Reply To: Cap and Trade

[Breakable]

Phil’s Dad wrote: Breakable Posted at 24 September 2009 03:55 AM
…
A slight reduction in the quality of living for many people is death. The problem with so much legislation (proposed or enacted) is that it seeks to prevent developing nations, well, developing. If they are only allowed energy from sources they can not afford (i.e. renewables) then they must continue to do without. That costs millions of lives and that is the true cost of making the wrong decision “just in case”. One reason why FF is so important – living standards world wide can go up sustainably.
At 05:04 AM (that’s very late by the way – kids keeping you up?) he goes on to say “A survey published in 2009 by Peter Doran and Maggie Zimmerman of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago of 3146 Earth Scientists found that 97% of active climatologists agree that human activity is causing global warming.”

Well I don’t think I would like for anyone to perish because of me, but I don’t agree with your assertion. I understand that in most poor developing Africa’s countries 1 $ can mean a difference between life and death, but so can 1°C. In a developed country such as USA 1000$ or 10°C can serve the same purpose. In fact developing countries will be most affected by the global warming.
But they also have the greatest opportunities with renewable energy.
Take for example the story of http://williamkamkwamba.typepad.com/
or the design of http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4224763.html
Even the installation of inexpensive FF power might prove prohibitively expensive to a third world country for some time.
I do not think its a good idea to reduce the quality of living anywhere – if properly done carbon tax can instead slow down the speed at which quality of living is improving instead, and its increasing the fastest in developing countries.

Phil’s Dad wrote:
Putting aside the “leanings and interests” of the people doing the survey that result is probably about the same percentage as thought the world was flat just before someone sailed around it.

Well there are still people who believe the earth is flat in our time, and nobody can convince them otherwise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society

Phil’s Dad wrote:
What made me post though was the assertion at 06:42 AM that “Consensus is much harder to form when there is nothing to test on.” I can only presume that Breakable, generally a sensible chap, was by then very tired.
:-/

I am well rested and awake now, but I still stand by this statement. It is much easier to disprove criticism when you can make experiments. Even such a wacky theory as Quantum physics has won full support using experiments. Who would believe that observers effect is real if you would not be able to demonstrate it? And you cannot do an experiment on the whole earth…