After a little reflection, I'm thinking we might be missing a good point. When our insurance goes up like this there ought to be a statement indicating it went up due to climate change and the increasing risk of wildfires. I don't suppose the insurance company wants to do that, but someone ought to.
Great post, Bill. Our major problem in the United States is GREED The gas and oil industry, the private power industry, bankers, brokers, money lenders, "equity" (a real misnomer, there is nothing equitable about them) managers, venture capitalists; all care first, foremost, and always about themselves. They have young children and grandchildren? Screw them I'm leaving them a fortune when I die. The Earth will be barely livable? tough patooties, it's livable now and I'm alive.
To add to the problem too many of our legislators have caught the same bug. They have their hands out for campaign money, personal money, family money. Yes, some are incorruptible, but they are, unfortunately in the minority.
The masses of citizens don't understand and therefore don't believe in science. As an educated scientist, myself, it strains me to hear - yeah, yeah, that's today but tomorrow, it will change - look how many different vaccines we had for Covid - the scientists couldn't make up their mind. I try to explain about how often viruses mutate, about how new discoveries are made that changes what we knew yesterday. They don't trust scientists, mainly because they don't understand and they want everything to be simple black or white. Some European countries are different; but here in the US no,.
Im reading 'Unsettled: What Climate Science Tell Us, What it Doesn't and Why It Matters' by Dr. Steven E. Koonin. Read that and see what you think. This is an incredibly complex and multifaceted issue that has been (like any global problem requiring global solution the Davos will invariably latch onto like flies on poo) highly politicized. Judith is another climatologist worth reading, for a critical perspective/ The US national debt is currently over 30 trillion dollars (It was 8 when Clinton left office). We have much bigger actual problems
So, if climate change will be costly, -- and it will be, already has been -- why not join those who advocate for the most cost - effective way of reducing the costs, a tax on net CO2 and methane emissions?
I think it's all good to have people made mindful of what the climate change is costing us. Perhaps a force to deal with the fossil fuel industry? I think it's hard to shake the fact that insurance companies have taken climate change firmly into their accounting for the risks they do insure
If we support green energy success, like CA did with Eco Wave Power in ALTA SEA PORT, LA, we will demonstrate 100% renewable is totally positive and possible. Therefore the 7 trillions that subsidize an inefficient enterprise will not be necessary but our portfolios must to be divested. Sand batteries is another important tech to incorporate to help the grid until rebuilt
The 38 trillions or billions are no problem bc we pay them, like we pay for the war for oil and any other financial fight in the world
After a little reflection, I'm thinking we might be missing a good point. When our insurance goes up like this there ought to be a statement indicating it went up due to climate change and the increasing risk of wildfires. I don't suppose the insurance company wants to do that, but someone ought to.
Great post, Bill. Our major problem in the United States is GREED The gas and oil industry, the private power industry, bankers, brokers, money lenders, "equity" (a real misnomer, there is nothing equitable about them) managers, venture capitalists; all care first, foremost, and always about themselves. They have young children and grandchildren? Screw them I'm leaving them a fortune when I die. The Earth will be barely livable? tough patooties, it's livable now and I'm alive.
To add to the problem too many of our legislators have caught the same bug. They have their hands out for campaign money, personal money, family money. Yes, some are incorruptible, but they are, unfortunately in the minority.
The masses of citizens don't understand and therefore don't believe in science. As an educated scientist, myself, it strains me to hear - yeah, yeah, that's today but tomorrow, it will change - look how many different vaccines we had for Covid - the scientists couldn't make up their mind. I try to explain about how often viruses mutate, about how new discoveries are made that changes what we knew yesterday. They don't trust scientists, mainly because they don't understand and they want everything to be simple black or white. Some European countries are different; but here in the US no,.
Got my home owner's insurance premium bill today. It's 3X what it was last year! That 19% cost you mentioned might be here before 2050!
Water vapor, clouds, ice, snow create 30% albedo which makes the Earth cooler not warmer.
W/o GHE there is no WV and no water and Earth goes lunarific, a barren rock ball, 400 K lit side, 100 K dark refuting a warming GHE.
Ubiquitous GHE heat balance graphics don’t plus violate LoT.
Kinetic heat transfer processes of contiguous atmospheric molecules render a surface black body and it’s “extra” upwelling GHE energy impossible.
Since GHE is bogus and CAGW a scam alarmists must resort to fear mongering lies, lawsuits, censorship and violence.
Im reading 'Unsettled: What Climate Science Tell Us, What it Doesn't and Why It Matters' by Dr. Steven E. Koonin. Read that and see what you think. This is an incredibly complex and multifaceted issue that has been (like any global problem requiring global solution the Davos will invariably latch onto like flies on poo) highly politicized. Judith is another climatologist worth reading, for a critical perspective/ The US national debt is currently over 30 trillion dollars (It was 8 when Clinton left office). We have much bigger actual problems
More evidence of the dollars-and-cents kind. Good - this can be useful for convincing the undecided.
So, if climate change will be costly, -- and it will be, already has been -- why not join those who advocate for the most cost - effective way of reducing the costs, a tax on net CO2 and methane emissions?
I think it's all good to have people made mindful of what the climate change is costing us. Perhaps a force to deal with the fossil fuel industry? I think it's hard to shake the fact that insurance companies have taken climate change firmly into their accounting for the risks they do insure
If we support green energy success, like CA did with Eco Wave Power in ALTA SEA PORT, LA, we will demonstrate 100% renewable is totally positive and possible. Therefore the 7 trillions that subsidize an inefficient enterprise will not be necessary but our portfolios must to be divested. Sand batteries is another important tech to incorporate to help the grid until rebuilt
The 38 trillions or billions are no problem bc we pay them, like we pay for the war for oil and any other financial fight in the world
Thank you Bill, a lot to take in!
I know! Let's make the coal and O&G industries pay for all the damages!
Bad news but then good news! Lots of useful and interesting info. I'm sending this to my email list of 70-plus.