Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday December 13 2015, @07:35PM   Printer-friendly
from the a-Republican-speaking-sense-to-other-Republicans-and-others dept.

The Center for American Progress reports:

Arnold Schwarzenegger posted a note on Facebook on [December 7] that made a very good point about climate change and renewable energy: It really doesn't matter what you believe.

The former California governor addressed people who think climate change is a conspiracy or a hoax, and asked them whether the deaths from pollution are acceptable, whether fossil fuels will last forever, and--to paraphrase greatly--what kind of world they want to live in. This excerpt pretty much sums up his argument to climate deniers.

There are two doors. Behind Door Number One is a completely sealed room, with a regular, gasoline-fueled car. Behind Door Number Two is an identical, completely sealed room, with an electric car. Both engines are running full blast.

I want you to pick a door to open, and enter the room and shut the door behind you. You have to stay in the room you choose for one hour. You cannot turn off the engine. You do not get a gas mask.

I'm guessing you chose the Door Number Two, with the electric car, right? Door number one is a fatal choice--who would ever want to breathe those fumes?

It's a strong point, but even more importantly, it's a bipartisan point. We are in an era where addressing climate change is largely split down party lines, especially in Congress. Moderate Republicans like Schwarzenegger, who believe a healthy environment and climate are public goods, haven't yet been able to sway people who think that clean energy is going to kill the economy.

But Schwarzenegger should know that a green economy can work. As governor of California, he worked with the Democratic-led legislature to enact the nation's first comprehensive greenhouse gas emissions reduction law and the nation's first low-carbon fuel standard. Now California is the nation's leader in both solar installations and solar jobs.

2 nitpicks: If it's electric, it's called a motor, not an engine. "Power plant" would have been more apt.
The electric car would need a way to allow the wheels to turn without the car going anywhere.
...and if the gasoline car's engine is "running full blast", you'll need a load (dynamometer).
Otherwise: Brilliant.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by tibman on Sunday December 13 2015, @10:53PM

    by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 13 2015, @10:53PM (#275882)
    --
    SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 13 2015, @11:53PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 13 2015, @11:53PM (#275904)

    From that link I got the estimate "Just 496,905 square kilometers". So this would be like losing the albedo[1] due to the largest iceberg[2] 50x. The temperature would be affected similarly except this would be energy absorbed near the equator where insolation is much higher. What would be the effect on overall albedo?

    Iceberg B-15 is the world's largest recorded iceberg.[Note 1] It measured around 295 kilometres (183 mi) long and 37 kilometres (23 mi) wide, with a surface area of 11,000 square kilometres (4,200 sq mi)—larger than the whole island of Jamaica.

    [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice-albedo_feedback [wikipedia.org]
    [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceberg_B-15 [wikipedia.org]

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by gnuman on Monday December 14 2015, @05:03PM

      by gnuman (5013) on Monday December 14 2015, @05:03PM (#276185)

      From that link I got the estimate "Just 496,905 square kilometers"

      Oh, for Pete's sake. There is 80,000,000 house rooftops in US alone, ignoring WalMarts which would probable double the area. Each one about 1500 sq. ft. facing the sunny side. So that's 11,000 sq. km already. And since US has less than 5% of world's population, then it only needs 5% of total energy, right? Which means HALF of that 5% is already provided by rooftop solar alone, never mind nuclear power, never mind hydroelectric, never mind wind or actual solar collectors in places like deserts.

      We don't need fossil fuels anymore. But we certainly need ALL types of other fuel sources to make this work, not just solar. But as you can hopefully see, even just solar gets us part of the way there.

      • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday December 14 2015, @05:32PM

        by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Monday December 14 2015, @05:32PM (#276202) Homepage
        > And since US has less than 5% of world's population, then it only needs 5% of total energy, right?

        Only if it wants to have the same shitty capacity as much of the rest of the world. I.e. "wrong!".

        Using your logic on another finite resource, it only needs 5% of the world's mobile devices - would you care to find 200+ million in the US who are willing to give up their phone/tablet?
        --
        Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves