More on Global Warming

[franko]

Isn't that what it is already? Sure feels like it.

[Cranky]

redscull said:

While your words have merit, noone's proposing going off the deep end and running the auto industry out of the water.

For what it's worth, I live a "normal" life. The major adjustments I've made is in my transportation (I hardly drive anywhere unless it's too far to bike) and my house is significantly reduced. Guess what? That didn't change my living costs at all (in fact, I probably have more money in my pocket). Of course I'm not willing to pay you to stop using gasoline, but I am willing to fund better technology research (as we all should be). The advent of electric, hydrogen-based and even "hybrid" cars is certainly a giant leap in the direction I'd like us to head. The only kind of tax I'd be willing to pay and support is a road tax (like is used in London) that would a) help fund road repair and b) encourage consolidation of road passengers into carpools and buses. Just like you don't want to be chastised for your living style (or rather the poster above said that), I don't want to breathe in the Saperlipopette from your car/live the repercussions because you chose to live an hour's drive from your office. Response in moderation, that's all I'm looking for.

There are technologies that can be adapted right now to make your car far more efficient but it's not happening. If every car in Canada switched to natural gas with regenerative braking the automotive pollution level of this country would drop by 90% and reduce our dependance on oil by a quarter. Ask yourself why it's not happpening from the auto industry and ALSO ask why enviromental groups are not screaming for it?

Instead, we get ethanol which uses just as much oil to make as the energy it produces, is pushing food prices higher and yet governments and enviromental groups are hugging it as if it was THE ANSWER. Why?

How many times have you heard about "the hydrogen economy"? It's a complete myth and yet, politicians and enviromental groups are pushing it like it was free rib steaks! (I love my steaks!). Very briefly, hydrogen requires electricity to make. It's NOT found as a free element on earth and can not exist as a free element on earth thus it needs to be created and can only be serve as a energy carrier. In other words, we will put electricity in to create hydrogen then put the hydrogen in the tank to power the cars. Why bother with the conversion and not just put the electricity in batteries. Do you hear the politicians or the enviromentalist tell you this? Why?

redscull said:

The funny thing about techonlogy is that it traditionally takes 20-30 years to diffuse to other areas after its invention. It's the technology that we develop today that will shape the world in 2050. I don't claim to know what carbon emissions and deforestation will do to the world, but it doesn't take a genius to put two and two together and say "You know what? It doesn't sound good." Asthma rates in particular are of great concern to me. More pollutants + less trees = more crap in the air.

It does NOT take 20-30 years for technology to filter down to the masses. If there was an intellegent group with NO influence from politicians and enviromentalist, Canada's energy needs could be changed within 10 to 15 years and you would be STUNNED to see the results. But it will NEVER happen. There could be billions invested in hydroelectric dams, billions invested in nuclear energy, ALL coal plants would be eliminated. Cars converted to natural gas. Nuclear heat conversion of tar sands into oil. Smart lighting. Massivly upgraded house energy requirements. I could probably write a hundred pages and still miss out on 80% of what could be done to use energy more efficiently. Why can't it be done? To put it simply, everybody has an agenda. You couldn't put a nuclear plant on Mars without SOMEONE in the enviromental lobby screamming that the Martians are going to glow in the dark from radiation. You can't build a hydroplant anywhere in Canada without the natives or the province demanding MONEY or POWER. You can't do anything without somone wanting to control it, make money off it or just plain whine about it.

redscull said:

China and India are the greatest polluters in the world, but if smaller countries with less population (who pollute more per capita, by the way) aren't willing to lead change, who will? Personally I don't think we should be funding the economic development of China; it's not really in our nation's best interests. That being said, developing technology that we can sell to China certainly is, so if the means to that end is funding the initial growth that leads to further industrialisation of China then I guess it makes sense.

China use to build a coal plant every week, three years ago. Now they are building one every three and a quarter days, by 2009, they will build one every two days. We can eliminate every coal plant in this country and destroy our economy and within LESS than FIVE months, China will have build more coal plant capacity. 15 of the 20 most polluted cities in the world are in China. China is NOT going to stop building coal plants because it has the worlds second largest reserve (after the US). Of course, wihtin a year or two, you will hear China proclaiming that it's going to go uber green and they will reduce their pollution by 6 million percent. Enviromentalist will hug them. The UN will erect seven statues. It will all be a lie. Coal plants are the fastest way to create large amounts of reliable electrical energy and China will never stop using. Why would they? It cost China less then 1 cent per kilowatt. NOTHING compares to that cost.

So tell me again what effect on the worlds pollution level we will have even if we plunge ourselves into an economic holocaust?

Green energy solutions? Wind, solar? Yes, to a very minor extent. On the warmest day in Ontario several weeks ago, we only had 3 megawatts of 398 megawatts of installed wind power available. Yes, less then ONE percent available on the warmest day of the year. If Ontario depended for even 10% from wind power electricity, we would have a complete grid shutdown or at best, rotating blackouts. Yet, if you ask ANY environmentalist, he will tell you how wind power was invented by God. Worse still, vote sucking politicians want to spend BILLIONS on it.

redscull said:

By the way, I'm not missing anything. I understand what people here mean, but you can't refute pro-global warming evidence that is supposedly biased by additional evidence produced to refute the original claim. How these claims are seemingly less biased is unknown to me. The only person I want to listen to is someone who went into an experiment expecting a warming trend, and came out with a cooling one (or vice versa) and even then it's probably because they LOVEed it up.
Until then, I'm reserving my judgments to my own thoughts regarding global environment trends.

I don't give a Saperlipopette about politicians and their friends, because it's not money that I'd have seen anyway. It's one politician and their friends vs another politician and his. Better the money go to environmental research and technology development than oil or weapons contracts. Average Joe isn't suffering, they're stagnating. In many ways.

As BC pointed out, in here I am the most vocifirous critic of "HUMAN caused global warming". I have questioned but have never denied that we could be getting into a warmer period. The earth has gone through thousands of these cycles before and it should suprise no one that the earth can get warmer...or colder. What I have always crticized is this sudden embracing of "carbon dioxide" as the cause of it. I am old enough to have heard the endless yapping about global cooling caused by..you geussed it, MAN. Twenty years ago, we had no idea of cooling or warming. Nothing special even ten years ago. Today, the world is comming to an end if we don't stop "carbion emmisions". Huh? How? What? Where did this come from? All of a sudden, and it IS sudden in geological terms, you hear speeches, you see graphs, "scientific" evidence spouted by every media, ice core samples that showed "suitable" results, a reletivly few screaming scientists, apopletic enviromentalist, panic, death, end of the world. In brief, the world is comming to an end and YOU, YOU the carbon breather has caused it. It's so all encompassing and so convinient that even the brightest minds couldn't invent a better tax base for the politicains to embrace or a bettter platform for socialist to do their social engineering.

How about this "all encompassing" demands?.....recent articles I read...

The Western world must stop consumming so much beef and a limit of 100 grams per day per person. This will "help balance the lower beef consumption of the third world". Reason? Animals produce carbon dioxide.

The Western world should finiance projects or pay the third world countries for their excessive carbon production through a carbon tax. In fact, China is DEMANDING it gat paid so as not to use toxic substances.

If this "human caused global warming crisis" is not a socialist wet dream then I don't l know what it.

One more thing.....

You hate pollution? You hate toxins? You hate filth? So do I and BC and Franko and every sane man on this planet. BUT, what has happend is that the enviromental groups, the leftist and the vote and tax grabbing politicians have linked everything. By making one of the most common elements on earth a "pollutant", there can be no discussion of any real social policies without the screaming of "human carbon emmissions causing global warming". It has to be the greatest sales job, or con job EVER. Think about this, if you control carbon "production", you control every single aspect of peoples lives, never mind their economies. Finally, a way to tax the air we exhale and control everything we do.

That is why some us are not only skeptical, we are downright concerned about the attempt by self serving groups to control our society through manipulation and fear mongering. Personally, as an engineeer, I can see practical, common sense solutions that are buried under mountains and mountains of agendas and interests.

[Cranky]

badcompany said:

Instead of being called “deniers”. HA is the biggest critic of the global warming movement, and yet if you ask him (you probably won’t even have to) he’ll go through the list of environmentally friendly changes he himself has made.

ABSOLUTELY! Just this weekend alone....

....I waxed my 12 cylinder Ferrari so I can get .014 liters better economy at 250km an hour.

....In a weight saving move to get better mileage from my Hummer, I removed twenty 100 dollar bills from my wallet.

.....to save energy in my 20,000 square foot house, I closed TWO blinds.

....I ordered all the servents to reduce their breathing by 10% every day. Needless to say, my harem girls are excempt. They work so hard.

And of course, just to prove that I am a true enviromentalist even in my business.....

...I did not supply wasteful things like toilet paper or allow any of my employees to flush the toilets.

No, wait, I am not finshed.

...I invented a portable carbon detector that can be shoved down ones throat and a methane detector that can be implanted in ones butt. As soon as the government passes mouth and butt pollution regulations, I can sell them the means to detect, control and tax.

Despite my rhetoric, nobody can challange my true enviromentalist heart.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

manton said:

I am looking forward to watching Glenn Beck's special on Global Warming tonight on CNN Headlines News, separating myht from fact...a fair and balanced approached.

Gee I wonder if the school principals will tape the program and force students to watch in order to get a different perspective. Don't bet on it as we all know the educational institutions worship their earth God Al Gore.

Not sure if these are the episodes you were watching manton.

"Scientists aren't wrong in the present ... scientists are wrong in the past ..."

Glenn Beck gives his suggestion for controlling global warming by eliminating the main problem ... Yes ... just blow up the sun

and

Glenn Beck and the NY Times Admission of Global Warming Swindle ... Students were actually losing marks in school for contradicting Gore's facts in "An Inconvenient Truth." To me it's akin to a 50's/60's attitude.

Was watching Beck tonight as well and he slammed Kyoto very well.

All nations should join hands

Anyway, there's lots of material from Beck on global warming.

Cheers.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Had to post one more from Beck.

Kyoto Accord is a joke ... an expensive joke ...

Check out Gore's spot.

Cheers.