First off....you really should READ MY POST BEFORE commenting on it. That would be a big help. I don't say that to be "snippy". After reading your post CLOSELY....I really don't know WHERE you got some of your comments. It certainly WASN'T anything I said in that post...or any other post of mine.
And thus we see a perfect example of the wrong way to approach dealing with this existential problem. The world is full of companies, investment advisers, BAU advocates, rich pukes, and the like who still think this is about making a dollar. This is the same thought process which drags out for decades the use of fossil fuels.
I'll TRY to answer this....but your comment is very "vague"...and I have no idea WHICH "existential problem" you are talking about. Are you talking about over population? Are you talking about not enough food? Not enough water? Not enough energy? All of the above? Are you going to make me guess? Could you be any more vague?
The only "large issue" I was commenting on was the DIRECTION OF ENERGY PRODUCTION (a decrease in fossil fuels....and an increase in renewable energy). By the way....if you DON'T think that renewable energy is the answer....then you have a REALLY, REALLY, short time line. If renewables is NOT the answer.....then earth can continue "business as usual" (BAU) and check out in 150 years or so. That is NOT something I would propose.
Oh....and the "rich pukes"....that was sweet:) I come from a mid/lower income family. I always bought my own car. Went to work at 6 am in the morning BEFORE high school started so I could afford my own car, insurance, and gas....all of which I PAID FOR. I also paid MY OWN WAY through college....yes it took me 5 years....but I paid for all of it myself. You see....I really AM a "fiscal conservative"....and a social moderate. Thus....I am an Independent voter. And no...I am not a "rich puke". Sorry to saw off the limb you so quickly climbed out on.
Coal is going to be a major factor for at least another 20 years and oil/gas much longer than that - because one can make lots of money from them. It is an extreme understatement to say if we allow that to happen it will be a disaster.
Glad to see that you have BACKED OFF your thoughts of coal being in significant use for "many decades"....down to 2. THAT is real progress:). But unfortunately.....coal will be around for a lot longer than I would like (two days is two days too many). Yes...coal will be around in Asia for a lot longer than in the US. As an INDEPENDENT VOTER....I encourage EVERYONE in the US to vote for whoever is the democratic candidate next year....because ALL THE REPUBLICANS want to do away with the EPA....and keep BIG COAL AROUND AS LONG AS THEY CAN. THAT...would not be a good thing. VOTE...VOTE...VOTE.
Coal use in the US has dropped from 50% 5 years ago to 30% now....and it continues to DROP LIKE A ROCK. That is also progress. It also looks like China "may have" peaked in its coal use. THAT...is good news if it is indeed the case.
That light from the train you think you see just shows us how behind schedule the train is running. It will arrive too late for us to board and make our desired destination. BAU approaches will not work - that train left the station 20 years ago. The old ways are dead and we will be too if we don't adapt to reality.
That "light from the train" I see.....is the light from the train that is GOING TO RUN OVER FOSSIL FUELS (again...read the post). BAU would be: Keep using coal, keep using nat gas, keep using oil, and by all means DON'T use many renewables. THAT...is BAU. And THAT...would NOT be a good thing.
I always find it puzzling when folks think that the cost of renewables are independent of fossil fuels. And even more so when they extrapolate those cost curves out to infinity. Much of the cost of renewable infrastructure is directly related to the cost of fossil fuels. All the way from mine equipment, transportation of minerals, manufacturing materials, assembly, further transportation, installation and such. Fossil fuels are a huge part of those costs and they have plummeted. Moore's Law does not apply to renewable infrastructure. A further huge boost to renewable infrastructure has been the huge subsidies put in place to create it from easy money being made available to blow economic bubbles and also direct tax credits.
Where in the world did you come up with me thinking that the cost of renewables are independent of fossil fuels? ESPECIALLY WHEN I SAID THAT COST WILL ULTIMATELY KILL FOSSIL FUELS. That's a head scratcher.
COST IS CLEARLY a HUGE deal between fossil fuels and renewables. HUGE. And it is going to KILL FOSSIL FUELS. Look back ten years to see where renewables were. Now....extrapolate forward another 10 years (even using a SMALLER annual decreases). FOSSIL FUELS ARE GOING TO GET KILLED ON PRICE/COST. Can I say it any more clearly than that? THAT...is not "BAU".
Keep in mind....that FOSSIL FUELS gets a LOT MORE INCENTIVES than renewables. If I were king (King Donald Trump?....yikkkkes).....I would have a "fee and dividend" system like that proposed by Dr. Hansen. In other words....more "fully price" actual COST of fossil fuels. Yes...fossil fuels ARE USED for mining (now...but NOT in the distant future). Fossil fuels are GOING AWAY. We can quibble over how long that will take....but they ARE GOING AWAY.
Even if one for some reason one believes that we can run this global civilization completely on renewables (a bat shit crazy idea in my opinion - it is just head stuck in the sand BAU thinking) it is obvious that adding 2+ billion to the global population would have a huge negative impact on that idea. Not to mention that such a change over would take decades to execute. And that would be far too late in any case.
I have some disappointing news for you: If this "global civilization" CAN'T run on renewables at some point in the future....we.....BY DEFINITION...... ARE TOAST. That apparently comes as a news flash to you. Sorry to ruin your day. Since we have burned through millions of years of fossil fuels....in only a couple hundred years....the math is NOT in favor of using fossil fuels for much longer:) Mankind is VERY YOUNG....and VERY STUPID (remember....Donald Trump IS leading the Republican Party...need I say more how stupid we American's are?).
Fortunately.....there are many companies that NOW PRODUCE some "oils" in a renewable process (from algae). In fact....the whole ENERGY SECTOR is FULL of companies trying all sorts of things. In 50 years.....people will look back at the "renewables" we are now using and they will likely look like "wale oil" (incredibly outdated). Should be have started on this journey back in the 1960's when a group of scientists warned US President Lyndon Johnson of the future dangers? Yes. Should be have started in 1988 when Dr. Hansen warned the US Congress of the future dangers? Yes. Should be have started in the early 1990's when the United Nations first warned the world? Yes. Should we work hard
NOW even though there is a FAKE NEWS CHANNEL (FOX NEWS) that WE ALLOW to lie and mislead about the dangers of global warming for the last 25 years?
HELL YES.Renewable technology is not on the critical path to a solution to climate change, carrying capacity and over population. It will be useful if we 'solve' those problems certainly, but we do a huge disservice to our chances of solving them when we encourage folks to assume there is an easy way out of the dilemma we are in. We have never yet put serious effort towards the critical path issues and until we do we have no chance of solving the core problems.
Renewable technology IS indeed....ONE of the solutions to climate change and carrying capacity. It is NOT a solution for over population (unless we can get the solar panels to somehow magically disperse IUD's or condoms or birth control pills to the like of Bristol Palin and everyone else:).
Over population IS the 64,000 pound gorilla that NOBODY wants to talk about:
http://climatechangegraphs.blogspot.com/2012/08/world-population-70000-bc-to-2010.htmlI put that chart on my website FOR A REASON. People SHOULD BE terrified at the population of earth NOW....and HORRIFIED by increasing it.
There are MANY ISSUES that I did NOT deal with in my last post....the one that you commented on. Maybe you were having a "bad day". Maybe your soccer team lost. I have no idea. I also have NO IDEA where you got some of the things you "thought" I said....or am (sorry to disappoint you IF you though I am a "rich puke"
Humanity has to deal with a LOT of things for us humans to advance as a CIVILIATION (being "civilized"....in our communication would be a "good start").
The issues we face are many: (1) population is likely the biggest (2) global warming (3) income inequality (the economic systems have a LONG WAY TO GO.......the "incentives" and "disincentives" are NOT well aligned (4) EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION (humans are HORRIBLE at it), (5) better legal system, etc...etc...etc. The ONLY issue I was dealing with was the DEATH OF FOSSIL FUELS....and the RISE OF RENEWABLE ENERGY (in MANY FORMS).