Lest you thought that whole climate thing was solved already....

[Doug MacIVER]

read this today, after Dr. Maue pointed out to accomplish could cost 1/2 quadrillion$$$.no clue given where that figure comes from but falls in the doomsday range.http://csas.ei.columbia.edu/2017/07/18/young-peoples-burden-requirement-of-negative-co2-emissions/ clue in video

 

[georgepds]

I had to walk away about 25 posts ago, but couldn't resist poking my head back in, with predictable thread progression: Woodgeek never ceases to impress me with his breadth and depth of research and knowledge, on any subject he chooses to tackle. He might even make an environmentalist out of this conservative, someday.

I always thought good stewardship of the environment was a conservative position.

Agree wholeheartedly about Woodgeek

 

[Ashful]

I always thought good stewardship of the environment was a conservative position.

Agree wholeheartedly about Woodgeek

It's a dichotomy, with both leftists and conservatives claiming domain, while disagreeing on what "good stewardship" means.

 

[begreen]

It's a dichotomy, with both leftists and conservatives claiming domain, while disagreeing on what "good stewardship" means.

How so? Can you explain?

 

[Highbeam]

Being in support of environmental conservation is not the same as being a political conservative.

 

[Ashful]

How so? Can you explain?

That's tough to do, without agitating folks on both sides, or having this thread closed.

 

[Highbeam]

How's this for a continuum? Preservation to conservation to exploitation. Conservation includes utilization of a resource.

 

[jebatty]

Being in support of environmental conservation is not the same as being a political conservative.

I fully agree. New definitions are needed for political groupings.

 

[WoodyIsGoody]

Being in support of environmental conservation is not the same as being a political conservative.

Really?

Isn't that kinda like saying:

"Raping is wrong and should be punished"?

 

[Highbeam]

Really?

Isn't that kinda like saying:

"Raping is wrong and should be punished"?

So are you saying that what I said was obvious and true?

You'd be surprised how many people think conservation (in the environmental context) means not using a resource. Even more make the assumption that a political conservative is in favor of clearcutting the country and polluting the streams!

 

[begreen]

Yes, there are a lot of fishermen and others that are quite conservative but firmly believe in preserving and protecting natural resources. I ran into this in eastern OR when staying with some BLM scientists. They see both sides frequently.

 

[woodgeek]

I think that environment concerns are naturally apolitical and popular. This is why Nixon started the EPA, and the Clean Air Act (and its revisions) were enacted and enforced by leaders from both parties.

It is clear that environmental concerns aka 'environmentalism' has been politicized over the last ten years or so (e.g. McCain was a climate hawk before 2008), but I think that is more about the agenda of the people doing the politicization (both side have played a role) than anything to do with the environment or the science involved.

It is certainly likely that global warming is an easier target for political manipulation by virtue of its abstract nature. People can see a forest cut down, smell and see smog in the air, smell exhaust and see diesel soot, see dead fish in a harbor or a river on fire...ergo Clean Air and Water acts. AGW by comparison is invisible and can only be detected statistically with a large sample of satellite based data.

 

[begreen]

We have evidence of what may be climate change right in our front yard. 110' coastal redwood just can't make it anymore with consecutively hotter drier summers. I see several other trees giving up in our area too.

 

[georgepds]

I read the Epa law was passed because states were ineffective

Speaking from what I remember, the public waterways were open sewers before the epa,by comparison those same ways I'm thinking of could be the garden of Eden supply now

 

[EatenByLimestone]

I don't believe the environment is a liberal or conservative issue. We all live here.

i think it's when politicians get involved that ears turn off. When neighbors discuss mutual problems ears stay open.

 

[WoodyIsGoody]

I don't believe the environment is a liberal or conservative issue.

Well, it's pretty difficult to convince voters your party is pro-environment when every environmental regulation that is rolled back is cheered and every new environmental protection is jeered.

Oh, wait, that's right, we should leave protection of the environment to the free market. Yes, that's the ticket.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Its hard to believe what a few degrees difference can make , until you see that a mere 2 Degrees C can wipe out large chunks of coral reef. In 2016 29% of the worlds coral reefs were lost. Life expectancy on most of the rest is about 30 years.

 

[woodgeek]

Its hard to believe what a few degrees difference can make , until you see that a mere 2 Degrees C can wipe out large chunks of coral reef. In 2016 29% of the worlds coral reefs were lost. Life expectancy on most of the rest is about 30 years.

Time to build some NEW reefs....

like rebuilding the reefs that used to run up and down the US East Coast, before they were all literally dredged up and sold in the 1800s.

https://www.billionoysterproject.org/

 

[Highbeam]

Yes, there are a lot of fishermen and others that are quite conservative but firmly believe in preserving and protecting natural resources.QUOTE]

So you have a fisherman that is quite conservative but also firmly believes firmly in preservation?

You see how that confuses people? This guy who claims to be into preservation just stole a fish from the natural environment and killed it.

Conservation does not equal preservation. I am the conservation guy that wants to responsibly harvest fish/deer/firewood in such a way that the resource is not depleted. Preservation means I don't fish, as in, preserve every bit of what is there.

Am I just confused about the definitions or do these scientists screw it up too? In your quote above, replacing the word preserving with the word conserving would make the world right!

 

[woodgeek]

I have read many **scientific** articles that try to assign value to the goods (e.g. fish, drinking water) and services (e.g. pollution scrubbing by the atmosphere, etc) provided 'for free' by the earth, and it usually comes to a rather hefty figure, comparable to GDP.

The purpose, of course, is that people tend to value things, and sustain them and see them as important, in proportion to their dollar value. What is the 'value' of the free rain, free sunshine and all the fishes in the sea. Zero? or priceless?

 

[georgepds]

replacing the word preserving with the word conserving would make the world right!

I don't know.. sounds like semantics more than any real difference .. but I get what you mean. If we extract resources from the environment in such a way that the the environment in more or less preserved in it's original state, that's conservation/environmentalism

That said the government plays a role in conservation. If I'm in business, producing a pollutant as a by product, I'd have to dump my byproduct in the nearest stream, just like everyone else who makes a similar product, to stay competitive. But, if the government says , to me and all my competitors, no, no dumping allowed, it puts all at the same economic advantage, and preserves the common good: the clean stream

That's the reasoning from the view of the producer. From the innocent bystander just trying to fish the stream, or get a drink of water, it's protection of the common good

 

[georgepds]

I have read many **scientific** articles that try to assign value to the goods (e.g. fish, drinking water) and services (e.g. pollution scrubbing by the atmosphere, etc) provided 'for free' by the earth, and it usually comes to a rather hefty figure, comparable to GDP.

The purpose, of course, is that people tend to value things, and sustain them and seem them as important, in proportion to their dollar value. What is the 'value' of the free rain, free sunshine and all the fishes in the sea. Zero? or priceless?

$5.99 / lb for haddock at the Market basket
$6.59/ 1000 gallons for water in the city of Boston
Sunshine buys me ~240 kwh/year-m^2 or ~ $48 worth of electricity

Rain is interesting.. in the East I can collect it in a rain barrel and use it at my discretion, in some places in the West I hear that I'm a lawbreaker if I try to use a rain barrel

So.. a little between zero and priceless


~~~~~~~~~edit~~~~~~~~~~
a note on CO2 cost courtesy of utility dive

In 1997, Minnesota set the cost at between $0.30/ton and $3.10/ton of carbon dioxide, and it still caps at less than $5/ton. The federal cost of carbon ranges from $11/ton to $57/ton, reflecting social costs, and is frequently set at around $36/ton.

http://www.utilitydive.com/news/min...ing-states-cost-of-carbon-calculation/447612/

 

[begreen]

So you have a fisherman that is quite conservative but also firmly believes firmly in preservation?

You see how that confuses people? This guy who claims to be into preservation just stole a fish from the natural environment and killed it.

Conservation does not equal preservation. I am the conservation guy that wants to responsibly harvest fish/deer/firewood in such a way that the resource is not depleted. Preservation means I don't fish, as in, preserve every bit of what is there.

Am I just confused about the definitions or do these scientists screw it up too? In your quote above, replacing the word preserving with the word conserving would make the world right!

Not really, his politics are conservative, but the person I am thinking about releases most of what he catches. Preservation does not mean do not fish. It means keep the balance, don't overfish to the point of species depletion. The plains Indians harvested buffalo regularly and yet the species thrived by the millions until the western world slaughtered them senselessly by the millions in a matter of a decade or two.

 

[Highbeam]

I don't know.. sounds like semantics more than any real difference .. but I get what you mean. If we extract resources from the environment in such a way that the the environment in more or less preserved in it's original state, that's conservation/environmentalism

That said the government plays a role in conservation. If I'm in business, producing a pollutant as a by product, I'd have to dump my byproduct in the nearest stream, just like everyone else who makes a similar product, to stay competitive. But, if the government says , to me and all my competitors, no, no dumping allowed, it puts all at the same economic advantage, and preserves the common good: the clean stream

That's the reasoning from the view of the producer. From the innocent bystander just trying to fish the stream, or get a drink of water, it's protection of the common good

I would take it a step farther and propose that it is human nature to exploit the resource to maximize one's best interest. Meaning, if I found a pile of gold coins in the woods (symbolic of a resource), I would take every single one of those gold coins home and live happily ever after. Only when government intervenes and limits the rate of gold coins being taken to the rate that new gold coins fall out of the ferry butts can conservation be accomplished. Now leaving the pile of coins undisturbed is symbolic of preservation.

 

[Highbeam]

Preservation does not mean do not fish. It means keep the balance, don't overfish to the point of species depletion.

Nope, that's conservation. Preservation means no fishing. As in preserve.

Google:

Environmental preservation is the strict setting aside of natural resources to prevent the use or contact by humans or by human intervention. In terms of policy making this often means setting aside areas as nature reserves (otherwise known as wildlife reserves), parks, or other conservation areas.

Conservation:

The careful utilization of a natural resource in order to prevent depletion.