What Do We Think About Climate Change

Rent the Michael Moore movie 'Capitalism: A Love Story' to see brainwashing combined with swindling on a global scale.

 

You are right, I should not have called your comment a loud fart. However, as to your comment being stupid, yes it was a stupid comment to suggests that the Danes adopted wind power because they wanted to copy the Dutch. This comment was clearly intended as a derogatory remark against both the Danes and the Dutch, as well as being incorrect, and shows that had not researched the topic.

As to your criticism of the economic viability of windmills, there are a number of studies that contradict what you are saying. I have cited two two of them in previous posts. One was a report from GE Energy Financial Services entitled "Impact of 2007 Wind Farms on US Treasury". The other was a report from Coherent Energy and Environmental System Analysis entitled "Danish Wind Power Export and Cost".

The first of these two reports focuses on the US, which has a relatively small wind power industry. It concludes that the internal rate of return of wind power subsidies to the US treasury is a net positive 5%, though the uncertainties in this estimate are large.

The second report focuses on Denmark, which has a relatively mature wind power industry. It concludes that during the years 2004-2008 the use of wind power resulted in a net increase in price to the consumer of 1-3% (a very small number) and in 2008 there was a net decrease in cost to the consumer. The report points out that wind power subsidy is paid by the consumer, which is already included in the figures just quoted. The report also points out that wind power has very low marginal cost (nearly zero), and that one consequence of this is to reduce the spot market price in a given hour, which is to the benefit of consumers but is not to the benefit of the competing power producers.

As to your comment that independence from foreign energy sources not being in debate here let me remind you that it was YOU that raised the issue of the motivations of the Danes for adopting wind power. My response simply pointed out that the Danes were not motivated to copy the Dutch but rather to achieve energy independence. This was a perfectly legitimate and reasonable response the the topic that YOU introduced.

Marco1, I notice that you are from Sydney. I assume this refers to Australia. There is a report from the Australia Institute on wind power entitled "Wind Farms
The facts and the fallacies". That report addresses your comments about the cost effectiveness of wind power. Here is what the summary says: "Wind energy is competitive with all other sources of renewable energy. The evidence indicates that if electricity generators were required to internalise the costs of pollution, it would also be competitive with coal- and gas-fired power stations."

The Australia Institute report also says that currently the increased cost to Australian consumers due to wind power is negligible, and that if the proportion of electrical generation from wind power were to increase to 15% (going from year 2006 to 2010) it could lead to about a 2% increase in cost to the consumer. This is, of course, not zero, but it is rather small, a bit smaller than the inflation rate in a typical single year and nowhere near the tripling of prices that you are suggesting.

And finally, your comments about subsidies are a bit disingenuous because they ignore the fact that fossil fuels are also subsidized by preferential tax treatment, at least in the US if not in Australia.

 

Yes, Denmark has a small population (about 5 million), as does Australia (about 20 million). Australia is about 5 times as big as Denmark, in terms of population, but the US is 15 times as bid as Australia in terms of population.

Also, Australia has a gross domestic product about 3 times that of Denmark (actually, less than Denmark on a per capita basis) whereas the US has a gross domestic product about 15 times that of Australia (about the same on a per capita basis).

So given your logic, should the US ignore Australia for the same reason you would ignore Denmark?

My own view is that it makes sense to look at any results that may be useful, regardless of the size of the country.

 

:?: :?: :?: :?: :!: :!: :!:

 

I can't quite figure out what all that would be in English. I'm thinking it's some kind of skepticism. (I'd put some sort of smilie here but you used up the quota for 1 post.)

Have you seen it?

Have you seen any of his movies?

 

:!: :!: :!:

 

Yeah. Maybe you could watch it and then comment.

 

Don't make me repeat myself!:!: :!: :!:

 

When you add a link to a post, it's customary to choose one that backs up what you're saying. If anything on the page you linked does so, I missed it.

This link does back you up, but I question its accuracy:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/29/arctic-ice-volume-has-increased-25-since-may-2008/

However, since 2007 and 2008 apparently had record low amounts of ice, even a substantiated rebound in a two-year period would hardly be proof of a long-term trend.

And of course, you could always read what scientists have to say, instead of relying on amateur bloggers like the one I linked. I know that's a heretical idea around here, because scientists are all liars, frauds and scam artists, but try it--you might like it.

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/ArcticSeaiceVolume/IceVolume.php

 

sorry it took me so long I been kinda busy this week end

feathers are signs of many things to the various nations and tribes within nations

different bird feathers also mean different things depending on species and how you wear them as well

for instance a crow feather worn on the arm of a Sioux nation man might be there because he believes it will help him ride longer and faster distances like the crow flies but the same kind of feather worn in the headband of a Crow nation ( Absaroka ) man is there to identify him as a member.

also the close proximity of these two nations would preclude the Sioux man from wearing a crow feather in his head band
those two groups did not always play well together

eagle feathers are generally awarded for various deeds probably having to do with bravery or service to the tribe. Most tribes handed golden eagle feathers out with a teaspoon so when you see some of the old pictures and they have some huge head dress in it, its probably staged as large head dresses of coup feathers were a lot more rare than what is often depicted

a man might earn a half dozen coup feathers in a typical life time and for a man to have an entire head dress would be really rare although some tribes like the Cheyenne would award entire head dresses for a single deed of particular bravery or service

other feathers have completely different meanings in religious ceremonies

for instance there is a feather ceremony where a feather is used to carry prayers to the great father, it is a very personal prayer ceremony and I'd be surprised if there are any pictures of it ever being performed, its a simple but very meaningful experience that also makes use of feathers but in a completely different context

something about the mystical powers of flight led natives of nearly all tribes to revere birds in many ways, particularly species that expressed strength or cunning. In order to acquire those powers or make them available to the native peoples the people developed a wide range of practices intended to show respect and therefor garner the assistance of these beings in the spirit world

most tribes native teachings placed the spirit world or the world which we can not see on the same plane as the world which we can see. To the native peoples there was little difference. If the spirits were with you then you have the strength and wisdom embodied in there corporal forms

so feathers were popular as they were also an invitation and sign of respect to the spririt of the animals they represented

might have been kinda long winded but feathers are a large part of the native belief system
hope that helps

B

 

Here's a synapses...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism_A_Love_Story

In the 'Special Features' is a very interesting interview with Chris Hedges about the predatory qualities of unregulated capitalism destroying it's own 'base', the environment.

 

Very well-written, Boston.

I remember one day when my older brother and I were playing cowboys and Indians (actually, reenacting scenes from a western we'd been to see). My dad came out and asked me to take the feather out of my headband. He didn't make a big deal of it; he just said something along the lines of, "when a man wears a feather, he does it because it means something--not just for show."

 

I love that stuff, Bos. Thx. I was thinking more tangible things - one time I heard or saw...somehow in my memory...There was a native with a feather placed just right to be a sun visor like the bill of a baseball cap.

 

sounds about right Troy
in most pictures of native children where the picture is not staged I'd be surprised if you found one of any tribe wearing a feather

cant really recall one I've ever seen

 

sounds like a more recent event than anything that would have occurred traditionally

feathers are pretty high on the sacred list in most native cultures, at least in a traditional sense
there are however many natives these days who do not follow there cultural heritage