Global Warming Debate

[Joesaila]

Its too cold- "Global Warming"

Its too hot- "Global Warming"

"Carbon footprints" mine zinc, lead, make polymers, transport them across oceans to make expensive batteries, replace after a few years, dispose of hazardous materials. Then do it all again...

Make a film and use computer imagery to simulate polar bears running out of ice and 'some' people will believe it.

Oh yes, do the same thing to produce artificial fur... 'The sky is cracking, rocks are falling...'

When some purport to know all the answers, get ready to duck. Sorry for the run on but at this point its all baloney, green baloney.

Its 2007 and a very small voiciferous crowd needs to 'get a life'!

[sailaway21]

This one was too beautiful. I was out in the garage, varnishing my arms, and this guy was on the radio, which, let's face it, after ten o'clock at night you can hear anything imaginable on the radio, even updates on the Lindburgh kidnapping. Anyways, this guy was expounding on the rising sea-levels to come and how all of the underground utlities in port cities, amoung other calamaties, would wreak havoc on Wall Street for heaven's sake. But the good part was when he started bemoaning the fact that GW is not universally accepted. I think he said something like, "there's a small group of people out there, and they are good, very good, at getting their anti-science message out". Oh, sweet Jesus, I about slapped my face with the varnish brush to stop laughing. It brought back such fond memories. Like when I took my physical for the "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy", and that 3 credit credit mail order course on the "grassy knoll" theory (I think I've got the certificate for that one around here somewhere), and then there was the photocopy of that op-ed from the NYT about the USSR, where the writer says, "I've seen the future and it works".
I mean, we've got hairdressers out there who, God bless 'em, are worried that their blow-dryers are contributing to the problem. Life, you can't make this stuff up.

[Valiente]

Yes, but you've got Presidential candidates who believe that Noah rode a dinosaur to retrieve the best logs for the Ark.

Neither political extreme has a monopoly on stupidity or gullibility. Unfortunately, we live in a world where there's money to be made shouting "THE END IS NEAR" and "PROBLEMS? WHAT PROBLEMS?" as loudly as possible.

I find I can skip even listening to 90% of what passes for public discourse by focusing only briefly on the source and the usually transparent motivation of said source. The great majority of politics these days depends on junkie logic: say absolutely anything that will get you what you want.

I do believe that global climate change is occuring: I've been a "weather fan" since childhood. And by "climate change", I don't just mean warming: I mean that the predictability of seasons is becoming less, and the range of extremes is becoming greater. Essentially, more heat equals more chaos and a lessening likelihood that "April showers bring May flowers" will continue to reflect reality.

I think the odds that man's activities are at least partly responsible for this, but that it is difficult to determine at this point to what degree...pun intended. I think that because we understand that for the sake of our lungs alone, burning fossil fuels should be monitored with an eye to reduction, and that alternatives must be developed systematically, and that this may involve some fairly large infrastructure changes, like how we plan cities and how we transport goods. Hell, anyone for a diesel-electric cargo ship run mostly on sail? Why the hell not?

I do know that some "initiatives" like ethanol and carbon credits seem poorly thought out, or even a step backwards. I don't own a car, and my carbon footprint is pretty small for a Westerner (and will be smaller yet as a liveaboard), and yet I have all the "toys" most people have. Maybe even better, because I don't have the cost of time commuting, and I don't have the cost of driving, which I estimate at $6,000-$8,000/year for ownership, depreciation, interest, fuel, insurance and maintenance. And that's for a $30,000 car lasting seven to nine years.

My 40 foot "yacht" costs about one-half that amount, and I'm in the second or third most expensive club locally.

So everything's relative. I am planning for a warmer world in my lifetime, because you can trust thermodynamics a lot more than you can trust people to think clearly or to be remotely honest with each other.

[Idiens]

A couple of throw-away lines from this side of the pond....

"The private individual can do nothing about carbon emmissions reductions of any significance - only industry can make a difference."

"50% of all carbon emmissions comes from oil production burn-off - they know about the problem but it will take years to fix."

[RAGNAR]

zzzz

[RAGNAR]

Izz

[sailaway21]

Val,
You stated that "alternatives must be developed systematically". By that, I assume you mean to imply that alternatives are not already present? Since most of our power-generating comes from coal, and those are the only power plants that have been built in the last thirty years, and since they pollute the most, I have a radical notion for you. Nuclear power. If you are so concerned with the problem of human induced warming, and if you've examined it to your satisfaction-then go for it, I would expect you to be out mobilizing for "nukes in the neighborhood". Accidents do happen. But what's the odd melt-down or two, compared to long-term parboiling?

[Valiente]

Originally Posted by sailaway21

Val,
You stated that "alternatives must be developed systematically". By that, I assume you mean to imply that alternatives are not already present? Since most of our power-generating comes from coal, and those are the only power plants that have been built in the last thirty years, and since they pollute the most, I have a radical notion for you. Nuclear power. If you are so concerned with the problem of human induced warming, and if you've examined it to your satisfaction-then go for it, I would expect you to be out mobilizing for "nukes in the neighborhood". Accidents do happen. But what's the odd melt-down or two, compared to long-term parboiling?

Nuclear power is not particularly radical. My city is run on it. I don't have an objection to nuclear if the waste can be dealt with responsibility. There's a mixed record on this.

Ironically, one of the better ideas I've heard lately is the best way to reduce emissions from the refining of the Alberta tar sands (very energy and water intensive) is to have a nearby nuke plant to power the processing.

I think you guys have me painted as a granola-eater. Far from it. I'm more a "enslave millions and laugh atop a throne of skulls of your enemies" type. By which I mean if some hard decisions aren't made by the people, they will be made for the people...and possibly to their disadvantage.

My political views and my ecological views come out of the same classically conservative place, but my conservatism has little to do with what goes by that name today.

[Idiens]

Originally Posted by RAGNAR

Idiens, Industry is nothing more or less than individuals.

Tell that to those losing jobs to the Chinese.

Originally Posted by RAGNAR

Further, industry reacts to the market, trends for which are defined by countless individuals making countless choices every day,

Which is why industry generates most of the CO2, I guess.

Originally Posted by RAGNAR

Further, where's the proof that carbon emissions are an issue?

Read the scientific journals on the subject, or just the news.

Originally Posted by RAGNAR

Do you think the thermodynamics of 1.4 drops of anything can affect the thermodynamics/temperature of that gallon?

Ever heard of catalytic action?
BTW - I was only quoting from a couple of radio/TV programmes.

[sailaway21]

Idiens,
A little off the topic but I thought I'd mention that the first world is not what is losing jobs to China. It is the third world. Countries such as the Caribbean nations, which is why it was important to pass CAFTA legislation, which put those countries on, at least, an even footing with China. China is currently beneficial to those American and European high skills jobs that pay so well as they supply the technological items that China cannot produce, like Boeing airplanes.

Back on topic. Scientists cannot figure out if the carbon emissions are causing the warming, or the warming is causing increased carbon emissions. One is easier to blame than the other.(g)