What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

climate change times are a changin'

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: climate change times are a changin'

OK, that's a good point. Let me ask you a question, though. (It's not a trap -- I don't know the answer.) What has a lower carbon footprint -- a mile driven in an electric car powered by a fossil fuel plant or a mile driven in a current car?

I'm not sure I'd call nuclear worries "NIMBY hysteria" unless you're willing to live right next to one. You and I have the luxury of choosing to live in nice leafy suburbs away from dirty (or lethal) industry. The people who don't have that luxury should fight tooth and nail to keep that stuff away from them.
It varies a lot depending on your local generation mix. A state with mostly coal plants will make a person's electric car relatively dirty from a carbon standpoint in comparison to a state that relies heavily on natural gas generation for its electricity, given that natural gas plants emit less than half the carbon a coal plant does. So, as with many things, it's complicated.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

That is a really excellent question, and I don't know a definitive answer - in fact, I'm not sure a definitive answer is really possible. On the face of it, it's an easy question: oil has two paths to create the motion of the vehicle which is the end result that you desire

If I am not mistaken, electric cars still use oil as a lubricant, do they not? and aren't there some serious pollution concerns related to the production and disposal of the lithium batteries they use?
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

If I am not mistaken, electric cars still use oil as a lubricant, do they not? and aren't there some serious pollution concerns related to the production and disposal of the lithium batteries they use?

The Nissan Leaf requires no oil changes or transmission fluid changes (there isn't a transmission). Most of the lubricants are going to be in the axles and hubs, but those don't really get greased in newer cars the way they did in older cars. Some guy at the local Minneapolis Auto Show was there to talk about electric cars and their low maintenance costs. The only maintenance they really need are wipers, tires and brakes.

Hybrid cars like the Prius and Volt still have petroleum-based engines, so they require oil changes. I don't know or care enough about them to know of their transmission fluid needs.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

I'll be taking this with a healthy dose of skepticism considering they're announcing some unknown breakthrough at precisely the same time they're announcing that they need commercial partners (money).

Well, here's the thing.

On the one hand, yes, obviously they're white collar criminals looking to hook venture capital. Their hands drip with the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocents. That's who they are; it's who they've been for thirty years. Fine.

On the other hand... do you know how many truly brilliant folks they have managed to lock up over the last generation? The nerds who launched the Silicon Valley revolution aren't working out of their garages anymore. The guys who are truly, truly, staggeringly good at these kinds of problems (leaving aside they are 80% Aspy and 90% sociopath) have been sucked into these incredibly high-paying gigs. Who knows? Maybe the little bastids actually cracked it.

The stinger in the tail is "We never forget who we're working for." If you think the early applications of this technology (if true) are going to be for the good, you are a very nice person who I will buy coffee and enclose in bubble wrap to keep your naiveté fresh.
 
Last edited:
Re: climate change times are a changin'

Well, here's the thing.

On the one hand, yes, obviously they're white collar criminals looking to hook venture capital. Their hands drip with the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocents. That's who they are; it's who they've been for thirty years. Fine.

On the other hand... do you know how many truly brilliant folks they have managed to lock up over the last generation? The nerds who launched the Silicon Valley revolution aren't working out of their garages anymore. The guys who are truly, truly, staggeringly good at these kinds of problems (leaving aside they are 80% Aspy and 90% sociopath) have been sucked into these incredibly high-paying gigs. Who knows? Maybe the little bastids actually cracked it.

The stinger in the tail is "We never forget who we're working for." If you think the early applications of this technology (if true) are going to be for the good, you are a very nice person who I will buy coffee and enclose in bubble wrap to keep your naiveté fresh.

This is what I love about you guys. It's the simple joy you find in the pure pleasure of being alive in the moment.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

On the one hand, yes, obviously they're white collar criminals looking to hook venture capital. Their hands drip with the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocents. That's who they are; it's who they've been for thirty years. Fine.

On the other hand... do you know how many truly brilliant folks they have managed to lock up over the last generation? The nerds who launched the Silicon Valley revolution aren't working out of their garages anymore. The guys who are truly, truly, staggeringly good at these kinds of problems (leaving aside they are 80% Aspy and 90% sociopath) have been sucked into these incredibly high-paying gigs. Who knows? Maybe the little bastids actually cracked it.

Woah there. This is taking the smearing a bit far, even for you.

The stinger in the tail is "We never forget who we're working for." If you think the early applications of this technology (if true) are going to be for the good, you are a very nice person who I will buy coffee and enclose in bubble wrap to keep your naiveté fresh.

However, this is probably accurate.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

This is what I love about you guys. It's the simple joy you find in the pure pleasure of being alive in the moment.

You are confusing inner (real) life with political (abstract) life. It is entirely consistent to be both personally happy, centered, and spiritually certain, with also being clear eyed about the way political life works and understanding that the predators are on the prowl.
 
Last edited:
Re: climate change times are a changin'

You are confusing inner (real) life with political (abstract) life. It is entirely consistent to be both personally happy, centered, and spiritually certain, with also being clear eyed about the way political life works and understanding that the predators are on the prowl.

I understand. Still, the volume of uncontrolled rage in that post was striking.
Anyone would have to admit that free enterprise has done more for human progress throughout history than top-down decrees. Right? Or is all free enterprise pure evil?
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

I understand. Still, the volume of uncontrolled rage in that post was striking.
Anyone would have to admit that free enterprise has done more for human progress throughout history than top-down decrees. Right? Or is all free enterprise pure evil?

Free enterprise is good. Corporate consolidation is bad. The biggest enemy of the free market isn't government; it's cartel.

tl; dr: Too big to fail is too big to be permitted to exist.
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

Free enterprise is good. Corporate consolidation is bad. The biggest enemy of the free market isn't government; it's cartel.

tl; dr: Too big to fail is too big to be permitted to exist.

I'm not familiar with the players. Are you wary of Lockheed as they exist (and they have competitors, right?) or the potential of them consolidating with other giant corporations?
 
Re: climate change times are a changin'

I'm not familiar with the players. Are you wary of Lockheed as they exist (and they have competitors, right?) or the potential of them consolidating with other giant corporations?

The big five (LockMar, Boeing, Northrop-Grumman, Raytheon, GD) compete ostensibly, but they have interlocking boards and are deeply incestuous at the senior management level. The competition exists primarily to keep the ball rolling. In fact there is such a tight connection between the contractors, the military-intelligence apparatus, and public officials that the system could be regarded as one large cabal similar to the way big business works in Japan. The regulations are written by those who are to be regulated, so they are primarily about having a plausible case to put before the voter that there is cost control and quality control. It's not exactly a "sham," because almost everybody is obsessed with following every rule strictly to the letter for fear of getting nailed and losing the right to compete a contract, but there is a great deal of kabuki about it.

Oddly enough the main corruption in contractors right now is the same one in most big businesses -- the internal squeeze of employees by owners to rip every last cent of benefits and future earnings increases away from them. All the companies have the same philosophy of ownership, if not the same actual owners via large financial investors, so the competition between companies for talent is largely a false choice -- no matter where you go, there you are. But of course this happens wherever the count of major competitors drops below some magic number -- let's call it 8. At that point the cold equations take over and it's a race to the bottom for working conditions. On that point Marx was actually quite prescient, as he was on stressing that you could populate the boards with angels and the same thing would happen -- it's a law of economics, not a personality problem. (The psychosis comes later, since everybody above a certain pay grade knows the score, so the people who will actually do the dirty work are highly narcissistic; nobody else could live with themselves.)
 
Last edited:
Re: climate change times are a changin'

It is entirely consistent to be both personally happy, centered, and spiritually certain, with also being clear eyed about the way political life works and understanding that the predators are on the prowl.

Except that you either are totally ignorant of the phenomenon known as "regulatory capture" (George Stigler won a Nobel Prize in Economics in 1982 partly for his ground-breaking work on this subject) or you are willfully blind on the subject. You speak of "predators on the prowl" yet ignore how many of these very same "predators" now routinely staff our regulatory agencies.*

For public choice theorists, regulatory capture occurs because groups or individuals with a high-stakes interest in the outcome of policy or regulatory decisions can be expected to focus their resources and energies in attempting to gain the policy outcomes they prefer, while members of the public, each with only a tiny individual stake in the outcome, will ignore it altogether. Regulatory capture refers to the actions by interest groups when this imbalance of focused resources devoted to a particular policy outcome is successful at "capturing" influence with the staff or commission members of the regulatory agency, so that the preferred policy outcomes of the special interest groups are implemented.

Regulatory capture theory is a core focus of the branch of public choice referred to as the economics of regulation; economists in this specialty are critical of conceptualizations of governmental regulatory intervention as being motivated to protect public good. Often cited articles include Bernstein (1955), Huntington (1952), Laffont & Tirole (1991), and Levine & Forrence (1990). The theory of regulatory capture is associated with Nobel laureate economist George Stigler, one of its main developers.

Likelihood of regulatory capture is a risk to which an agency is exposed by its very nature. This suggests that a regulatory agency should be protected from outside influence as much as possible. Alternatively, it may be better to not create a given agency at all lest the agency become victim, in which case it may serve its regulated subjects rather than those whom the agency was designed to protect. A captured regulatory agency is often worse than no regulation, because it wields the authority of government. However, increased transparency of the agency may mitigate the effects of capture. Recent evidence suggests that, even in mature democracies with high levels of transparency and media freedom, more extensive and complex regulatory environments are associated with higher levels of corruption (including regulatory capture). [emphasis added]



* it is a totally bi-partisan phenomenon. You want an "expert" in a field to serve in a regulatory agency? Typically you find someone already employed in that field. Where else can you find anyone with the requisite technical expertise?
 
Last edited:
Re: climate change times are a changin'

I dunno. When skunk works says they have something publicly, I'll listen. As should everyone.

Reddit has had some fairly decent discussion of this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top