Fossil Fuels Will Save The World

[ArlJim78]

The environmental movement has advanced three arguments in recent years for giving up fossil fuels: (1) that we will soon run out of them anyway; (2) that alternative sources of energy will price them out of the marketplace; and (3) that we cannot afford the climate consequences of burning them.

These days, not one of the three arguments is looking very healthy. In fact, a more realistic assessment of our energy and environmental situation suggests that, for decades to come, we will continue to rely overwhelmingly on the fossil fuels that have contributed so dramatically to the world’s prosperity and progress.

read the rest at:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/fossil-fuels-will-save-the-world-really-1426282420

[davew]

It is amazing that hydro-electric is the cheapest and leaves the least amount of by-products, but the environmentalists are blocking it because of fish habitat.

[boxcar]

Great article, Jim! Thanks for the link! :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

Why is anyone surprised that fossil fuels, as NATURAL as it gets, would ever fail us?

[Native Texan III]

You poor old suckers falling for the same old propaganda from the same old vested interests that told us all that tobacco was healthy.



http://captionx.com/section/special-page/image/healthy/science.jpg

[iceknight]

Also.. IEA report on CO2 emissions stall.

http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/news/2015/march/global-energy-related-emissions-of-carbon-dioxide-stalled-in-2014.html

[ArlJim78]

You poor old suckers falling for the same old propaganda from the same old vested interests that told us all that tobacco was health
With tobacco it was easy to realize that it was not healthy, despite what any authority had to say about it. People were dropping like flies with various illnesses. On the contrary there is no evidence that a radical man made climate change is under way which can be solved by abandoning all use of carbon. That is truly the biggest flim-flam ever conceived and you better believe the people involved are vested interests.

But we can all relax because there is no substitute for fossil fuels and we'll be using them for a long, long, time.

[davew]

With tobacco it was easy to realize that it was not healthy, despite what any authority had to say about it. People were dropping like flies with various illnesses. On the contrary there is no evidence that a radical man made climate change is under way which can be solved by abandoning all use of carbon. That is truly the biggest flim-flam ever conceived and you better believe the people involved are vested interests.

But we can all relax because there is no substitute for fossil fuels and we'll be using them for a long, long, time.


Not if the gov't taxes petroleum to give money to their friends to start GREEN companies that can't make any money on their own, and once subsidies stop close down.

[Clocker]

It is amazing that hydro-electric is the cheapest and leaves the least amount of by-products, but the environmentalists are blocking it because of fish habitat.

That's why tree huggers prefer wind and solar. Those don't kill any fish.

So some birds get fried by solar or chopped up by wind mills. A small price to pay to be green.

[davew]

That's why tree huggers prefer wind and solar. Those don't kill any fish.

So some birds get fried by solar or chopped up by wind mills. A small price to pay to be green.


What about all the bald eagles that get clipped / killed at the wind mills?

[boxcar]

That's why tree huggers prefer wind and solar. Those don't kill any fish.

So some birds get fried by solar or chopped up by wind mills. A small price to pay to be green.

Fish or birds? Six of one, half a dozen of the other. What do they call those kinds of fatalities in war? :rolleyes: