World's climate warming faster than feared, scientists say

[Ender]

Given that the major power supplier in the northeast has to shut down 1/4 of their coal fired plants due to EPA regulations, it’s going to be very tough on the elderly and the poor if this winter is anything like the last one here in the US. Making energy costs sky-rocket is done by reducing the supply, there just may not be enough to around.

Of course, a lot of folks are going to be blaming the power companies, ignoring the fact that a lot of folks have been warning this is going to happen based on the governments actions.

I say out with the old (bad) and in with the new (good).Workers at a state-of-the-art solar plant in the Mojave Desert have a name for birds that fly through the plant’s concentrated sun rays – “streamers,” for the smoke plume that comes from birds that ignite in midair.
wtop.com/884/3683752/Emerging-solar-plants-scorch-birds-in-mid-air
Oops.

Ender

 

[lynnvinc]

Earth to All Ye who float above us in a Utopian Dream Cloud: Stop thinking the government can tax us into a perfect world.

Actually you are correct. The only thing that will help mitigate AGW is if enough people around the world were to reduce their GHG emissions. And that includes caulking one’s windows, etc. As Hunter Lovins has said the energy policy comes down to the cracks around one’s windows.

Tax and fees will not help one iota if people insist on living energy/resource inefficient/non-conservative lives without a care or concern about the people they are harming.

It is up to the people – you and me. Nothing else is going to work. Tax and fees, if at all they help, would be to encourage us to reduce our pollution by striving to reduce our bills. But if nothing can encourage intransigent people to do good by reducing their pollution, then it just won’t work at all.

From my experiences with people I don’t really have much hope. What my daily experiences it seems about a fourth or more of the people are slackers, cheaters, criminals, or just plain mean people. With a world composed of those types, we can’t expect them to turn off lights not in use or any other good thing to reduce their GHG emissions and concomitant pollution.

Maybe only prayer for them will help, since nothing else seems to.

 

[Ridgerunner]

From my experiences with people I don’t really have much hope. What my daily experiences it seems about a fourth or more of the people are slackers, cheaters, criminals, or just plain mean people. With a world composed of those types, we can’t expect them to turn off lights not in use or any other good thing to reduce their GHG emissions and concomitant pollution.

People who don’t turn off the lights when they leave a room are slackers, cheaters, criminals or just plain mean people? What an astonishing thing to say! But I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised. I have long thought Puritanism is far from dead; it’s just that it has changed its focus to “political sins” from “fleshly sins”. But it’s just as intolerant as Johnanthan Edwards with the shingles on an overcast day.

 

[sps49]

The poor are always hurt the most when the elite forces steps for “the good of all”

Yes indeed. Our “moral and intellectual superiors” know what is best for the huddled masses. Steps will have to be taken, and a price must be paid to ensure survival, etc. etc. Thank goodness its not up to them!

 

[sps49]

People who don’t turn off the lights when they leave a room are slackers, cheaters, criminals or just plain mean people? What an astonishing thing to say! But I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised. I have long thought Puritanism is far from dead; it’s just that it has changed its focus to “political sins” from “fleshly sins”. But it’s just as intolerant as Johnanthan Edwards with the shingles on an overcast day.

I have noticed this as well. Some people have this uncanny sense of who and what people are, where they are from, and their relative worth to society. An almost prescient ability. Almost as if they know what we are thinking. It must be quite a burden to have to live with the knowledge that you are in the right, and compassionate enough to share it with others. Almost a vocation, one might say.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I have noticed this as well. Some people have this uncanny sense of who and what people are, where they are from, and their relative worth to society. An almost prescient ability. Almost as if they know what we are thinking. It must be quite a burden to have to live with the knowledge that you are in the right, and compassionate enough to share it with others. Almost a vocation, one might say.

 

[lynnvinc]

People who don’t turn off the lights when they leave a room are slackers, cheaters, criminals or just plain mean people? What an astonishing thing to say! But I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised. I have long thought Puritanism is far from dead; it’s just that it has changed its focus to “political sins” from “fleshly sins”. But it’s just as intolerant as Johnanthan Edwards with the shingles on an overcast day.

No. What I’m saying is that in my experiences a lot of people, maybe one-forth, are just selfish, mean, even criminal in some cases. They do all sort of mean and cruel things to people (one of my fields is criminal justice, also I have some business dealings and come across shady people all the time, some addicted to drugs and alcohol – some claiming to be Christian). They have no thinking at all about doing any good. They are focused on self, not even realizing that by doing good they also do good for themselves in many ways. Of course the news is also full of people doing bad things, as well.

I’ve unfortunately had more bad dealings with such people in the past couple of months and have gone away thinking – they’re not going to mitigate climate change, or do anything else for the common good…so there’s really no hope at all for mitigating AGW. It would take a huge conversion of the bad people of the world (and they seem legion) for there to be a significant dent in mitigating AGW, or for bringing about world peace, reducing world hunger, or solving any of the other huge world problems for that matter.

However, I also have to say that in Mary’s eyes, what she sees (I think, I imagine) is most people very sad and hurting and she has compassion for all. I strive to overcome my disappointment in these people who cheat and harm me, and pray for them, rather than become bitter.

 

[Ridgerunner]

No. What I’m saying is that in my experiences a lot of people, maybe one-forth, are just selfish, mean, even criminal in some cases. They do all sort of mean and cruel things to people (one of my fields is criminal justice, also I have some business dealings and come across shady people all the time, some addicted to drugs and alcohol – some claiming to be Christian). They have no thinking at all about doing any good. They are focused on self, not even realizing that by doing good they also do good for themselves in many ways. Of course the news is also full of people doing bad things, as well.

I’ve unfortunately had more bad dealings with such people in the past couple of months and have gone away thinking – they’re not going to mitigate climate change, or do anything else for the common good…so there’s really no hope at all for mitigating AGW. It would take a huge conversion of the bad people of the world (and they seem legion) for there to be a significant dent in mitigating AGW, or for bringing about world peace, reducing world hunger, or solving any of the other huge world problems for that matter.

However, I also have to say that in Mary’s eyes, what she sees (I think, I imagine) is most people very sad and hurting and she has compassion for all. I strive to overcome my disappointment in these people who cheat and harm me, and pray for them, rather than become bitter.

Sorry about your bad experiences. However, I have dealt with a lot of people over the years, and in no way would I characterize “a fourth” of them to be “bad people”. In no way.
I have known drug addicts and people with criminal records, and I still wouldn’t characterize them that way.

But there is no way you can equate someone’s inclination to do bad things with his or her refusal to accept the MMGW ideology. Some people who are its most vigorous supporters have insouciently wreaked havoc on the lives of others. And when you think about it, a person who intends to make people’s utility bills “skyrocket”, make transportation unnecessarily expensive and cost jobs cannot be reasonably counted among the most caring in society.

Perhaps in “counting noses”, one might look more closely at the MMGW supporters and see just how much suffering they’re willing to cause to how many in order to serve their ideology (or, in some cases, purses). When one sees an oil tank car explode in some little town when that oil could be safely transported by pipeline, who shall we call evil? When a man who makes millions off MMGW believers heats seven mansions and flies around in a private jet, who are we to call evil? When a president employs a dozen ships, many airplanes and round-the-clock jet fighter protection so he can shake a man’s hand in Africa, and yet promises to “shut down” an employer of thousands and make poor peoples’ utility bills “skyrocket” dare we call that evil?

 

[lynnvinc]

…And when you think about it, a person who intends to make people’s utility bills “skyrocket”, make transportation unnecessarily expensive and cost jobs cannot be reasonably counted among the most caring in society.

I’m sure no one interested in mitigating AGW wants people’s utility and transportation to increase. That’s ridiculous. That would mean people are continuing to emit the same or much greater levels of GHGs.

What people concerned about AGW would like is for people to REDUCE their fossil-fuel based electric/gas consumption and bills thru energy efficiency/conservation and/or alt energy when feasible.

If poor, one could start out with low or no-cost measures, then saving money from those, could go on to measures with higher up-front costs, but that save money in the long run.

That’s sort of what we did – except one year, 1991, we had several $1000 in the bank and I presented hubby with a business plan to buy a SunFrost frig (uses 1/10th the energy). That cut our electric bill way down, saving us more than I had calculated, and with the savings in veggies not going bad to boot, it paid for itself in 16 years, rather than the projected 20 years, and has been going on to save. However our $6 low-flow showerhead has saved us almost as much, while cutting hot water from the shower by over half, with no noticeable feel in the spray.

RE transportation costs, I’ve been promoting moving closer to work/schools/shops on one’s next move for some 25 years. If people had been following that, considering that many people make at least one move within 25 years for other reasons (new job, etc), that would have greatly helped those people. I still see people, even poor people, choosing to live far away from jobs when there are good housing choices much closer.

There was a poor woman in Chicago whose gas bill was some $350 in a small apt, the same winter month that ours in a large 3-BR home out in Aurora without lake-effect warming was about $75. It was obvious her apt had lack of insulation, caulking, etc and perhaps she left the windows open. I’m thinking the gov or some charitable org could help people like her (and her landlord) to become much more energy efficient/conservative.

If done right, then even if the gov increases fees or taxes on fossil fuel energy, people should still be able to save money, not spend more. Unless they just love being inefficient and profligate and don’t want to give that up for anyone or any reason.

I wish you’d stop assuming that people concerned about AGW want people to keep on emitting their same levels of GHGs or increase these. That just doesn’t make sense. I don’t want that, and I don’t think others so concerned do either. And I’m not even suggesting reducing one’s lifestyle or a countries productivity, only making such reductions in a smart way that makes sense and saves cents and $$.

OTOH, those who refuse to accept that AGW is happening – they are the one’s who would risk other’s well-being and lives due to their intransigence to support reduction in GHGs (and concomitant pollution that harms and kills).

 

[Ridgerunner]

I wish you’d stop assuming that people concerned about AGW want people to keep on emitting their same levels of GHGs or increase these. .

I don’t know where you got this. I certainly never said it. What I have said is that it appears the ones who are the major supporters of the MMGW ideology and “mitigation” do not do it themselves. They expect others to do it. Examples of this are Barack Obama, Al Gore, Warren Buffett, George Soros, all profligate emitters of CO2 who want the “little people” to bear the burden of “mitigation”, not themselves.

It tells me the most powerful promoters of the MMGW ideology don’t believe in it. They apparently think we’re all too stupid to notice.

 

[Midwest88]

This is “good” news. Summers in Chicago might be longer than 2.5 months.

 

[lynnvinc]

I don’t know where you got this. I certainly never said it. What I have said is that it appears the ones who are the major supporters of the MMGW ideology and “mitigation” do not do it themselves. They expect others to do it. Examples of this are Barack Obama, Al Gore, Warren Buffett, George Soros, all profligate emitters of CO2 who want the “little people” to bear the burden of “mitigation”, not themselves.

It tells me the most powerful promoters of the MMGW ideology don’t believe in it. They apparently think we’re all too stupid to notice.

Again, that could be false. I for one have put forth a lot of effort to reduce. And perhaps those rich people may have reduced the GHG emissions from higher levels. Even my reductions do not come down to some tribal person’s emissions in Africa of S. America. I’ve only reduced about 60%+ from what we were emitting in 1990, and am probably still emitting 10, maybe 20 times more than a tribal person, or a very poor person in India of Mali. The important thing to do it reduce from the level at which one currently is; we shouldn’t expect people to extremely reduce, epecially if they have to make business trips, etc.

 

[Erich]

And perhaps those rich people may have reduced the GHG emissions from higher levels. … The important thing to do it reduce from the level at which one currently is; we shouldn’t expect people to extremely reduce, epecially if they have to make business trips, etc.

Look over the descriptions of the following two houses and see if you can tell which belongs to an environmentalist.

HOUSE # 1:
A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern “snow belt,” either. It’s in the South.

HOUSE # 2:
Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every “green” feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.

HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. It is the private residence of the previous President of the United States, George W. Bush.

So whose house is gentler on the environment?

 

[lynnvinc]

Look over the descriptions of the following two houses and see if you can tell which belongs to an environmentalist.

HOUSE # 1:
A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern “snow belt,” either. It’s in the South.

HOUSE # 2:
Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every “green” feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.

HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. It is the private residence of the previous President of the United States, George W. Bush.

So whose house is gentler on the environment?

I was always taught 2 wrongs don’t make a right. And just because Hitler killed a lot of people doesn’t mean we’re okay if we only kill or harm one person

IOW, we ALL (rich and poor alike) need to reduce our harms to God’s creation (including to our own species), and if bilateral or multilaterial agreements and efforts to do so fail or fall short (as is the case re AGW), then we still must follow a unilateral strategy.

I remember a homily in Mass once where the priest pointed out these types of flawed moral reasoning – that just because so&so does it (or refuses to do good) therefore we do not need to do good or can persist in our bad behavior.

 

[vz71]

I was always taught 2 wrongs don’t make a right. And just because Hitler killed a lot of people doesn’t mean we’re okay if we only kill or harm one person

IOW, we ALL (rich and poor alike) need to reduce our harms to God’s creation (including to our own species), and if bilateral or multilaterial agreements and efforts to do so fail or fall short (as is the case re AGW), then we still must follow a unilateral strategy.

I remember a homily in Mass once where the priest pointed out these types of flawed moral reasoning – that just because so&so does it (or refuses to do good) therefore we do not need to do good or can persist in our bad behavior.

You assume the post is a comment that we should or should not do something.

In actuality, the post is a highlight of the hypocrisy inherent to the green movement

 

[DoGodsBidding]

You assume the post is a comment that we should or should not do something.

In actuality, the post is a highlight of the hypocrisy inherent to the green movement

And that’s a real inconvenient truth.

DGB

 

[estesbob]

I was always taught 2 wrongs don’t make a right. And just because Hitler killed a lot of people doesn’t mean we’re okay if we only kill or harm one person

IOW, we ALL (rich and poor alike) need to reduce our harms to God’s creation (including to our own species), and if bilateral or multilaterial agreements and efforts to do so fail or fall short (as is the case re AGW), then we still must follow a unilateral strategy.

I remember a homily in Mass once where the priest pointed out these types of flawed moral reasoning – that just because so&so does it (or refuses to do good) therefore we do not need to do good or can persist in our bad behavior.

I think the point is one should no more go to an abortionist for pre-natal care than they should to Al Gore for advice on the environment.

I suspect I use far less energy than most of the environmentalists in the country-that’s because I live in an area where Air Conditioning is not needed.

 

[sps49]

You assume the post is a comment that we should or should not do something.

In actuality, the post is a highlight of the hypocrisy inherent to the green movement

Winner!

 

[lynnvinc]

You assume the post is a comment that we should or should not do something.

In actuality, the post is a highlight of the hypocrisy inherent to the green movement

I’m glad you brought up hypocrisy.

When I was a teen I left my Protestant church in a self-righteous huff bec of the hypocrisy I saw there. Then in my 20s when I met my husband, a Catholic, I was ready to convert to Catholicism. Not because I thought Catholics were less hypocritical. No way. It was because I had come to understand that hypocrisy was rife in our society and – let me face – I came to realize I too was a hypocrite in so many ways. I fall short. I stumble. I have many flaws, many habitual ingrained flaws, which my husband is only too glad to point out. (One thing good about Catholicism is that little act of contrition that is available for making over and over and over again.)

So since I’m a greenie and a hypocrite, I guess you’re right – greens are a bunch of dirty rotten hypocrites

 

[Erich]

And just because Hitler killed a lot of people doesn’t mean we’re okay if we only kill or harm one person

Godwin’s Law is alive and well. I guess it’s time for this thread to be officially closed