tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post2568047980719365276..comments2023-09-28T08:13:11.489-07:00Comments on Only In It For The Gold: More Big Picture FuturismMichael Tobishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-619834472097234922008-05-08T18:49:00.000-07:002008-05-08T18:49:00.000-07:00tidal, great minds think alike, but Eli does not n...tidal, great minds think alike, but Eli does not necessarily like the <A HREF="http://rabett.blogspot.com/2008/05/this-has-been-another-simple-answer-to.html" REL="nofollow"> conclusions he is driven to</A> in this matter, they are too dark.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-52276606924256448322008-05-08T07:25:00.000-07:002008-05-08T07:25:00.000-07:00There is an interesting - almost throwaway - tidbi...There is an interesting - almost throwaway - tidbit in Pielke's commentary w.r.t. "air capture" (a topic that I see Michael Schellenberger of Breakthrough Inst. is also raising at Climate Progress): <I><B>Pielke: </B>"In addition, the costs of air capture provide a hard estimate of the true costs of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and thus provide a valuable baseline for evaluating other approaches based on social engineering."</I><BR/><BR/>They seem to have rather high hopes for air capture - despite the peculiar idea of focussing CO2 capture on 382ppm ambient air, instead of from highly-concentrated "at source" production sites. I don't share that enthusiasm - nevertheless:<BR/><BR/>Maybe you call them on this? I.e. if, as he says, the "hard estimate of the true costs of removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere" is the all-in cost of air removal (i.e. including transport and long-term storage), then perchance this is the price per ton of CO2 that Pielke, et al., would "recommend" for his point 2: "make carbon emissions pricier"?<BR/><BR/>Schellenberger is claiming that the cost of air capture may approach $30 - $50/ton CO2 (not including storage, etc.) sometime in the future. I think that beggars belief, but nonetheless, you have the start of some number that they are claiming is a "hard estimate of true costs".<BR/><BR/>Instead of imposing a cost based on estimated externalities, you would impose a baseline CO2 emissions cost representing the expense of reversing the imposed quantity of your emissions (which would work for vehicles as well, when you think about it). Want to emit CO2? Go ahead. But you have to pay for its equivalent removal from air. Cheaper to avoid emissions by point-capture of CO2, or other methods? Fine, avoid the emissions and avoid the cost of subsequent removal...<BR/><BR/>iirc, the CURRENT estimated cost of air removal is far higher - perhaps $130/ton or more just for "capture" - so they might try to use the "breakthrough" escape and claim that it makes no sense to impose costs today that are "sure to be" lower in the future. Whatever - at least it begins a concrete dialogue and doesn't allow them to simply "imagine" future breakthrough technologies and price points... <BR/><BR/>Anyway, I am just thinking out loud here. But it just seems to me that Pielke has just inadvertently published the price he thinks we should impose on carbon emissions, and he/they should be held to it. If not, they are being egregiously inconsistent... again ;}<BR/><BR/>Curious if any others were struck by this...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-28126592781752484282008-05-07T19:23:00.000-07:002008-05-07T19:23:00.000-07:00Note the slippery "There is a chance that these ef...Note the slippery <BR/><BR/>"There is a chance that these effects could be relatively benign, but there is also a chance that the effects could be quite severe. I personally lean toward the latter view, ..."<BR/>Followed by the slide into well what will happen won't be SO bad so we can do "moderate" nothings. This is an old tactic used by <A HREF="http://rabett.blogspot.com/2008/05/manchurian-senior-fellow-ethon-has-been.html" REL="nofollow"> Pielke's teachers</A>.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.com