Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19
Fat bottom Trump
9947 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4794

Subscriber

  # 1891103 27-Oct-2017 01:33
Send private message

Human beings can do incredible things when sufficiently motivated. I am convinced that if things get so bad the threat is imminent, and there can no longer be any possible question about it, humanity is perfectly capable of coming up with last-ditch technological innovations to turn things around, whether those are mirrors in space, or tubes in the ocean, or something else. The problem with this approach, and the reason it would be better not to have to rely on it, is that much damage would have to occur first, and the expense would be enormous. Far better to avoid the problem in the first place.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


118 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 41


  # 1891872 28-Oct-2017 14:41
One person supports this post
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

Human beings can do incredible things when sufficiently motivated. I am convinced that if things get so bad the threat is imminent, and there can no longer be any possible question about it, humanity is perfectly capable of coming up with last-ditch technological innovations to turn things around, whether those are mirrors in space, or tubes in the ocean, or something else. The problem with this approach, and the reason it would be better not to have to rely on it, is that much damage would have to occur first, and the expense would be enormous. Far better to avoid the problem in the first place.

 

 

Global GDP per capital is about 10 times more than it was 100 years ago. If we assume that GDP growth continues, then it may be rational to wait until we're better able to afford the costs of change. This is essentially the argument that many developing countries make. The same is generally true for individuals. That is, in the future we'll be able to afford costs that we can't afford today.

 

If the costs and our ability to pay are both increasing, then when is the optimal time to act? If your answer is "now", then please show your working.


 
 
 
 




1073 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 219


  # 1892062 29-Oct-2017 09:01
Send private message

Ouranos:

 

Rikkitic:

 

Human beings can do incredible things when sufficiently motivated. I am convinced that if things get so bad the threat is imminent, and there can no longer be any possible question about it, humanity is perfectly capable of coming up with last-ditch technological innovations to turn things around, whether those are mirrors in space, or tubes in the ocean, or something else. The problem with this approach, and the reason it would be better not to have to rely on it, is that much damage would have to occur first, and the expense would be enormous. Far better to avoid the problem in the first place.

 

 

Global GDP per capital is about 10 times more than it was 100 years ago. If we assume that GDP growth continues, then it may be rational to wait until we're better able to afford the costs of change. This is essentially the argument that many developing countries make. The same is generally true for individuals. That is, in the future we'll be able to afford costs that we can't afford today.

 

If the costs and our ability to pay are both increasing, then when is the optimal time to act? If your answer is "now", then please show your working.

 

 

I think most Governments consider that now is the optimal time to act because GDP growth and financial considerations are not all that relevant when you consider we may already be too late to prevent the extinction of many species on the planet.

 

For example, consider this important article about melting permafrost. This article mentions that:

 

"Beyond the local effects on plant and animal life, the landscape changes can have an important climate change impact, by altering the mix of carbon dioxide and methane that is emitted. Although methane does not persist in the atmosphere for as long as carbon dioxide, it has a far greater heat-trapping ability and can contribute to more rapid warming."

 

"Estimates vary on how much carbon is currently released from thawing permafrost worldwide, but by one calculation emissions over the rest of the century could average about 1.5 billion tons a year, or about the same as current annual emissions from fossil-fuel burning in the United States."

 

(It is 1.5 billion tons a year averaged over the remainder of the century, not 1.5 billions tons a year currently.)

 

"There’s a massive amount of carbon that’s in the ground, that’s built up slowly over thousands and thousands of years,” he said.

 

“It’s been in a freezer, and that freezer is now turning into a refrigerator.”

 

That shows just how important the melting permafrost issue is.


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 900


  # 1892098 29-Oct-2017 11:50
Send private message

By New Zealand spending money we don't have on climate change isnt going to make 1% of 1% of 1% difference to global change.

 

I do believe in cleaning up messes we have made like rivers, and ensuring it never happens again, and that we recycle etcetc, but we shouldnt be on the leading edge of global climate change as we simple cannot afford it.

 

Our closest neighbor, Australia is totally ignoring it, and continually mining coal and opening new coal mines. So if we spend valuable tax dollars on things that effect our export earnings, it will make us very weak internationally.

 

Lets spend our money on cleaning up, on poverty (and not just child poverty), some new infrastructure and when the big countries start spending their tax dollars on it, so can we.


Fat bottom Trump
9947 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4794

Subscriber

  # 1892121 29-Oct-2017 13:20
3 people support this post
Send private message

Is there no way to set an example and give others a nudge without committing economic suicide? Is there nothing we can do to shame Australia and others into more responsible behaviour? Arguing that we shouldn't do anything because it won't make any difference anyway just doesn't sit well with me.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


285 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 182


  # 1892157 29-Oct-2017 15:25
2 people support this post
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

Is there no way to set an example and give others a nudge without committing economic suicide? Is there nothing we can do to shame Australia and others into more responsible behaviour? Arguing that we shouldn't do anything because it won't make any difference anyway just doesn't sit well with me.

 

 

I've got to agree with this.  I see nothing wrong with working towards having a totally 100% clean energy grid and in fact we can do so much cheaper than larger countries because we are a smaller country.  We are already somewhere around 85% and with the Huntly coal fired plant due to be closed by the end of 2018 we will move to around 90% clean, so why not push for the last 10% of fossil fuel burning to end?

 

All we would need to do following that change is to keep up sufficient investment in power production to keep up with our usage and as our transport fleet naturally changes to more and more EVs we will become greener and greener.


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 900


  # 1892166 29-Oct-2017 16:10
Send private message

MarkH67:

 

Rikkitic:

 

Is there no way to set an example and give others a nudge without committing economic suicide? Is there nothing we can do to shame Australia and others into more responsible behaviour? Arguing that we shouldn't do anything because it won't make any difference anyway just doesn't sit well with me.

 

 

I've got to agree with this.  I see nothing wrong with working towards having a totally 100% clean energy grid and in fact we can do so much cheaper than larger countries because we are a smaller country.  We are already somewhere around 85% and with the Huntly coal fired plant due to be closed by the end of 2018 we will move to around 90% clean, so why not push for the last 10% of fossil fuel burning to end?

 

All we would need to do following that change is to keep up sufficient investment in power production to keep up with our usage and as our transport fleet naturally changes to more and more EVs we will become greener and greener.

 

 

Is our electricity generation a climate issue at all? I thought we were quite clean..

 

Don't we now have an abundance of hydro generation? and this be get a huge surplus when Tiwai Point eventually closes as it will.

 

The main issue facing NZ is animal farting isnt it? Burning of fossil fuels in our vehicles will gradually dwindle as more and more EV's arrive.

 

We need a technological solution for the animals. 


118 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 41


  # 1892169 29-Oct-2017 16:27
Send private message

frednz:

 

I think most Governments consider that now is the optimal time to act because GDP growth and financial considerations are not all that relevant when you consider we may already be too late to prevent the extinction of many species on the planet.

 

 

If it is already too late to prevent the extinctions, then - by definition - now is not the optimal time to invest.

 

Anyway, the current "Sixth Mass Extinction" is due to factors such as habitat destruction, intensive farming & cultivation practices, over-hunting, pollution, and the introduction of invasive species. These factors are, of course, substantially due to humans. However, there is surprisingly little evidence to support the often repeated claim that anthropogenic climate change is causing mass extinctions (for example, see "disturbingly limited knowledge" in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3574421/).

 

Meanwhile, financial considerations are always relevant, given that we have competing priorities. Is it really better to spend thousands of dollars on an electric vehicle or solar power generation etc, to address a future problem, rather than spending that money on addressing problems like starvation and poor water quality that are widespread now?


285 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 182


  # 1892176 29-Oct-2017 16:43
One person supports this post
Send private message

Pumpedd:

 

Is our electricity generation a climate issue at all? I thought we were quite clean..

 

Don't we now have an abundance of hydro generation? and this be get a huge surplus when Tiwai Point eventually closes as it will.

 

 

We still need more hydro, it is great for when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining - it can also increase output (opening more floodgates to spin more turbines) to meet peak demand.  It is important to understand that we will need more electricity as we gradually replace petrol & diesel powered cars with battery powered cars.  Mostly the other renewables like wind help maintain good storage of energy in the form of water resting against the dams.

 

I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to address other forms of pollution too, but there would be a certain level of pride in being able to proudly say to the whole world that our entire electricity grid is powered by non-polluting renewables.  Maybe we could shame the US of A to clean up their grid?  I certainly know I'd feel some pride if I lived in a country powered by 100% renewable electricity!


Fat bottom Trump
9947 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4794

Subscriber

  # 1892177 29-Oct-2017 16:43
2 people support this post
Send private message

I think an argument can be made that if spending money on starvation and poor water quality had been done way back when, these wouldn't be crisis situations now. Maybe spending thousands on electric vehicles or solar generation to address a future problem is the way to prevent it becoming a future problem.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


15928 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3137

Trusted

  # 1892250 29-Oct-2017 19:36
One person supports this post
Send private message

Pumpedd:

 

By New Zealand spending money we don't have on climate change isnt going to make 1% of 1% of 1% difference to global change.

 

I do believe in cleaning up messes we have made like rivers, and ensuring it never happens again, and that we recycle etcetc, but we shouldnt be on the leading edge of global climate change as we simple cannot afford it.

 

Our closest neighbor, Australia is totally ignoring it, and continually mining coal and opening new coal mines. So if we spend valuable tax dollars on things that effect our export earnings, it will make us very weak internationally.

 

Lets spend our money on cleaning up, on poverty (and not just child poverty), some new infrastructure and when the big countries start spending their tax dollars on it, so can we.

 

 

I get that, but climate change isn't an issue we can ignore and get onto later. We are small, but if every country said we cant afford it, and we are small it wont matter much, then all those drops in a bucket are gone. This is when we can fight wars, terrorism, poverty and so on , but in  this case,we need ONE world order. Its not a country issue, is an Earth issue.

 

Or we can fight wars when its a race to the limited places to grow food and breathe and locate desalinated water, once we overrule whoever controls it. Sounds extreme? No, its the future reality


15928 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3137

Trusted

  # 1892251 29-Oct-2017 19:38
One person supports this post
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

Is there no way to set an example and give others a nudge without committing economic suicide? Is there nothing we can do to shame Australia and others into more responsible behaviour? Arguing that we shouldn't do anything because it won't make any difference anyway just doesn't sit well with me.

 

 

 

 

We are not the most intelligent being if we cannot do what we have to to survive. Others do, yet they have limited intelligence. Yet we have the intelligence and choose not to.


15928 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3137

Trusted

  # 1892253 29-Oct-2017 19:41
2 people support this post
Send private message

MarkH67:

 

Rikkitic:

 

Is there no way to set an example and give others a nudge without committing economic suicide? Is there nothing we can do to shame Australia and others into more responsible behaviour? Arguing that we shouldn't do anything because it won't make any difference anyway just doesn't sit well with me.

 

 

I've got to agree with this.  I see nothing wrong with working towards having a totally 100% clean energy grid and in fact we can do so much cheaper than larger countries because we are a smaller country.  We are already somewhere around 85% and with the Huntly coal fired plant due to be closed by the end of 2018 we will move to around 90% clean, so why not push for the last 10% of fossil fuel burning to end?

 

All we would need to do following that change is to keep up sufficient investment in power production to keep up with our usage and as our transport fleet naturally changes to more and more EVs we will become greener and greener.

 

 

I have a problem with your post, I can only support it once. We are very green here, energy wise. EV. Make solar worthwhile. The problem is the other suckers who LOVE green energy, after the coal runs out....Looking at you China and USA, and Australia


15928 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3137

Trusted

  # 1892257 29-Oct-2017 19:52
Send private message

Ouranos:

 

frednz:

 

I think most Governments consider that now is the optimal time to act because GDP growth and financial considerations are not all that relevant when you consider we may already be too late to prevent the extinction of many species on the planet.

 

 

If it is already too late to prevent the extinctions, then - by definition - now is not the optimal time to invest.

 

Anyway, the current "Sixth Mass Extinction" is due to factors such as habitat destruction, intensive farming & cultivation practices, over-hunting, pollution, and the introduction of invasive species. These factors are, of course, substantially due to humans. However, there is surprisingly little evidence to support the often repeated claim that anthropogenic climate change is causing mass extinctions (for example, see "disturbingly limited knowledge" in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3574421/).

 

Meanwhile, financial considerations are always relevant, given that we have competing priorities. Is it really better to spend thousands of dollars on an electric vehicle or solar power generation etc, to address a future problem, rather than spending that money on addressing problems like starvation and poor water quality that are widespread now?

 

 

You have to be joking or are unaware of climate change, what it does, and when we reach the threshold when it runs amok, and any money or resources we throw at it are too late. 

 

There was a doco, I will look again, when the global temp reaches 1 degree, then 2, then 3, then 4, 6 8. Very sobering. Divide the globe into eighths. Then fit 7 billion onto that, and feed them.  


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 900


  # 1892283 29-Oct-2017 20:39
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Ouranos:

 

frednz:

 

I think most Governments consider that now is the optimal time to act because GDP growth and financial considerations are not all that relevant when you consider we may already be too late to prevent the extinction of many species on the planet.

 

 

If it is already too late to prevent the extinctions, then - by definition - now is not the optimal time to invest.

 

Anyway, the current "Sixth Mass Extinction" is due to factors such as habitat destruction, intensive farming & cultivation practices, over-hunting, pollution, and the introduction of invasive species. These factors are, of course, substantially due to humans. However, there is surprisingly little evidence to support the often repeated claim that anthropogenic climate change is causing mass extinctions (for example, see "disturbingly limited knowledge" in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3574421/).

 

Meanwhile, financial considerations are always relevant, given that we have competing priorities. Is it really better to spend thousands of dollars on an electric vehicle or solar power generation etc, to address a future problem, rather than spending that money on addressing problems like starvation and poor water quality that are widespread now?

 

 

You have to be joking or are unaware of climate change, what it does, and when we reach the threshold when it runs amok, and any money or resources we throw at it are too late. 

 

There was a doco, I will look again, when the global temp reaches 1 degree, then 2, then 3, then 4, 6 8. Very sobering. Divide the globe into eighths. Then fit 7 billion onto that, and feed them.  

 

 

 

 

It certainly isnt as easy as some believe!!


1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Video game market in New Zealand passes half billion dollar mark
Posted 24-May-2019 16:15


WLG-X festival to celebrate creativity and innovation
Posted 22-May-2019 17:53


HPE to acquire supercomputing leader Cray
Posted 20-May-2019 11:07


Techweek starting around NZ today
Posted 20-May-2019 09:52


Porirua City Council first to adopt new council software solution Datascape
Posted 15-May-2019 12:00


New survey provides insight into schools' technology challenges and plans
Posted 15-May-2019 09:30


Apple Music now available on Alexa devices in Australia and New Zealand
Posted 15-May-2019 09:11


Make a stand against cyberbullying this Pink Shirt Day
Posted 14-May-2019 20:23


Samsung first TV manufacturer to launch the Apple TV App and Airplay 2
Posted 14-May-2019 20:11


Vodafone New Zealand sold
Posted 14-May-2019 07:25


Kordia boosts cloud performance with locally-hosted Microsoft Azure ExpressRoute
Posted 8-May-2019 10:25


Microsoft Azure ExpressRoute in New Zealand opens up faster, more secure internet for Kiwi businesses
Posted 8-May-2019 09:39


Vocus Communications to deliver Microsoft Azure Cloud Solutions through Azure ExpressRoute
Posted 8-May-2019 09:25


Independent NZ feature film #statusPending to premiere during WLG-X
Posted 6-May-2019 22:13


The ultimate dog photoshoot with Nokia 9 PureView #ForgottenDogsofInstagram
Posted 6-May-2019 09:41



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.