Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Moominoid who wrote (49278)	5/2/2004 1:58:55 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Moom, I don't want it hot and wet. I don't believe that adding about 10% of the atmospheric CO2 is going to make it hot and wet. At best, I think we'll avoid another glaciation period. But if it did get wet, it wouldn't be a big deal. Cities need upgrading more often than every hundred years. Economic cycles work in 15 years, or 20 years for investments. Returns after 20 years are usually not particularly relevant. It's the returns in the first decade or two of investment which represent the great majority of returns. These days, a lot of technologies are completely obsolete within 10 years, let alone 20 years. Meanwhile, it's silly to worry about the low risk of a few metres sea level rise over 100 or 200 years compared with the high risk of a 50 metre instant sea level rise due to small size bolides. I think the idea of runaway greenhouse and a Venus syndrome has been discounted even by the gloom and doomster global warming scientists. The fashion now seems to be that global warming will cause an ice age, thanks to the Gulf Stream being turned off, which I also don't believe will happen since ice has been melting in a very big way for 10,000 years and it didn't stop and cause an ice age to return. The relative trickle of water from Greenland etc is trivial compared with the vast floods accompanying the big melt as the ice cover moved north across North American and the Russian/European land masses. The carbon which is now in the oil/gas/coal/shale/bitumen/peat and limestone wasn't in the mantle, comets etc. It was alive and kicking before being ignominiously buried, mostly forever. One thing I'd suggest is tariffs, which would make oil relatively more expensive. That would have a dual good effect in that it would reduce greenhouse gases, since they are considered bad, and make local production with lots of labour laws and environmental protection more competitive. Mqurice