KyussB wrote: » No. We can eliminate emissions without needing to tax the fuck out of ourselves.
Thelonious Monk wrote: » Why are people talking about socialism like it's a bad thing?
Blueshoe wrote: » We are doing just finehttps://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Greenhouse_gas_emission_statistics
KyussB wrote: » It took almost 20 years to drop from 100% to 80%, and we want to get to 0% in 11-12 years (then further shift into -x% thereafter) - that's far off the mark.
KyussB wrote: » The thing that most exposes you as regurgitating a script here, is that you ignore how my fairly succinct post says to use EV transportation powered by renewable sources - in order to shit out a scenario that reverts back to fossil fuel based transport, in order to re-inflate the perception of its carbon cost. You can air-dry wood, with no added carbon release/cost, and if in a rush you can also renewably power kiln-dryed wood - zero carbon cost. Soil disturbance and tree offcuts...that amounts to fuck all carbon, and overall still amounts to likely 90+% of the carbon sequestered from the atmosphere, staying sequestered. It's immensely carbon-negative, done right.
There are many methods of removing moisture from timber including air, solvent, microwave and supercritical CO2 drying, but the most common in the sawn softwood industry is convective or condensing kiln drying. Convective drying, although energy and equipment intensive, offers the most accelerated means of drying dimensional timber for market. The ‘kiln’ is defined as an enclosed structure, typically 30–100 m3, that provides controlled heating, air circulation, humidification and ventilation. Heating is achieved by indirect (steam, hot water, thermal liquid, electricity) or direct means (gas/oil burner). It is common for convective kilns to enclose overhead or side fans that circulate warm or dehumidified air through and around an open stack of sawn timber. Equipment factors which can affect efficiency of softwood drying include standards of kiln thermal insulation and the modulation of fan speed speeds during different stages of the drying cycle.
jackboy wrote: » Most of us do not want to get to 0% in 12 years. Only a small number of people want this and almost no scientists.
KyussB wrote: » You don't speak for most people, let alone the majority of scientists.
gozunda wrote: » Could you stop for once peppering your rants with expletives like "shit". It makes your comments at best unreadable. You what lol? A script? All from that from my personal knowledge of forestry and timber production. If you dont like facts - then tough. If you are in doubt - please show from where my 'script' is derived. Your the one who brought up the bs of using EVs to transport timber - no one else. I showed how your suggestion was pure imagination. Perhaps you are imagining you could stick a tree in a Nissan Leaf or similar Again you know veryblittle about timber production. Construction grade timber is nearly all kiln dried. Check your local building Mechant if you dont believe anyone. All the unusable material removed from felled trees can accounts up to between 30 - 50 of a tree by volume. Again carbon is lost at all stages of timber processing
jackboy wrote: » Neither do you. Looking for 0% emissions in 12 years is an extreme position.
KyussB wrote: » EV = Electric Vehicle - i.e. electrically powered industrial vehicle, like a lumber truck...This is an EV:https://www.topgear.com/car-news/electric/all-hail-edumper-largest-ev-worldDon't be so wilfully thick.
kyussB wrote: Soil disturbance and tree offcuts...that amounts to **** all carbon, and overall still amounts to likely 90+% of the carbon sequestered from the atmosphere, staying sequestered.
Trees and woodlands play an important role in the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Through the biochemical process of photosynthesis carbon dioxide is taken in by trees and stored as carbon in the trunk, branches, leaves and roots. Carbon is also stored in the soil and indeed this is a major sink for carbon in the forest. Decay of the organic material eventually releases the CO2 back to the atmosphere
Blueshoe wrote: » I googled it while having a poo. Socialism is poo Socialism fails because it suffers from four fundamental design defects.
batgoat wrote: » Question, why did you just try to pass that off as something that you wrote?https://mises.org/wire/4-reasons-why-socialism-fails
Blueshoe wrote: » Answer I didn't pass it off as something I wrote. I said I googled it. Who the f is going to bother writing that much for a boards post
batgoat wrote: » Plenty do, you pretty clearly made no effort to differentiate it from something that you wrote. Also it's not a great sign when you're sourcing from a libertarian think tank that infamously opposes child labour laws.
KyussB wrote: » You can air-dry wood, with no added carbon release/cost, and if in a rush you can also renewably power kiln-dryed wood - zero carbon cost.
Pa ElGrande wrote: » Not in Ireland being surrounded by water with prevailing south-west winds means we have a damp climate with poor drying conditions. Even with several years of air drying it is almost impossible to achieve moisture content below 25%. Good luck building your eco-home with native Irish timber you have to kiln dry it if you want to house to last a lifetime. Irish softwood timber is not very good quality compared with that sourced from Sweden, Russia or Canada.
European standards for structural timber also specify an upper limit of 20% moisture content for ’dry graded‘ timber in order for it to receive a defined strength grading. Drier timber also provides a more receptive substrate for gluing and is lighter to transport. Timber's durability and environmental resistance can be further enhanced by thermal and chemical treatments ... There are many methods of removing moisture from timber including air, solvent, microwave and supercritical CO2 drying, but the most common in the sawn softwood industry is convective or condensing kiln drying. Convective drying, although enalthough energy and equipment intensive, offers the most accelerated means of drying dimensional timber for market. The ‘kiln’ is defined as an enclosed structure, typically 30–100 m3, that provides controlled heating, air circulation, humidification and ventilation. Heating is achieved by indirect (steam, hot water, thermal liquid, electricity) or direct means (gas/oil burner). It is common for convective kilns to enclose overhead or side fans that circulate warm or dehumidified air through and around an open stack of sawn timber. Equipment factors which can affect efficiency of softwood drying include standards of kiln thermal insulation and the modulation of fan speed speeds during different stages of the drying cycle.
In 2017, the World Bank released a little-noticed report that offered the first comprehensive look at this question. It models the increase in material extraction that would be required to build enough solar and wind utilities to produce an annual output of about 7 terawatts of electricity by 2050. That’s enough to power roughly half of the global economy. By doubling the World Bank figures, we can estimate what it will take to get all the way to zero emissions—and the results are staggering: 34 million metric tons of copper, 40 million tons of lead, 50 million tons of zinc, 162 million tons of aluminum, and no less than 4.8 billion tons of iron. In some cases, the transition to renewables will require a massive increase over existing levels of extraction. For neodymium—an essential element in wind turbines—extraction will need to rise by nearly 35 percent over current levels. Higher-end estimates reported by the World Bank suggest it could double. The same is true of silver, which is critical to solar panels. Silver extraction will go up 38 percent and perhaps as much as 105 percent. Demand for indium, also essential to solar technology, will more than triple and could end up skyrocketing by 920 percent. And then there are all the batteries we’re going to need for power storage. To keep energy flowing when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing will require enormous batteries at the grid level. This means 40 million tons of lithium—an eye-watering 2,700 percent increase over current levels of extraction. That’s just for electricity. We also need to think about vehicles. This year, a group of leading British scientists submitted a letter to the U.K. Committee on Climate Change outlining their concerns about the ecological impact of electric cars. They agree, of course, that we need to end the sale and use of combustion engines. But they pointed out that unless consumption habits change, replacing the world’s projected fleet of 2 billion vehicles is going to require an explosive increase in mining: Global annual extraction of neodymium and dysprosium will go up by another 70 percent, annual extraction of copper will need to more than double, and cobalt will need to increase by a factor of almost four—all for the entire period from now to 2050. The problem here is not that we’re going to run out of key minerals—although that may indeed become a concern. The real issue is that this will exacerbate an already existing crisis of overextraction. Mining has become one of the biggest single drivers of deforestation, ecosystem collapse, and biodiversity loss around the world. Ecologists estimate that even at present rates of global material use, we are overshooting sustainable levels by 82 percent.source
Pa ElGrande wrote: » The Limits of Clean Energy Just imagine all that green new deal money destabilising Africa and South America in the race to capture minerals. I would like to re-submit a modest proposal for the reduction of consumption in Ireland.
KyussB wrote: » It will definitely require a restriction of the use of those materials from other industries - and massive R&D for material substitution, to replace the rare-earths. All the more reason to immediately start allocating a significant percentage of GDP, to R&D, as part of the GND - so we can develop these technologies and substitutions, urgently.
KyussB wrote: » Fair enough - yet the kiln-drying is fairly easily made zero-emissions as well.
KyussB wrote: » Or just combine electric kilns with renewable energy sources (the technology for both, already existing), like anyone who isn't a fuckwit or being wilfully thick, can figure out.
KyussB wrote: » Personally, I view the Green New Deal and its variations, as being a supercharged version of Capitalism - every Capitalist economy on Earth inherently depends on having a strong government, in order to correct the faults that would exist in a pure Capitalist economy (hence why economies tend to be Mixed Economies) - and the GND fixes the problems of externalized costs leading to accelerated climate change, while also solving the problem of unemployment even during recessions (due to its policy of guaranteeing jobs). An actual/real Capitalist, who wants Capitalist economies to function at their most efficient level, will not shy away from the inevitable need for a Mixed Economy, and strong governments, in order to achieve this - they will not shy away from acknowledging the faults that such an economy creates, and which need fixing to prevent us going down an unsustainable path. The Green New Deal, adjusts our economies to preserve Capitalism, by preventing it from continuing down an unsustainable path.
In a single sub-paragraph, American people are promised “high-quality health care; affordable, safe and adequate housing; economic security; and clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and access to nature.” There is no further elaboration. Along with the previous guarantee of “a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security,” this vision of American society is beautifully utopian. It quite literally promises the world. Yet each component of this paradise would require massive upheavals. Voters deserve a bit more explanation on how to get from here to there. Such objections are thought unsportsmanlike by the proposal’s backers. The Green New Deal has people excited in ways think-tank white papers on cap-and-trade schemes never did. Boosters argue that it moves the “Overton window” of political dialogue: towards taking serious action on climate change. The little details, like how to pay for universal health care and a federal jobs guarantee can be dealt with later.
KyussB wrote: » Pretty much everything has been answered, only to be met with "but Communism...".I've got pretty much a solution to every problem put to me - even stupid/obvious shit like the exact solutions for producing timber in a carbon-negative way - and I'm just met with retarded Communism accusations.It's the level of discourse you'd expect from a child - one who thinks responding to everything with "but Communism! :rolleyes:" is hilarious.If it's meant to be humorous or something, it fails to even meet the level of "yore ma" jokes - it's just retarded.The people spouting that shite aren't even supporters of Capitalism either, because they want Capitalism to run itself into the ground through gradual climate change - instead of leveraging the full power of Capitalist Mixed Economies, to prevent that.
KyussB wrote: » I've got pretty much a solution to every problem put to me - even stupid/obvious shit like the exact solutions for producing timber in a carbon-negative way - and I'm just met with retarded Communism accusations. It's the level of discourse you'd expect from a child - one who thinks responding to everything with "but Communism! :rolleyes:" is hilarious.
