Obama Announces New Climate Plan

  • Thread starter Thread starter lynnvinc
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
_Abyssinia said:
I updated my previous post. There are more than 2 scientists in the articles I posted that said there could be an ice age and those scientists were in some articles I found, who knows how many other scientists might have supported the idea that could be an ice age that I did not post or find.
Click to expand...
They may or may not have been climate scientists. Or may not have had a strong background in the greenhouse effect. There are still scientists (tho not climate scientists) who do not know much about the greenhouse effect.

When I broached the topic of global warming with a geologist on my campus last year, she told me the greatest greenhouse gas is water vapor – which is correct, except that it is a “feedback” (responding to the warming caused by climate “forcings,” such as CO2). She didn’t know that. She was much more into other aspects of geology and gave a really good presentation on “bling” (gold, diamonds) and the extreme harm to people its extraction is causing. Scientist, including geologists, specialize, and do not necessarily know much about other areas of their field.

I know geologists would say there could be ice ages, since there have been so many in the past, so they see the earth as constantly changing, tho at a very slow pace vis-a-vis the timeframe of our lives.

And, in fact, I’d think most climate scientists would think there could be more ice ages once the global warming as stopped in some 1000s of years.

It is only a couple of climate scientists (that I know of) who are saying there will be no more ice ages at all, bec of the extent and rapidity of the global warming today, and also bec the sun has become hotter in its progression to self-destruct in some billions of years.

So, yes, it is possible there could be more ice ages…but not for many 1000s of years. So technically those scientists were not necessarily wrong, but perhaps wrong in suggesting an ice age was imminent.
 
Ridgerunner said:
I don’t think any of that is going to happen. Other nations are going to be in the forefront of such developments because they don’t ban them out of envionmentalist politics, whereas this country does. I recently read where South Korea is well ahead of us in nuclear tech, including both breeder reactors and thorium reactors. And South Korea isn’t the only one pulling ahead, it’s just the most developed among those who are surpassing this country in nuclear technology.

And, of course, this country will not allow “clean coal” retrofitting of coal powered plants, so our exports of coal are greatly increasing to other countries. So others will undoubtedly be the ones who develop that technology while this country will become a “commodity exporter” of coal, like third world countries are who have natural resources but don’t have the technology to develop them.

Like the idologically driven “experimenter” that he is, Obama is suppressing useful technologies for the sake of a very speculative theory that is not unanimously held by reputable scientists and is not (at least for years) supported by objective fact. He is risking the welfare of the American people for the sake of his own vanity and the dollars the environmentalists give him to support his campaign against Republicans in 2014.
Click to expand...
It’s interesting you mention thorium, which is rarely mentioned in popular science articles. There is still the issue of storing waste. One solution is to keep spent fuel rounds in water- filled tanks but those tanks will rust out long before the spent fuel rods are “safe.”

The country is not allowing or disallowing anything, it’s coal-fired plant owners. Anything that raises their costs means two things: (1. people lose their jobs to cover the cost and/or (2., prices go up to cover their costs.

There is on-the-shelf technology to add “scrubbers” to smokestacks to remove pollutants but that would eat into profits and cause job losses and/or cost increases.

Peace,
Ed
 
lynnvinc said:
Love your cartoon. That says it all!
Click to expand...
Maybe not quite all of the effects of Obama’s anti-energy policies.

There’s falling behind in technology and turning into a “commodity exporter” of our energy resources to other countries; a third-world economic strategy.
There’s much higher costs of everything for most, because energy costs affect everything we buy.
There’s freezing in the dark for the poor.
There are “crony capitalism” benefits going only to the well-connected “clean energy” scams.
There is the unemployment line for everybody in the coal industry.
There is the loss of potential jobs for people in the energy industries and the industries highly sensitive to artificially high energy costs.
There is the loss of competitiveness worldwide when energy costs much more here than elsewhere.

Just a few negatives attending the pursuit of the mythical dragon of “global warming”.

And judging from their prodigal use of energy, the energy-averse politicians themselves don’t believe in it.

So it’s for nothing.
 
edwest2 said:
It’s interesting you mention thorium, which is rarely mentioned in popular science articles. There is still the issue of storing waste. One solution is to keep spent fuel rounds in water- filled tanks but those tanks will rust out long before the spent fuel rods are “safe.”

The country is not allowing or disallowing anything, it’s coal-fired plant owners. Anything that raises their costs means two things: (1. people lose their jobs to cover the cost and/or (2., prices go up to cover their costs.

There is on-the-shelf technology to add “scrubbers” to smokestacks to remove pollutants but that would eat into profits and cause job losses and/or cost increases.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
I have read that spent rods can be reprocessed in such a way that reduces their volume to a fraction of what they are now. But the government won’t allow it or the uses to which the reprocessed fuel can be put…a holdover from the cold war when the government encouraged production of “new” uranium resources for weapon-making.
 
Ridgerunner said:
I have read that spent rods can be reprocessed in such a way that reduces their volume to a fraction of what they are now. But the government won’t allow it or the uses to which the reprocessed fuel can be put…a holdover from the cold war when the government encouraged production of “new” uranium resources for weapon-making.
Click to expand...
Bingo. In burning spent fuel, one of the stages results in an isotope that is very well suited for use in nuclear weapons. The fact that this can still be burned and rendered safe doesn’t matter because ZOMG ATOMZ.
 
Ridgerunner said:
And judging from their prodigal use of energy, the energy-averse politicians themselves don’t believe in it.
Click to expand...
This is a major sticking point for me. If Al Gore believed his own rhetoric, he’d be behaving quite differently. His push for *everyone else *to give up and sacrifice (and he’s not the only one, of course) reeks of ‘let them eat cake.’
 
Ridgerunner said:
I don’t think any of that is going to happen. Other nations are going to be in the forefront of such developments because they don’t ban them out of envionmentalist politics, whereas this country does. I recently read where South Korea is well ahead of us in nuclear tech, including both breeder reactors and thorium reactors. And South Korea isn’t the only one pulling ahead, it’s just the most developed among those who are surpassing this country in nuclear technology.

And, of course, this country will not allow “clean coal” retrofitting of coal powered plants, so our exports of coal are greatly increasing to other countries. So others will undoubtedly be the ones who develop that technology while this country will become a “commodity exporter” of coal, like third world countries are who have natural resources but don’t have the technology to develop them.
Like the idologically driven “experimenter” that he is, Obama is suppressing useful technologies for the sake of a very speculative theory that is not unanimously held by reputable scientists and is not (at least for years) supported by objective fact. He is risking the welfare of the American people for the sake of his own vanity and the dollars the environmentalists give him to support his campaign against Republicans in 2014.
Click to expand...
I wanted to comment on your post, but couldn’t find anything to add.

I’d like to know if all the global warming alarmists are using their air conditioning this summer. Are they using horses to get around? What about food, only buying food from local farmers?

So far, the only ones I know who are really conservationists are the Amish.
 
I’d like to know why burning wood, a renewable resource, is banned in many communities.
 
qui_est_ce said:
So far, the only ones I know who are really conservationists are the Amish.
Click to expand...
And not even all of the Amish. Most of them have tractors, trucks, use chemical fertilizers and use electricity. There are a very very few of them who do not. It is my understanding from Amish farmers I have known that the “horse-drawn and muscle power only” ones are the Mennonites, and perhaps not even all of them.
 
One would think before we started to spend trillions to combat global warming there should at least be global warming taking place.
 
qui_est_ce said:
I’d like to know why burning wood, a renewable resource, is banned in many communities.
Click to expand...
Air pollution, I suppose. But wood fires sure smell good.

Years ago, I lived on Washington Street, east of SLU. Really a poor neighborhood. The people burned what I think was coal a lot, and on some really cold days, you could hardly see the sun because of it.
 
Ridgerunner said:
And not even all of the Amish. Most of them have tractors, trucks, use chemical fertilizers and use electricity. There are a very very few of them who do not. It is my understanding from Amish farmers I have known that the “horse-drawn and muscle power only” ones are the Mennonites, and perhaps not even all of them.
Click to expand...
Actually, in Pennsylvania, it’s the Amish. They still use horses. The only electricity they use comes from generators, no power lines allowed. The reason for that is many have dairy farms and they need the technology for sanitary reasons.

Cell phones are somewhat of a controversy, because there is no physical connection to the English world.

I do like how the Amish assess technology and its effects on the community before they allow it.
 
estesbob said:
One would think before we started to spend trillions to combat global warming there should at least be global warming taking place.
Click to expand...
That makes you one of Obama’s “flat earthers”. Your membership card will probably go into the mail today. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Besides, Bob, the heaviest burden of increased energy costs will fall on the poor, and why should liberals care any more about the poor now than they have in the past?
 
Ridgerunner said:
That makes you one of Obama’s “flat earthers”. Your membership card will probably go into the mail today. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Besides, Bob, the heaviest burden of increased energy costs will fall on the poor, and why should liberals care any more about the poor now than they have in the past?
Click to expand...
I suspect I will get audited shortly.
 
qui_est_ce said:
Actually, in Pennsylvania, it’s the Amish. They still use horses. The only electricity they use comes from generators, no power lines allowed. The reason for that is many have dairy farms and they need the technology for sanitary reasons.

Cell phones are somewhat of a controversy, because there is no physical connection to the English world.

I do like how the Amish assess technology and its effects on the community before they allow it.
Click to expand...
Do you know how much methane horses “breaking wind” adds to the atmosphere!!!
 
ringil said:
Maybe later he will include those who think the world is 6000 years old.

Folks may have problems with Obama but it is great to have a leader who acknowledges valid science.
Click to expand...
Bollocks. He won’t acknowledge that human beings are human beings from the moment of conception, and that’s perfectly valid science.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Air pollution, I suppose. But wood fires sure smell good.

Years ago, I lived on Washington Street, east of SLU. Really a poor neighborhood. The people burned what I think was coal a lot, and on some really cold days, you could hardly see the sun because of it.
Click to expand...
I know you are not that old!

1939 St. Louis smog

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4d/Man_Lights_Cigarette_in_Daylight_-Black_Tuesday_1939.jpg/220px-Man_Lights_Cigarette_in_Daylight-_Black_Tuesday_1939.jpgA man lights a cigarette as streetlights along Olive glow during the daylight hours of November 28, 1939. St. Louis Post-Dispatch
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top