many aquaculture vehicles.
Hydrogen, while possible, would require massive changes in the infrastructure and it's storage technology needs improvement.
Fuel cell electrics are the likely future long term, but the hydrogen may still be carried as a hydrocarbon,
and reformed as needed.
 
jaeger19 said:
The internet is infrastructure.. its the result of technology that was started decades ago.

He stated that apple, and amazon are the internet economy.. and represent infrastructure.. they don;'t. they simply USE the infrastructure that was developed decades ago.
Click to expand...
I can tell you that the internet's infrastructure refreshes about every 5 years, with newer better equipment.
Please consider that 20 years ago, most homes only had a modem connection to the internet.
Some had ADSL, and almost no one had an actual T1 (1.5 Mbps)to their home.
Now many people have connections of over 100 mbps.
 
longview said:
I can tell you that the internet's infrastructure refreshes about every 5 years, with newer better equipment.
Please consider that 20 years ago, most homes only had a modem connection to the internet.
Some had ADSL, and almost no one had an actual T1 (1.5 Mbps)to their home.
Now many people have connections of over 100 mbps.
Click to expand...

Even with my same modem I bough several years ago, rated to 150 mbs... I now get over 80 mbs. I bought it when I was only getting 12 mbs.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Even with my same modem I bough several years ago, rated to 150 mbs... I now get over 80 mbs. I bought it when I was only getting 12 mbs.
Click to expand...
Yea, bandwidth has come down in price per unit faster than TVs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom