Originally Posted by mcbear
I understand. My point was that there is not a need for the Doomsday scenario.
Here is a quote from the Chairman of the Kentucky Public Service Commission. He is about as NeoCon Republican as you can get. I have also known him since he was in the fourth grade. It is a thought that I believe shows a reality that there is no need to look at Draconian solutions when the power of everyone working together can provide balanced solutions that address the part of this Climate problem that man affects.
Kentucky Public Service Commission
Well, with current technologies, a tax/penalty/cap and trade carbon program (whichever it becomes for the power industry) that doubles the costs of coal fired generation, you'll redispatch, add reduction technology, or replace about 10% of your emissions of CO2. If more reduction is required, more cost. Twice your bill and only 10% reduction. That is today, again, we are an innovative people, costs will improve over time, but the increase will be significant and will impact everyone's economics. It will take considerable time for this innovation, and the emissions will continue while we figure it out. Nonetheless, if it must be done, we will pay it.
That only addresses my industry, more efficient cars only help if they replace others (a general increase in the number on the road is what is occurring). Those industries that burn stuff to make stuff will have to raise their prices to cover those costs (or go under/stop). And, this will help level off our contribution, maybe reduce it to a degree, but as long as we keep making so many people, the result will be more stuff being made for the same CO2.
If you buy into the water vapor contribution, you have much more work to do. Ever wonder what it is rolling out of the top of those cooling towers at some power plants (including many non-carbon emitting nukes)? Water vapor. Those scrubbers that clean up the acid rain thingy spray limestone mud through the flue gas, with, you guessed it, water vapor rolling out of the stacks. Waste heat from the production of steam at coal, oil, gas, and nuclear plants is rejected into our bodies of water, and the waste is 2/3's of the heat generated (for every light bulb of electricity you get, put two lightbulbs in your local lake and turn them on). If water vapor is also to be controlled, you'll pretty much have to stop producing heat to make power.
Again, we are an innovative people, we'll adapt to the costs and/or changes to our lifestyles, and we must if current consensus is proven to be true. We shouldn't let those costs/changes blind us away from any particular possible cause or contribution, but they should temper our panic and acceptance of theories which may be incorrect.