Page 341 of 341 FirstFirst ... 241291331339340341
Results 5,101 to 5,113 of 5113
  1. #5101
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,106
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray View Post
    Great idea, but it takes a brave government to try to take subsidies away from fossil fuel industries. Good luck!
    But wait there's more!

    Rise of renewables may see off oil firms decades earlier than they think
    The Guardian
    15.10.19

    The world’s rising reliance on fossil fuels may come to an end decades earlier than the most polluting companies predict, offering early signs of hope in the global battle to tackle the climate crisis.

    The climate green shoots have emerged amid a renewable energy revolution that promises an end to the rising demand for oil and coal in the 2020s, before the fossil fuels face a terminal decline.

    The looming fossil fuel peak is expected to emerge decades ahead of forecasts from oil and mining companies, which are betting that demand for polluting energy will rise until the 2040s.

    But energy experts are adjusting their forecasts as clean energy technologies, including wind and solar power, emerge faster than predicted and at costs that pose a direct threat to coal-fired electricity and combustion-engine vehicles....

  2. #5102
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,945
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray View Post
    But wait there's more!

    Rise of renewables may see off oil firms decades earlier than they think
    The Guardian
    15.10.19

    The world’s rising reliance on fossil fuels may come to an end decades earlier than the most polluting companies predict, offering early signs of hope in the global battle to tackle the climate crisis.

    The climate green shoots have emerged amid a renewable energy revolution that promises an end to the rising demand for oil and coal in the 2020s, before the fossil fuels face a terminal decline.

    The looming fossil fuel peak is expected to emerge decades ahead of forecasts from oil and mining companies, which are betting that demand for polluting energy will rise until the 2040s.

    But energy experts are adjusting their forecasts as clean energy technologies, including wind and solar power, emerge faster than predicted and at costs that pose a direct threat to coal-fired electricity and combustion-engine vehicles....
    I do not worry about the oil firms...so if they are dismissed due to market forces - off they go!
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  3. #5103
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,553
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    I do not worry about the oil firms...so if they are dismissed due to market forces - off they go!
    But this is my point: they are not dismissed due to market forces because they are subsidised up the wazoo.
    meep meep

  4. #5104
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,563
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    But this is my point: they are not dismissed due to market forces because they are subsidised up the wazoo.
    But our point is that neither MB nor object if fossil fuels become obsolete in fair competition. Subsidies are a problem whether for fossil fuels or the half-billion for Solyndra. At present, the renewable fuels mandate has made electricity more expensive not less, so market forces are not working here.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  5. #5105
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    But our point is that neither MB nor object if fossil fuels become obsolete in fair competition.
    You say that but your other commentary is inconsistent. It isn't a fair competition. The fossil fuel companies have over a hundred years of incumbency, are heavily entrenched with powerful lobby groups, and receive gigantic subsidies.

    Subsidies are a problem whether for fossil fuels or the half-billion for Solyndra.
    There are very different things going on here. One the one hand we have mature, entrenched industries that receive massive subsidies. That should not happen. These companies should stand or fall as per the market. If they can be profitable in their own right - great! - but they must not lock up taxpayer dollars to keep profits and crowd out other companies that could stand on their own.

    On the other hand, I can see a case for subsidies to help start up fledgling industries that will become profitable on their own terms, and then reduce and ultimately remove the subsidies, over time.

    At present, the renewable fuels mandate has made electricity more expensive not less, so market forces are not working here.
    If the cost of the polution caused by the fuel has not been priced in, then it is falsely underpriced. And again, don't talk to me about market forces while taking trillions of dollars in subsidies.
    meep meep

  6. #5106
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,983
    Quote Originally Posted by ER View Post
    also …
    I never doubted his champ status in chess terms, he actually challenged successfully the Tassie chess status quo.
    I have declared that publicly in another social media outlet (certainly not in the other place).
    ...
    It's in arguments here that I "picked on him", definitely not on a larger scale than he "picked on me"!
    I think you've got the wrong Ian (Ian Murray is from Qld)

  7. #5107
    CC Grandmaster ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    11,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    I think you've got the wrong Ian (Ian Murray is from Qld)
    You are correct and thanks! I remove the post with apologies to both Ians!
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

    https://aus2020.chesschamp.net/

  8. #5108
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,106
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    You say that but your other commentary is inconsistent. It isn't a fair competition. The fossil fuel companies have over a hundred years of incumbency, are heavily entrenched with powerful lobby groups, and receive gigantic subsidies.

    There are very different things going on here. One the one hand we have mature, entrenched industries that receive massive subsidies. That should not happen. These companies should stand or fall as per the market. If they can be profitable in their own right - great! - but they must not lock up taxpayer dollars to keep profits and crowd out other companies that could stand on their own.

    On the other hand, I can see a case for subsidies to help start up fledgling industries that will become profitable on their own terms, and then reduce and ultimately remove the subsidies, over time.

    If the cost of the polution caused by the fuel has not been priced in, then it is falsely underpriced. And again, don't talk to me about market forces while taking trillions of dollars in subsidies.
    Quite so. Fossil fuel subsidies are set in stone, while our renewable subsidies have sunset clauses. The Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme finishes in 2030, while the Large-scale Renewable Energy Target is capped at 33 GW by 2020 (now reached).

  9. #5109
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,945
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    You say that but your other commentary is inconsistent. It isn't a fair competition. The fossil fuel companies have over a hundred years of incumbency, are heavily entrenched with powerful lobby groups, and receive gigantic subsidies.

    There are very different things going on here. One the one hand we have mature, entrenched industries that receive massive subsidies. That should not happen. These companies should stand or fall as per the market. If they can be profitable in their own right - great! - but they must not lock up taxpayer dollars to keep profits and crowd out other companies that could stand on their own.

    On the other hand, I can see a case for subsidies to help start up fledgling industries that will become profitable on their own terms, and then reduce and ultimately remove the subsidies, over time.

    If the cost of the polution caused by the fuel has not been priced in, then it is falsely underpriced. And again, don't talk to me about market forces while taking trillions of dollars in subsidies.
    But are you saying that you would support fair competition?
    Or if its ''fair'' it would still not be ''good enough''
    I support fair competition, do you? if yes, we agree!
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  10. #5110
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,553
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    But are you saying that you would support fair competition?
    Or if its ''fair'' it would still not be ''good enough''
    I support fair competition, do you? if yes, we agree!
    Of course, that's the point!

    For a fair competetion, we need to have the total cost of the energy generation paid by the energy generator, including the polution it causes (See below video from free market advocate Milton Friedman 40 years ago).
    The other thing we need for a fair competition is not for some of the competitiors to be subsidised to the tune of trillions of dollars.

    I am 100% OK if the fossil fuel companies are the more economical. If they can produce their energy, and pay to offset the carbon they produce, without the ridiculous subsidies they have for an established industry, while still being cheaper than renewables, then they will win. I am 100% OK with this, because it would solve the global warming problem too - through carbon capture, or whatever other mechanism.

    Fix those 2 things, and let's see who is the winner in the fair competition.


    meep meep

  11. #5111
    CC Grandmaster ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    11,858

    what happened?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray View Post
    Eat your heart out She is also favourite to win the Nobel Peace Prize
    while eating my heart out, I read some news which you might have missed …

    Quote Originally Posted by ABC net Australia
    Some (*) believed she was a favourite to win the Nobel Peace Prize, announced on Friday, for her effort to get young people worldwide to fight climate change.

    But instead, that award went to Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed for his work to bring peace to that region of Africa.

    Head of the Peace Research Institute Oslo, Henrik Urdal, omitted Ms Thunberg from the Nobel Peace Prize shortlist he publishes.

    He explained his decision to The Washington Post, saying there "isn't scientific consensus that there is a linear relationship between climate change — or resource scarcity, more broadly — and armed conflict."
    (*) we have a couple of them here

    gret.jpg
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

    https://aus2020.chesschamp.net/

  12. #5112
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,411
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray View Post
    Quite so. Fossil fuel subsidies are set in stone, while our renewable subsidies have sunset clauses. The Small-scale Renewable Energy Scheme finishes in 2030, while the Large-scale Renewable Energy Target is capped at 33 GW by 2020 (now reached).
    Did someone have a sense of humour imposing a sunset clause on subsidies for solar energy - did they think the sun was going stop rising in the morning or the Earth stop spinning?
    Zionism is racism as defined by the UN, Israel by every dirty means available steals land and water, kill Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians, and operates an apartheid system to drive more Palestinians off their land

  13. #5113
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,411
    Originally Posted by ER
    You must understand the value of market stability factor and always examine the relation b/n production and exports.
    Of course, the "sluggish" phenomenon in markets can be interpreted in many different or related parameters.
    Here, it is the volume of exports as measured by the needs of importing countries for the specific product. It has stabilized, it hasn't decreased.
    This is good for my product since it is also good for the national economy, the involved company as well as personal interests for the shareholders.
    I give you a small example: when BHP merged with Billiton in 2001 the price of my already profitable shares (then $8.30 apiece) almost quadrupled to $33.50!
    During almost two decades of seemingly decreasing of production volume, according to your way of thinking, the profits. share market value, and
    general yield dividends for shareholders would have dramatically fallen, right? Wrong!! Last Friday evening, at the close it was almost $35.50!


    AC:
    Buy those BHP shares did dip to half of $35.50 about 7 years ago (guessing) whereas real estate stayed REAL in Byron anyway. Aren't BHP in prior days notorious for lousy dividends? I am sure a lot of people have bad memories of BHP - those who bought at about $47. When they sank to about $18 - that is $30 less they would have pulling their teeth out. Whereas except for the Great Depression this has never occurred in real estate to that extent that I am aware of. Imagine queueing up for welfare because they blew their inheritance on BHP shares. Lebs would not do that.

    If those shareholders would have given their money away instead they could not have gotten welfare but lose it on a bad share bet and you can ride the welfare nag and get an inside running. The only topic FM Baron and I agree upon.
    Last edited by antichrist; 17-10-2019 at 09:45 AM.
    Zionism is racism as defined by the UN, Israel by every dirty means available steals land and water, kill Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians, and operates an apartheid system to drive more Palestinians off their land

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Evangelism and Climate Change
    By Ian Murray in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-04-2017, 11:24 AM
  2. Climate Change (read bottom up)
    By antichrist in forum Politics
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-10-2010, 01:00 PM
  3. Climate Change Is Irreversable ??
    By Bruce Oates in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 28-01-2009, 09:55 PM
  4. The Death of Climate Change Consensus
    By Spiny Norman in forum Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21-12-2007, 11:38 AM
  5. Pentagon Report on Climate Change
    By Cat in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 21-06-2004, 10:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •