Or somewhat equivalently, getting us to pay carbon taxes on what we
consume...  To do that we'd need some way guess the carbon content (and
other earth insults) for products the manufacturer didn't provide
verifiable data for... and just as necessary, some believable plan for
using the money collected.  *But* that too would still provide only
temporary relief!!  The co2/$ ratio for total economic product (economic
efficiency) can only be reduced toward a positive limit and not toward
zero (real 2nd law).


Phil Henshaw                       ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
680 Ft. Washington Ave 
NY NY 10040                       
tel: 212-795-4844                 
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]          
explorations: www.synapse9.com    


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Howard
> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 11:23 PM
> To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] bigger plans, bigger little mistakes
> 
> 
> Now, if we can just get those Chinese to pay carbon taxes, we 
> might be able to compete. :-)
> 
> Robert Howard
> Phoenix, Arizona
> 
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 2:03 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] bigger plans, bigger little mistakes
> 
> phil henshaw wrote:
> > The consensus response to global warming relies on reducing the
> > impacts of economic growth by improving the efficiency of economic 
> > growth!
> So we need a lot more clean power, and we need it fast.   
> Time to spend 
> some money on figuring out how to do it!
> Without efficiency gains, it's estimated 10 TW are needed globally by 
> 2025. [1] 
> The ITER/DEMO fusion reactor only promises net 1.5 GW by 2045 
> [2], and 
> the largest hydroelectric facilities (Three Gorges Dam in 
> China) are at 
> about 22 GW [3].   There's not enough high-grade silicon for 
> dozens of 
> square miles of conventional photovoltaic solar [4]. Meanwhile, China 
> builds a new coal fired planed every week [5] and apparently can keep 
> doing that for 100 years [6].  
> 
> Seems to me any cost imbalance of solar, etc. is easily fixable by 
> taxing the hell out of CO2 energy emissions while subsidizing the 
> development of new solar, fusion, carbon sequestration 
> technology (etc). 
> 
> [1] http://t8web.lanl.gov/people/rajan/Gupta_energy_for_all_2007.pdf
> [2]  http://fire.pppl.gov/isfnt7_maisonnier.pdf
> [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Gorges_Dam
> [4] http://www.ft.com/cms/s/e50784ea-78cb-11db-8743-0000779e2340.html
> [5] http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1223/p01s04-sten.html
> [6] 
> http://www.technologyreview.com/printer_friend>
ly_article.aspx?id=17963
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
> 
> 
> 
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
> 
> 



============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to