Cap and Trade

[Phil’s Dad]

Rezwan, you speculate the scenario where “The issue is no longer carbon, or greenhouse gases. But C&T;remains!”

I can’t for the life of me see why it would. 8-/

I think I am with Brian when he says;”Water rights will also become moot. Desalinization and other water purification and pumping options will open up with FF.”

In other words if there is plentiful / cheap energy then there is more than enough water to be had. No need for a cap. 🙂 The issue is only getting it to where it is needed but we already pay for that (where I come from anyway) so that doesn’t change anything fundamental. (Might be a few disused oil or gas pipelines that could be used for the purpose – just a thought because I have no idea if they are in the right place.)

To stray into the off topic area. %-P The “not the first shots” showed that “the machine needs to be tweaked and it wasn’t quite there.” I know the guys are busy but could we have a clue as what that means in practical terms?

[Aeronaut]

Phil’s Dad wrote: Rezwan, you speculate the scenario where “The issue is no longer carbon, or greenhouse gases. But C&T;remains!”

I can’t for the life of me see why it would. 8-/

I think I am with Brian when he says;”Water rights will also become moot. Desalinization and other water purification and pumping options will open up with FF.”

In other words if there is plentiful / cheap energy then there is more than enough water to be had. No need for a cap. 🙂 The issue is only getting it to where it is needed but we already pay for that (where I come from anyway) so that doesn’t change anything fundamental. (Might be a few disused oil or gas pipelines that could be used for the purpose – just a thought because I have no idea if they are in the right place.)

To stray into the off topic area. %-P The “not the first shots” showed that “the machine needs to be tweaked and it wasn’t quite there.” I know the guys are busy but could we have a clue as what that means in practical terms?

C&T;will remain due to the money, influence, and inertia that got it this far, coupled with the fact that FF won’t be universally available until many years after FF goes into mass production, the prices have come down, the later adopters come aboard, etc.

Then there’s the bond issues to build water pipelines, and that puts a lot of North America at least 10 years from that water. I’d guess more like 20 years. The idea of re-purposing oil & gas pipelines is guaranteed to make a HUGE stink over here, even if the demand for oil and gas suddenly ceased.

On the brighter side, Obama’s blank check remains mostly unspent, so pipelines would make a great follow-up to Roosevelt’s TVA dam builders.

[Brian H]

Phil’s Dad wrote: Rezwan, you speculate the scenario where “The issue is no longer carbon, or greenhouse gases. But C&T;remains!”

I can’t for the life of me see why it would. 8-/

I think I am with Brian when he says;”Water rights will also become moot. Desalinization and other water purification and pumping options will open up with FF.”

In other words if there is plentiful / cheap energy then there is more than enough water to be had. No need for a cap. 🙂 The issue is only getting it to where it is needed but we already pay for that (where I come from anyway) so that doesn’t change anything fundamental. (Might be a few disused oil or gas pipelines that could be used for the purpose – just a thought because I have no idea if they are in the right place.)

…

I think Rezwan was thinking globally re the water rights (e.g., the M.E., S.A., etc.) But desalinization resolves those shortages, too. The excellent Israeli desal installations could be ramped up manyfold with FF, as an example.

One of the consequences of both replacing generators and easing water shortages will be the accelerated decommissioning (= removal) of dams, already going on in many places. Imagine detonating the Hoover! :bug: 😛 :coolgrin:

P.S. Just thinking of other consequences, too: using idle oil tankers (refitted with FF generators and electric engine power) to transport purified water, and/or tow icebergs to where they’ll be appreciated. 🙂 😉

[Brian H]

Aeronaut wrote:
…
Then there’s the bond issues to build water pipelines, and that puts a lot of North America at least 10 years from that water. I’d guess more like 20 years. The idea of re-purposing oil & gas pipelines is guaranteed to make a HUGE stink over here, even if the demand for oil and gas suddenly ceased.

On the brighter side, Obama’s blank check remains mostly unspent, so pipelines would make a great follow-up to Roosevelt’s TVA dam builders.

Maybe in the interim, use giant FF powered excavators to dig canals, filled with FF-purified water. Human- and electric-powered boating only allowed.

[Aeronaut]

I easily see the US’s environmental laws making us the last country to adopt the desalination plants. And that’s along the coasts.

[Brian H]

Aeronaut wrote: I easily see the US’s environmental laws making us the last country to adopt the desalination plants. And that’s along the coasts.

I was speculating about the possibility of using condensers in remote areas without pipeline access to any bodies of water. I think the Israelis developed on passive or semi-passive system that used clear domes to collect water from the air at night. Can’t recall the details. But any cooled gridding could be used to extract water from even low humidity air in warm climates.

[JimmyT]

Aeronaut wrote: I easily see the US’s environmental laws making us the last country to adopt the desalination plants. And that’s along the coasts.

What about the ecological effects of the brine concentrate that you have to dump back into the ocean?

Do I believe that this is a major concern? Emphatically no! But there is always some issue that can be used to block new technology.

Water extraction from the atmosphere? What about the decreased rainfall in the water-diminished-plume downwind? Shouldn’t the adopters of this technology have to pay the rest of the world some sort of “environmental sin tax” for the horrors of ecological disruption this causes?

It never ends folks.

[Aeronaut]

JimmyT wrote:

I easily see the US’s environmental laws making us the last country to adopt the desalination plants. And that’s along the coasts.

What about the ecological effects of the brine concentrate that you have to dump back into the ocean?

Do I believe that this is a major concern? Emphatically no! But there is always some issue that can be used to block new technology.

Water extraction from the atmosphere? What about the decreased rainfall in the water-diminished-plume downwind? Shouldn’t the adopters of this technology have to pay the rest of the world some sort of “environmental sin tax” for the horrors of ecological disruption this causes?

It never ends folks.

No need to dump it back into the ocean, Jimmy. We use it on roads all year around- and that’s just part of the salt industry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcium_chloride

[dash]

JimmyT wrote: It never ends folks.

I believe it will be ending quite soon. The US empire is bankrupt. Only a global superpower can enforce draconian politically motivated anti-progress measures.

Without that global superpower, it becomes a matter of herding cats. The country that adopts useful technology soonest will get ahead, and stay ahead.

The glory days are ahead of us. And not too far ahead, at that.

[Brian H]

dash wrote:

It never ends folks.

I believe it will be ending quite soon. The US empire is bankrupt. Only a global superpower can enforce draconian politically motivated anti-progress measures.

Without that global superpower, it becomes a matter of herding cats. The country that adopts useful technology soonest will get ahead, and stay ahead.

The glory days are ahead of us. And not too far ahead, at that.

You’d better hope it’s not bankrupt. The empire that Copenhagen is trying to put in place would be 1000X worse. How do you feel about paying off “Carbon Debt” for the rest of your life? Or subordinating even the Supreme Court to the Haig? Up next, free health care for the planet, courtesy the US Federal Reserve’s printing presses.

I just hope FF comes onstream soon enough that everybody can get busy getting wealthy and healthy on their own hooks rather than looking for a “bleed the rich” solution for the many politically retarded economies of Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

P.S. The US is an empire by no definition found in history. That’s “progressive” rhetoric that is nothing more than a ludicrous, egregious, gratuitous, but politically useful insult.

[Breakable]

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/111232
Bottom 40% of population has 0.2% of all wealth. Well the rich are clearly not rich enough.

[dash]

Brian H wrote: You’d better hope it’s not bankrupt.
…
That’s “progressive” rhetoric that is nothing more than a ludicrous, egregious, gratuitous, but politically useful insult.

Whatever. Some people take a lot of convincing.

Actually, I’m hoping for and counting on the US going bankrupt and the dollar collapsing.

Got silver?

[HermannH]

Brian H wrote:
P.S. The US is an empire by no definition found in history. That’s “progressive” rhetoric that is nothing more than a ludicrous, egregious, gratuitous, but politically useful insult.

Let’s see:
– 41% of the world’s military budget is spent by the US (5% of population).
– It has military bases in dozens of countries all around the globe.
– It reserves the right to pre-emtively attack countries it feels threatened by (regardless of whether that feeling is actually justified).
– It pressures other countries into joining its wars (‘Coalition of the willing’).

If you look at the CIA world fact book you will find that the US ranks as number 28 in terms of defense spending vs GDP (twice the world average). I did a quick scan of the top 50 countries on that list and I didn’t find many that are shining examples of free and democratic societies.

Also have a good look at the Project for the New American Century. An important part is the last section titled “Associations with Bush administration”.

And of course there is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Empire.

In general, the definition of what constitutes an empire is likely a fluid one. There is a good chance that future generations of historians will lump the current US together with previous empires.

That’s not to say that the world would be a better place if the US were crushed to pieces.

[Brian H]

HermannH wrote:

P.S. The US is an empire by no definition found in history. That’s “progressive” rhetoric that is nothing more than a ludicrous, egregious, gratuitous, but politically useful insult.

Let’s see:
– 41% of the world’s military budget is spent by the US (5% of population).
– It has military bases in dozens of countries all around the globe.
– It reserves the right to pre-emtively attack countries it feels threatened by (regardless of whether that feeling is actually justified).
– It pressures other countries into joining its wars (‘Coalition of the willing’).

If you look at the CIA world fact book you will find that the US ranks as number 28 in terms of defense spending vs GDP (twice the world average). I did a quick scan of the top 50 countries on that list and I didn’t find many that are shining examples of free and democratic societies.

Also have a good look at the Project for the New American Century. An important part is the last section titled “Associations with Bush administration”.

And of course there is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Empire.

In general, the definition of what constitutes an empire is likely a fluid one. There is a good chance that future generations of historians will lump the current US together with previous empires.

That’s not to say that the world would be a better place if the US were crushed to pieces.

Typical misrepresentation. The bases are in NO countries that don’t want them, and most howl like banshees when their removal is contemplated for strategic or cost reasons. The justification for the ME wars is something for another locale, but I can refer you to some very grateful Iraqis etc. who say things like

[what] makes me declare my love for America is that it is good luck to those who Atdf funds reflects his love of people, so I can expression of feelings of loyalty and fidelity from them without hesitation or fear that you accuse me of the receipt of funds or courtesy to them, I write in compliance with the orders of conscience and moral values, reason, religion and God .. Asking that we honor, loyalty to the owners of the credit, known and beautiful … As the preferred and the blessings of America is not on my own, but on the whole across the world, including their knowledge of science and human values … I am happy to express my love for them.

in response to accusations that his current efforts shuttling between London and Baghdad are the result of some nefarious American bribery or brainwashing (he’s a prominent architect and businessman). His English is a bit choppy, but … 😉

Or perhaps you’re just onside with Chavez who’s threatening (suicidal) war with Columbia because the Americans continue to help train and equip them. Don’t get too excited; his generals will deep-six him before they stick their hands into that buzz-saw.

[HermannH]

Brian H wrote:
Typical misrepresentation. The bases are in NO countries that don’t want them, and most howl like banshees when their removal is contemplated for strategic or cost reasons. The justification for the ME wars is something for another locale, but I can refer you to some very grateful Iraqis etc. who say things like …

Really?

About he bases have a look at this.

What did I misrepresent about the ‘Project for the New American Century’?

As for the Iraqis, it appears to me that there have been far more Iraqi losers than winners. Probably well over 100,000 dead, a million who are refugees in other countries and large internal displacements. These losers lost big time and you need a lot of winners to make up for it. Of course the Americans are losers too, they (and other countries) lost thousands of soldiers’ lives, not to mention the tens of thousands wounded and the cost of over a trillion dollars. It isn’t much mentioned, but far more American lives were lost in Iraq than on September 11. And all because of the imperial ambitions of a bunch of neo-cons in the White House.

[Author]

Posts