The Green New Deal

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Seems unlike or air travel will no be what we know today. Maybe recreation of a real rail network would address some of that

The rail network is feasible. Eliminate all the diesel electric and convert to all electric. Don't know if they could run these off of batteries but they could put up catenary across the country. Going to need a lot of electric power. Need more wind turbines and solar panel farms.

There are a lot of options, but a lot of resistance to change. Nuclear is still viable.

[HONDO74]

Seems unlike or air travel will no be what we know today. Maybe recreation of a real rail network would address some of that

The rail network is feasible. Eliminate all the diesel electric and convert to all electric. Don't know if they could run these off of batteries but they could put up catenary across the country. Going to need a lot of electric power. Need more wind turbines and solar panel farms.

There are a lot of options, but a lot of resistance to change. Nuclear is still viable.

To me Nuclear would be they way to go. Need some new technology to work out some of the problems. Problem is too many people are scared of it.

[HONDO74]

The push to eliminate fossil fuel in 10 year will be interesting. Doing a little research on just New York and how they derive their electricity is enlightening. See the chart below from 2016. New York better get to clicking to blanket the state with Wind Turbines and Solar Panels. All those buildings and homes will have to be converted to all electric to accomplish the GND.

[robert.]

strange pie chart. you have gas & oil. gas, oil. Before we look for cleaner energy. Why not use less. Turn the lights off in NYC. Time's square has to many lights. Most the buildings in big cities are always lit up and empty at night. Turn them off.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

The rail network is feasible. Eliminate all the diesel electric and convert to all electric. Don't know if they could run these off of batteries but they could put up catenary across the country. Going to need a lot of electric power. Need more wind turbines and solar panel farms.

There are a lot of options, but a lot of resistance to change. Nuclear is still viable.

To me Nuclear would be they way to go. Need some new technology to work out some of the problems. Problem is too many people are scared of it.

That fear factor is unfortunately just like all too many other subjects. Some smattering of facts and then a lot of fake facts and scare tactics applied. But, also basically no new designs have been put into practice or permitted to be tested for decades.

Other really big problem -self-inflicted- is waste. Unlike the rest of world, the US does not recycle fuel which could be done to ~95% efficiency - we store it instead.

[Roy]

They had a piece on 60 Minutes about tidal energy being tapped off the Scottish shore. It takes care of their needs, but it's not as developed as wind and solar yet.

[John Webster]

About 30 million years ago the atmospheric CO2 content was 800 parts per million. Today it is around 400 ppm. Shouldn't we be boosting CO2 production to get back to that level?

[HONDO74]

I hope all you members her have your life in order, BECAUSE......

‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?'" Ocasio-Cortez said.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y/, spoke out on Monday about the urgency to take on climate change, comparing it to World War II.

Speaking at an event commemorating Martin Luther King Day, Ocasio-Cortez expressed how the issue of climate change is a “generational” issue that younger people are more focused on.

“Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: ‘The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?'" Ocasio-Cortez said.

The Democratic Socialist said the fight against climate change is war and that it’s “our World War II.”

[NJPiney]

Every side of a debate has it's idiots. Basing one's argument on them is a sign of a weak stance. Turning it into a partisan attack only identifies one's response as a partisan one, rather than one based on knowledge.

[Mitch]

Too many people are believin' in global warming as climate change instituted and caused by man. I have forever believed that it is a natural phenomena; that it has happened before over the millenium, and is happening again. Folks would be better served to educate themselves in what is really happening now. Polar Shift.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Every side of a debate has it's idiots. Basing one's argument on them is a sign of a weak stance. Turning it into a partisan attack only identifies one's response as a partisan one, rather than one based on knowledge.

And we're running short on knowledge...........

[HONDO74]

So far every democrat that has said they will be a candidate for president is supporting the "Green New Seal' along with free collage education, Medicare for everyone and a guaranteed income for everyone.

Where were all these democrats when I first started working. Back then it was "ask not what your country can do for you but what can you do for your country". I apparently voted the wrong way back then.

[NJPiney]

Every side of a debate has it's idiots. Basing one's argument on them is a sign of a weak stance. Turning it into a partisan attack only identifies one's response as a partisan one, rather than one based on knowledge.

And we're running short on knowledge...........

Unfortunately, what many attempt to pass for knowledge is cherry-picked from the net or other sources. That which substantiates their preconceived notions (which are usually based on their politics) is fact, and that which doesn't is dismissed.

Too many people are believin' in global warming as climate change instituted and caused by man. I have forever believed that it is a natural phenomena; that it has happened before over the millenium, and is happening again. Folks would be better served to educate themselves in what is really happening now. Polar Shift.

You are absolutely correct in that climate change is a natural phenomena. But that fact does not preclude man having an effect on it. Extinction is likewise a natural phenomena. That hasn't precluded man from wiping out species, which I'm sure we can all agree has happened.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

That hasn't precluded man from wiping out species, which I'm sure we can all agree has happened.

I'm pretty sure that some would deny that has happened and that some would also not care at all.

There are a lot of people that very adamantly deny reality and proven factual science every day.

[NJPiney]

That hasn't precluded man from wiping out species, which I'm sure we can all agree has happened.

I'm pretty sure that some would deny that has happened and that some would also not care at all.

There are a lot of people that very adamantly deny reality and proven factual science every day.

Now now. Let's not bring religion into this!