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This discussion has been archived.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, Insightful) by Jiro on Monday December 14 2015, @12:54AM

    by Jiro (3176) on Monday December 14 2015, @12:54AM (#275928)

    One possible answer is carbon taxes, but a simpler one is "nothing". People are capable of doing all sorts of things for their ideology and prejudices. These things need not have any prospect of any benefit more concrete than "we're good guys and they're bad guys". What did the movie industry hope to get by blacklisting Communists in the 1950's? Nothing, really. You could blame it on the public hating Communists, but what did the public hope to get by not watching movies run by Communists? Did they seriously think that their movie ticket would bring them some financial harm? Or did they just want to stick it to the Russkies regardless of whether they benefitted from it or not?

    What do KKK members get from hurting blacks? Nothing--except they don't like blacks very much so they value hurting them. Plenty of people don't like the right or businesses very much and would do lots of things to take them down a peg and make them get what's coming to them.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by snufu on Monday December 14 2015, @02:39AM

    by snufu (5855) on Monday December 14 2015, @02:39AM (#275976)

    If we are looking for the simpler explanation, which of the following seems more plausible:

    A) Based on a preponderance of empirical data and modeling, a majority of the international community of scientists concludes that climate change is occurring and the consequences to society could be dire.
    B) A majority of the international community of scientist have conspired to perpetrate the hoax of climate change because "they don't like businesses very much."