Australian Politics Forum - Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky
Reply #60 - Feb 13^th, 2014 at 8:20pm

[... continued]

ENA, however, dismissed the off the grid scenario because of the higher capital cost over business as usual. But it missed the point – the CSIRO modelling suggested that despite the higher upfront costs, the bills to consumers in this scenario would be cheaper, which is what will motivate them to take action in the first place. That is what is motivating households to spend money on rooftop solar, because ultimately it will deliver cheaper electricity. If the ENA can succeed in removing the remaining incentives, then the payback for such investment lengthens, making the investment less attractive.

The ENA describes the pro-sumer scenario, where nearly half of all generation is supplied on-site, on rooftops and at business sites, as “irrational”.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21603
Gender: male

Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky
Reply #61 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 10:40am

# wrote on Feb 13^th, 2014 at 8:10pm:

lee wrote on Feb 13^th, 2014 at 8:08pm:

muso wrote on Feb 13^th, 2014 at 5:32pm:

Last time I checked, Obama was not a scientist

Maybe he should sack some science advisors. Wink

Why?

SOTU is a carefully crafted document, created by his horde of media advisors, who rely on his advisors, including John Holdren, chief science advisor. It is inconceivalble the climate change part of his speech did not have input from Holdren.

If Holdren did not insist on "the debate is settled" being excluded, then he failed in his duty.

Unless you think SOTU was an off the cuff piece crafted on a table napkin.

Back to top

IP Logged

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky
Reply #62 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 12:44pm

lee wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 10:40am:

# wrote on Feb 13^th, 2014 at 8:10pm:

lee wrote on Feb 13^th, 2014 at 8:08pm:

muso wrote on Feb 13^th, 2014 at 5:32pm:

Last time I checked, Obama was not a scientist

Maybe he should sack some science advisors. Wink

Why?

SOTU is a carefully crafted document, created by his horde of media advisors, who rely on his advisors, including John Holdren, chief science advisor. It is inconceivalble the climate change part of his speech did not have input from Holdren.

If Holdren did not insist on "the debate is settled" being excluded, then he failed in his duty.

Unless you think SOTU was an off the cuff piece crafted on a table napkin.

# wrote on Feb 13^th, 2014 at 7:55pm:

... Given that scientists have repeatedly shown that the vast majority are as certain as science ever gets about global warming and its causes, then his “The debate is settled. Climate change is a fact.” sums up the situation accurately enough.
...

SOTU is a political speech, not a scientific treatise. From that perspective, the President's statement is the effective truth.

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21603 Gender:	Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky Reply #63 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 12:49pm # wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 12:44pm: SOTU is a political speech, not a scientific treatise. From that perspective, the President's statement is the effective truth. So we have truth and effective truth?
Back to top	IP Logged

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky
Reply #64 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 1:01pm

lee wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 12:49pm:

# wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 12:44pm:

SOTU is a political speech, not a scientific treatise. From that perspective, the President's statement is the effective truth.

So we have truth and effective truth?

Do you deny that, within the limits of scientific uncertainty, what the President said is true?

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21603 Gender:	Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky Reply #65 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 1:46pm # wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 1:01pm: Do you deny that, within the limits of scientific uncertainty, what the President said is true? Do you admit effective truth = propaganda?
Back to top	IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky Reply #66 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 5:46pm Lee, This is thread is about over-reliance on natural gas. It's not for your Church of Denial sermons.
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky
Reply #67 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 5:57pm

lee wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 10:40am:

If Holdren did not insist on "the debate is settled" being excluded, then he failed in his duty.

Unless you think SOTU was an off the cuff piece crafted on a table napkin.

You can't communicate science to the general public using scientific language about 95-99% certainties.

As far as the basics of climate science are concerned, it's appropriate to use the term fact, just as it's appropriate to say that it's a fact that the Earth orbits the sun.

If on the other hand, you want to concentrate on those aspects that have lower degrees of certainty, then the appropriate language is "we're not sure", so for example -

We know for a fact that increased greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere causes increased warming. That's a consequence of the fact that existing greenhouse gases cause warming. However, we are not sure if this will increase the severity of tropical cyclones significantly in the next 30 years.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21603 Gender:	Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky Reply #68 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 6:05pm muso wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 5:46pm: Lee, This is thread is about over-reliance on natural gas. It's not for your Church of Denial sermons. And not IPCC being less than 5% certain of the warming in the short term.
Back to top	IP Logged

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky
Reply #69 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 7:07pm

lee wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 1:46pm:

# wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 1:01pm:

Do you deny that, within the limits of scientific uncertainty, what the President said is true?

Do you admit effective truth = propaganda?

I'll take that as a 'no' from you. There's no need for you to get hysterical, lee.
# wrote on Feb 13^th, 2014 at 7:55pm:

... Given that scientists have repeatedly shown that the vast majority are as certain as science ever gets about global warming and its causes, then his “The debate is settled. Climate change is a fact.” sums up the situation accurately enough.
...

Back to top

IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky Reply #70 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 7:52pm lee wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 6:05pm: muso wrote on Feb 14^th, 2014 at 5:46pm: Lee, This is thread is about over-reliance on natural gas. It's not for your Church of Denial sermons. And not IPCC being less than 5% certain of the warming in the short term. Can I join in? Blessed be the Lord Monckton.
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21603
Gender: male

Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky
Reply #71 - Feb 14^th, 2014 at 8:57pm

Funny. And I wasn't even the one who introduced SOTU.

Don't you like the footer from AR5 SPM, Table SPM.2, which I included in its entirety, in "Interesting or not" thread?

If their confidence is less than 5 - 95% confidence level, doesn't that make it a no-confidence level?

Nothing to do with Monckton, sorry to disappoint.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Feb 14^th, 2014 at 9:09pm by lee »

IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: Overreliance on Natural Gas: Risky Reply #72 - Feb 15^th, 2014 at 9:25am I think it's about time this thread was cleaned of all posts that have nothing to do with over-reliance of natural gas.
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged