Re: [Phys-L] carbon wars

[John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>]

On 10/05/2014 10:03 PM, Folkerts, Timothy J wrote:

> This process is not helped by hyperbole.  

OK, fair enough.

I shouldn't have said "uninhabitable".

> people are adaptable and can live about anywhere

That is going too far in the other direction.  If the wet 
bulb temperature goes over 35 C for very long, people tend 
to keel over from heat stress.  That's not going to change
by adaptation any time soon.  There is already evidence
that climate change is reducing health and productivity in
tropical countries.

We could have an interesting discussion about uninhabitable
versus "mostly" uninhabitable, and extinct versus "almost"
extinct ... but even so, that's probably not the optimal 
way to frame the discussion. (*)

I reckon the economic argument is the most rational:  Why
why why is it that small businesses have to pay somebody
to carry away their trash, but huge businesses such as
ore smelters, paper mills, and oil companies think they
should be allowed to externalize and socialize the harm
done by their waste streams?

If we forced the carbon fuel industry to internalize even
a smallish fraction of the cost of carbon pollution, it
would make them uncompetitive with renewable energy in
virtually all applications.  There are some sticky questions
about how fast you can scale up the solar electricity
industry and the biofuel industry, but I see no fundamental
problems ... and no viable alternatives.





(*) OTOH it might lead to some interesting science fiction
stories.