View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17749 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:02 am Post subject: Wildfires and global warming |
|
|
Apologists for the oil industry have quickly attacked the spread of wildfires as the product of Democratic rule in California. Not enough raking, eh? A despicable effort to divert attention from global warming as CO2 levels rise and the carbon industry trie desperately to wring the last profits out of destroying our climate. A California problem? Ten percent of the homes in Oregon have been evacuated.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/09/climate/nyt-climate-newsletter-california-wildfires.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 11:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not even going to look ... don't need to ... but show us the proof.
Jeez ... if it's not racism, it's AGW. If it's not racism or AGW, it's white privilege. If it's none of those, it's critical race theory. Or Trump. Or RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA.
I have a bare patch of lawn. PROVE it's AGW and not my busted irrigation pipe.
Sometimes a banana is just a banana. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17749 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
isobars wrote: | I'm not even going to look ...
I have a bare patch of lawn. PROVE it's AGW and not my busted irrigation pipe.
|
Hysterical. Fick won't look, and thinks his lawn is like western forests. You can't make this shit up. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008 Posts: 6485 Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wildfires, global warming, lightening, and arson.
I'm surprised that you used the term that doesn't poll well "global warming", you're slipping. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vientomas
Joined: 25 Apr 2000 Posts: 2343
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mac wrote: | isobars wrote: | I'm not even going to look ...
I have a bare patch of lawn. PROVE it's AGW and not my busted irrigation pipe.
|
Hysterical. Fick won't look, and thinks his lawn is like western forests. You can't make this shit up. |
And, he lives in the desert. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9120 Location: at a computer
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is amazing how all the Haze, and smoke completely shuts down the prevailing winds in the bay. A few times in the past three weeks, I've gone to a site where it was blowing, then the smoke rolls in and everything gets still and hot. The climate has definitely changed since I've lived here, and I cant help but think the massive population explosion, along with the traffic and haze has had a material impact. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17749 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nw30 wrote: | Wildfires, global warming, lightening, and arson.
I'm surprised that you used the term that doesn't poll well "global warming", you're slipping. |
Try to pay attention. Higher temperatures are one of the manifestations of climate change. Others include sea level rise, more frequent and intense hurricanes, more chaotic rainfall, drought, and more intense winters. This is not a poll. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001 Posts: 4162
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Co2 stats from the top 5 producers in the world and the increase in Co2 production between 1990 and 2017:
1 China 353% increase & produces 29.3% of world’s Co2.
2 US .4% increase & produces 13.7 % of the world’s Co2
3 EU -20% decrease & produces 9.5% of the world’s Co2
4 India 305% increase & produces 6.6% of the world’s Co2
5 Russia -25.8% decrease & produces 4.7% of the world’s Co2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions
So, here we have 64% of the world’s Co2 producers, and as I posted once before, China and India are continuing to increase their production by building more coal power plants.
Quote: | Yet China's overseas ventures include hundreds of electric power plants that burn coal, which is a significant emitter of the carbon scientifically linked to climate change. Edward Cunningham, a specialist on China and its energy markets at Harvard University, tells NPR that China is building or planning more than 300 coal plants in places as widely spread as Turkey, Vietnam, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Egypt and the Philippines. |
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/29/716347646/why-is-china-placing-a-global-bet-on-coal
Quote: | Since 2000, the world has doubled its coal-fired power capacity to around 2,045 gigawatts (GW) after explosive growth in China and India. A further 200GW is being built and 300GW is planned. |
https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants
My question – As the United States moves to greener energy and less Co2 pollution, will it have a meaningful impact on Global Warming or Climate Change in the next few decades?
Oh, and by the way, I believe in Global warming and in moving to greener energy (within reasonable limits). Defining “reasonable limits” is for another discussion. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17749 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A reasonable question and post. According to 2014 data, China accounted for 30% of CO2 emissions, the US 15%. By 2019 that had changed only a little, with China accounting for 27.2%, the US 14.6%. The good news within that is that the increasing costs of carbon-based energy has resulted in both slower growth in CO2 emissions, and in fewer CO2 emissions required to generate economic activity.
You are absolutely correct that activity by the US alone cannot stop global warming. There must be economic pressures that allow a transition to greener forms of energy. The first step in that is improving technology. Huge steps have been made, but far more needs to be discovered. I have no illusion this will happen overnight, I've been around windsurfing for over 40 years and seen the various transitions in go fast boards, from the Rocket to the foiling windsurfer and kite boards.
Most people who pay attention believe that efforts by the Obama administration to incentivize conservation and solar technology done as part of the 2008 stimulus bill was well thought through and accelerated this process. People who don't pay attention, or have an ax to grind, chanted "Solyndra" for years, while they have ignored the various Ivanka and fat donny scandals. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nw30 wrote: | Wildfires, global warming, lightening, and arson.
I'm surprised that you used the term that doesn't poll well "global warming", you're slipping. |
Naaaah. I just hate euphemisms and political correctness. OTOH, "climate change" makes the left look even more stupid, if that's possible. What do they expect ... every day to look like the last one ... or thousand?
Mustn't forget AOC's Chief of Staff's confession on-the-air and in-a-meeting with my equally stupid governor:
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti admitted recently that the true motivation behind introducing the Green New Deal is to overhaul the “entire economy.”
Chakrabarti said that addressing climate change was not Ocasio-Cortez’s top priority in proposing the Green New Deal during a meeting with Washington governor Jay Inslee.
“The interesting thing about the Green New Deal, is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all,” Chakrabarti said to Inslee’s climate director, Sam Ricketts, according to a Washington Post reporter who attended the meeting for a profile published Wednesday.
“Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing,” he added.
The Green New Deal, proposed earlier this year by Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey (D., Mass.), would transition the U.S. economy entirely away from fossil fuels within ten years while simultaneously providing a federal jobs and healthcare guarantee. It would also, according to its proponents, advance “social, economic, racial, regional and gender-based justice and equality and cooperative and public ownership.”
All told, the proposal will cost up to $93 trillion in new government spending over ten years, according to a recent report by the conservative American Action Forum.
i.e.: It's about spending 93 trillion dollars on forced wealth redistribution. And she's Hidin' Biden's climate change czar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|