Solutions/Strategies to encourage change of Global Warming?

Question

yeah.. I really need help.

Answer 1

What to do about Global Warming?  Ignore it?  Kill whole economies over it?  How about change the economics of Renewable Energy? Central to this article is the subject of the energy supply and shortfall.

If Al Gore is correct about man’s footprint related to Global Warming then ignoring it doesn’t serve humanity’s interest. Collapsing the world’s economies also doesn’t serve humanities’ or the planet’s best interest. Case in point:  with global economic collapse there would be fewer assets available to take care of the poor and to treat human waste, thus opening us up to vulnerabilities of disease and ultimate global hardship. This leaves us with a choice: pursue nuclear

Energy, or change the economics of renewable energy to decrease man’s footprint on Global warming.  Since it is common knowledge that environmentalists have ruled out nuclear energy, let’s talk about the concept of changing the economics around renewable energy.

Granted I’m a “nobody” (now), but the “some bodies” have, in the past concluded that renewables aren’t directly economically viable to replace grid power 24/7/365 in populated areas.  I base this on the historical fact. After the 2000 energy debacle in California, renewables weren’t the chosen means for the new power plants, even though California has a history of being on the cutting edge of environmental concerns.

Senator Diane Feinstein has concluded that a mandate asking for 20% of distributed grid power to come from renewables would somehow change the economics in a positive way. Utilities would gladly pay customers (for peak use) who would invest in renewables for their unused energy.  The cost of creating the delta of peak power verses base needs isn’t covered by the base rate sales price.  Her mandate assured those who chose to install renewables that they’d have a place to sell the energy that exceeded their immediate needs.  Another advantage for those who choose to install renewables is that they don’t have to store energy for a time when their needs exceed their generating capacity. What I haven’t seen addressed is what happens when what the customer supplies to the grid exceeds what they later consume? Maybe that is why those who choose to install renewables don’t allow (or install means for) excess capacity.

Unfortunately, it appears that those who can afford to pay for their energy needs (for many years in advance) aren’t even giving renewables a nod.

If they were interested, maybe we could cover the energy shortfall and more.  What a concept! Where is the hang up? Could the problem be that these people are looking for a return ON their investment (=$$) not just a return OF their investment?  Another theory I have heard is when the need is great enough someone else will fix the problem.  What happens if this technology is the best there is?   I say go for it. If better comes along, it can be incorporated.

        Is it true that building enough capacity to enable change-over to renewable energy infrastructure for just the U.S. in short order would bankrupt any entity?  As when electrification of the U.S. 1st started it took time to generate the capacity. Since the main cost of solar cells is energy to purify the silicon, the capacity has to be available both on the energy & purify side.  Creating capacity cost s & having too much capacity causes companies to fold.

In previous write-ups to both sides of the aisle, I have spelled out step by step what it would take to finance the changeover to renewable energy.  From the responses I have received (and with a mind towards the book The Ugly American), I have concluded that if you are interested in the solution you will ask me for it or you are not interested and you will come up with an answer yourselves. It is obvious that the masses have shown they are willing to pay a premium for the convenience of energy. They will also pay a premium for comfort, recreation, prestige and safety. Anything else, they wish the government to subsidize or for business to handle.  Subsidize here is defined as monetary support to cover costs to create an item for yourself without economics of scale.

      I am curious, what is your solution to change the economics of renewables?    Does your solution include as varied a menu as: distribution, weather, sellable spin-off benefits, and go as far as illegal aliens? The question boils down to how big of a picture are you willing to look at?

     Here is some bait: my solution includes enjoying a higher standard of living all while creating the funds to pay for renewable energy INFRASTRUCTURE.

Do I have your attention?

Answer 2

Possible Strategies:

- Drink beer instead of water

- Shower every three days

- Don't work, stay at home to avoid using transport

- Move out to the bush to avoid using electricity

- Burn firewood for warmth

- Hunt your own food to avoid encouraging supermarket chains

- Shower in beer

Answer 3

ignore answers over one sentence...

Answer 4

Vote democratic