Let's be under no illusion here,

hatchelt · Post by **hatchelt** » 03 Jul 2005, 12:19

"climate change" is just a safer way of saying Peak Oil:

http://telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml? ... wstop.html
________
[URL=http://growingmedicalmariju
POT GROWING ADVERT REMOVED

MacG · Post by **MacG** » 03 Jul 2005, 14:09

Yep. Sound pretty straightforward to me. And it will launch a new currency based on energy also! Reminds quite a lot about something thought up by Silvio Gesell. These "emission rights" could very well end up as THE currency after a collapse of the fiat currencies. Add Fukuoka farming, and with a little luck, you are off the hook - congrats!

PowerSwitchJames · Post by **PowerSwitchJames** » 03 Jul 2005, 15:35

A good step in the right direction but the devil is in the detail.

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 03 Jul 2005, 21:22

PowerSwitchJames wrote:A good step in the right direction but the devil is in the detail.

I think a leap to a full personal energy trading system is a little too ambitious as a first step (much as I'd love to see it happen).

If you start from the assumption that there will be fuel rationing at some point, then it's not hard to imagine ways to make that system more flexible, such as allowing people to buy extra allowances from the government, or giving tax breaks or refunds to those who don't use their quota. Under any such system however it seems inevitable that there would be those who could get better value by buying or selling fuel in secondary (black) markets, though it probably doesn't matter so long as the overall fuel usage decreases.

Eventually one can imagine a fully fledged personal energy trading system being introduced to stamp out the problems associated with people buying black market quota-free fuel that could have had any number of additives mixed in to increase volume...

Still, I dont envy the civil servants who have to explain energy trading to average Joe - there'd be so much opportunity for shysters to scam people out of their allowances.

isenhand · Post by **isenhand** » 04 Jul 2005, 06:49

Interesting! It does have some similarities to the technocracy plan bur it is dealing with rationing rather than abundance. Something to think about.

PaulS · Post by **PaulS** » 04 Jul 2005, 18:39

DTQs are an excellent idea.

So THIS is why the government are so keen on ID cards!

Once you have a national database of all individuals, bolting on a weekly carbon allowance would be a doddle.
Maybe we should all start supporting the ID card scheme!

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 04 Jul 2005, 22:29

Yes, at first glance, I think the idea of personal carbon trade credits linked to use of fossil fuels seems to be a good idea. Certainly in terms of reducing the use of oil and gas.

I might surprise a few people here when I say I am not convinced of the arguments regarding global warming and the cause being due to mankind. Whilst I don't disagree that mankind has been partly to blame for the increased greenhouse gases eg CO2, we have to remember the main greenhouse gas is actually water vapour and we don't have any real impact on that! Also CO2 has only increased in the atmosphere from about 280 parts per million to 370 parts per million over the last couple of hundred years although this is a considerable percentage increase it is still only a very small amount in the actual atmosphere, so we have to keep things in perspective. The world has warmed and cooled before when mankind was much less populous and couldn't have been having any effects on CO2.

But from the PO perspective I would support the proposals (please note I have not studied these at all yet, so this is based on a cursory read and understanding).

Bandidoz · Post by **Bandidoz** » 05 Jul 2005, 01:13

I have no doubt whatsoever that fuel/energy rationing is going to happen. ID cards will play an important part in such a scheme; for that reason I now think they'd be a good idea.

There was a National Geographic article several months ago that indicated without question that CO2 levels in the atmosphere are now higher than they have been over the past 400000 years (the concentrations never exceeded 300ppm). Take a look at the following images:

(1870-2000 - http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/07.htm)

(over the past 400000 years - http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/02.htm)

It was funny how no-one made the connection during live-8 between Global Dimming and famine in Ethiopia (as indicated by the Horizon programme). No amount of aid is going to successfully help them if they can't grow their own food because we've f**ked up their weather.

nancy · Post by **nancy** » 05 Jul 2005, 03:32

I agree this is coming and that the devil is in the detail. Have any of you read the detail for the UK outlined in Not by Money Alone. Economic as Nature Intended by Malcom Slesser and Jane King, 2 Brits, who proposed a very workable sounding trading system of Personal Energy Rights, which could be phased in to replace all other forms of taxation in a way that would be fiscally neutral.

I read it because Colin Campbell called it the "most important book of the new millenium". It is very impressive. However, I am not sure if they have been the inspiration behind these DTQ's (even though they call theirs PERs). They are on leave at the moment, but I have written to Elliot Morley and the Tyndall centre to ask them.

fishertrop · Post by **fishertrop** » 05 Jul 2005, 08:28

snow hope wrote: I might surprise a few people here when I say I am not convinced of the arguments regarding global warming and the cause being due to mankind.

You don't work for the Exxonn press dept do you?

If you have seen the Horizon episode regarding the stopping of the atlantic conveyer - which spends most of it's time looking at ice-core research similar to that which Bandidoz posted - I think you'd be a lot less skeptical that the problems are man-made.

You should kick off another thread tho if you want to discuss this in detail - it's topic with a life of it's own!

andyh · Post by **andyh** » 05 Jul 2005, 22:40

hi bandidoz
Im intrigued by the graphs you posted. Do you know
a) what caused the previous sugges in atmospheric Co2 concentrations?
b) why there is an apparent cyclical nature to these rises - between every 100-150,000years if you look at those graphs?

bigjim · Post by **bigjim** » 05 Jul 2005, 23:04

I still have my doubts over whether global warming is man-made. There's a lot of evidence to say it is.

However, one thing that really clouds the issue for me is that the Romans were able to keep vineyards in York. Does that mean that Roman chariots belched out lots of CO2 when they moved? Did the centurions fart a lot?

isenhand · Post by **isenhand** » 06 Jul 2005, 06:16

Used to be able to do that in South of Sweden too. I think it is generally accepted that the climate goes through warm / cold cycles but the question is; it today?s warming part of that natural cycle or as a result of human activity?

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 06 Jul 2005, 09:29

Agreed, bigjim. See here for more, http://www.powerswitch.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=172