Global Warming

“No, Dan. Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.”

“Sulphur content isn't the only problem, XL. ALL coal has major problems, high sulphur or not.

- obliterates the environment, since most of it is strip mined and not dug out with a traditional mine
- very high mercury output, especially in the western states like Montana
- very high transportation costs (which requires oil)
- nitrogen oxides, particulates. carbon dioxide, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, all when its burned
- contaminated groundwater around mines



My neighbor is in charge of the scheduling for the Hubble telescope. (since we are on ego trips). Another friend of ours is a manager at the MD Stadium Authority - the big boys that built & own our stadiums.

(grin)”

“NEAT-O.

You KNOW I'm a serious HST fan.


Iv'e got the Hubble on the wall behind me, looking over my shoulder... and the Spotlight print of the first Deep Field downstairs under glass.”

“He's a cool guy, his wife too. A lot better than some of the snobfest members around our neighborhood. I've had one pic or another from Hubble as my background pic on my work computer for many years now. Ok, I lie. I've had one or two from the various Mars rovers (original and current), too. I'm the type that will go outside in 20F weather to see a meteor shower or night shuttle launch (but dang it, I missed the recent night launch since they delayed it a day!).”

“I love it when Mutt puts tilt in his place. :)”

“Every environmental fight has been a long one and opposed every step of the way. I was once one diametrically opposed to eliminating anything that would improve the environment. I was brought up to believe that environmentalist were wackos and all their causes were bullchit. I remember when lead was removed from gasoline and the cussing and fussing about that. I remember when scrubbers were first being required on coal fired plants and the cussing and fussing about that. I remember when two stroke gasoline engines were to be forced to clean up their emmisions and the cussing and fussing about that. I remember when catalytic converters were first added to cars and the cussing and fussing about that.


I remember when my company was required to stop sending acid waste to the air and the Mississippi River and the cussing and fussing about that. I remember when my company was to be required to close our effluent surface pond which contained benzene, aniline, formaldehyde and other toxic chemicals and the cussing and fussing about that. I remember when my company was required to clean up our air emissions and have our stacks monitored and the cussing and fussing aboutthat. I remember when my company was required to report all spills over 55 gallons and the cussing and fussing over that.

I have worked in the chemical industry for quite some time now. I am proud to say that the company I work for is much cleaner today than it was when I started. When I first started so many acid vapors condensed with moisture in the air that the paint jobs on our cars only lasted a year or two and they were rust buckets in no time. When I first went to work there I was as antienvironmentalist as they come. Now acid no longer rains down on me and my car. These inprovements came about because people I once loathed, cared enough to voice their opinion and do something about it. My whole work environment is cleaner and safer. There is still lots of room for improvement. The irony is my company has higher production and higher profits today than ever before.
last edited: 1/19/07 11:47:17 AM”

“Yep. That's what got me into camping, BPing, the whole thing... I didn't want to go back indoors. And of course you only get the truly killer clear skies at 2 am in February...

FYI
The next at least possibly half-assed shower:

the Lyrids peak on April 22
zenithal hourly rate: 18 (variable up to 90)
2007 IMO Calendar”

“Batting1000driver.”

“http://www.jamesspann.com/blog.htm

“The Weather Channel” Mess
January 18, 2007, 5:45 pm | James Spann | Op/Ed

Well, well. Some “climate expert” on “The Weather Channel” wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent “global warming” is a natural process. So much for “tolerance”, huh?

I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can’t find them. Here are the basic facts you need to know:

*Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab.

*The climate of this planet has been changing since God put the planet here. It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades. And, lets not forget we are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North America and Northern Europe.

If you don’t like to listen to me, find another meteorologist with no tie to grant money for research on the subject. I would not listen to anyone that is a politician, a journalist, or someone in science who is generating revenue from this issue.

In fact, I encourage you to listen to WeatherBrains episode number 12, featuring Alabama State Climatologist John Christy, and WeatherBrains episode number 17, featuring Dr. William Gray of Colorado State University, one of the most brilliant minds in our science.

WeatherBrains, by the way, is our weekly 30 minute netcast.

I have nothing against “The Weather Channel”, but they have crossed the line into a political and cultural region where I simply won’t go.

********************************



Stalinists/Libbies politicize everything, even the weather, to get what they want.

A call to silence people who dare contradict the correct Stalinist/Libbie idea? Sounds just like something Vile and his type would do.”

“bateauxdriver, well said, and interesting change since you are "on the inside". Glad to see you jumped the fence.”

“"It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades."

I like how he's ignored the long view and only focused on comparing one decade to another in the 1900's. Its only when you start comparing the decades in the 1900's to the decades in other centuries that the alarming trend of the 1900's becomes so evident. Charting global CO2 over thousands of years (using ice core samples), also shows the massive jump starting in the early 1900's. The early 1900's is when we started burning coal and oil in large quantities.

He's missing the view of the forest because he's staring at the leaves.”

“Stovie, the thing I like is the insidious method they utilize. They started with (disgustingly cheery voice) "you can help the planet and make a better place"

If you offer any counters....YOU WANT DIRTY AIR AND DIRTY WATER!!!!

eventually they move from "hey lets do the nice things the FEEELY nice things" to

YOU VILL DO VAT I TINK MITOUT QUVESTION,UNT IF YOU DON"T VE VILL TAKE YOUR LIFE."

It always seems they want us to do as they say not as they do. Algore is a perfect example, screaming about global warming (apparently cause specifically by AMERICANS being successful) but he rides around in the HUGE SUV's and flys back and forth in private jets...which he got the money for the old fashioned way...he inherited it.

Paul Ehrlich....Earth First....REDWOOD HOUSE...now I don't know where else you get redwood but I think it only comes from REDWOOD TREES.

The Soviets did the same thing. They told nations to go GOVERNMENT controlled because of the GREAT EQUALITY...we later found that the EQUALITY meant Equal suffering...except for the chosen FEW of the ruling class....not very EQUAL if you ask me.

Its not a bit different from the Islamo Fascists and their desire to run everyone's life.”

““bateauxdriver, well said, and interesting change since you are "on the inside". Glad to see you jumped the fence.”
techntrek

Techntrek it is not about jumping the fence. It is about a smarter way of doing things. The old phrase of necessity being the mother of invention will always be true. The associated problems with pollution caused concearned citizens to demand change. That change necessitated smart people to come up with the improvements to make things better. We should strive to continually improve. The old guard is dead and generations to come will demand more. When I was young I watched my parents and others throw garbage out their car windows. So I grew up throwing garbage out car windows. I grew up and realized it was wrong to throw garbage out the windows. I have never seen my children throw garbage out the window, because they have never seen me do it. Environmentalism is becoming a lifestyle. Overconsumerism is my greatest sin. I've got too much stuff that will eventually be trash somewhere. I also burn more than my fair share of fossil fuel because I love to travel. Hopefully future generations will find solutions to our energy woes. It is our job to push for the change.”

“"I like how he's ignored the long view and only focused on comparing one decade to another in the 1900's. Its only when you start comparing the decades in the 1900's to the decades in other centuries that the alarming trend of the 1900's becomes so evident"

There is something to be said about uniformitarianism; I am one myself.

However, who ever said this does not know what they are talking about and should refrain from future posting on the subject matter.

"“The Weather Channel” Mess
January 18, 2007, 5:45 pm | James Spann | Op/Ed"

I don't know which is worse.

The fact that this guy is a talking head for some small market radio station in GA;

the fact that this is an OP/ED presented by stove as fact;

the fact that stove lifted this OP/ED from a blog and presented as fact;

all of the above.

Truly pathetic. Nice snappy comment about the Stalinist crap. Again playing on a subject you have very little knowledge on.
last edited: 1/19/07 1:37:00 PM”

“Silly Robin.
I figured you would have figured out this Op/Ed thing by now. It was clearly labeled as such, dumba$$.
I am wrong again. LOL
Y'all ever notice how Robin uses a thousand words when ten would do?
I believe someone over on Backpacker forums called him a blowhard.
Fits.

LOL
last edited: 1/19/07 1:53:56 PM”

“bateux, ah, but it is about jumping the fence (and still eating your cake). Don't mind the mixed metaphors, LOL. Anyway, instead of saying "I'm going to support big chemical companies because my livelihood depends on it, no matter what" you said "I'm going to acknowledge the problems in my industry and work to change them, as I keep my job in this industry". You could have just quit and gone into a different career.”

“ABC News reported this evening that some conference in Park city, Utah focused on the impending (by 2050) demise of the local winter sports oriented economy

So much disinformation. The problem is larger than Global Warming and will strike many regions long before 2050.”

“More big businesses going green. Damn Lefty's.

"Industry signals Bush to do more on warming"

10 companies join activist groups in calling for caps on carbon emissions

WASHINGTON - Major corporations and environmental groups on Friday announced what they called an "unprecedented alliance" to push for quicker action against global warming — urging lawmakers to pass mandatory curbs on carbon emissions, in contrast to President Bush's voluntary approach.

In a statement, the 10 U.S.-based companies and four environmental groups called for mandatory reductions of greenhouse gas emissions, including those from power plants, transportation and buildings.

Called the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, the group includes aluminum giant Alcoa, BP America, Caterpillar, DuPont, General Electric, Lehman Brothers and four utilities with a big stake in climate policy: Duke Energy, FPL Group, PG&E and PNM Resources. (MSNBC.com is a joint venture of Microsoft and GE's NBC Universal unit.)

Complete story
last edited: 1/19/07 9:24:17 PM”

“There you go --

As these corporations contemplate the looming effect on their profitability, they begin to alter their behavior. You know it's not out of the kindness of their hearts.

Unfortunately, the manipulation of the carbon cycle has a 100-year head start. It will take decades to discover how late we truly are in taking action.

I'm not optimistic.”

“1. Gore Effect 126 up, 7 down

The phenomenon that leads to unseasonally cold temperatures, driving rain, hail, or snow whenever Al Gore visits an area to discuss global warming. Hence, the Gore Effect.

- Australia, November 2006: Al Gore is visiting two weeks before summer begins. The Gore Effect strikes: "Ski resort operators gazed at the snow in amazement. Parents took children out of school and headed for the mountains. Cricketers scurried amid bullets of hail as Melburnians traded lunchtime tales of the incredible cold." (The Age)

- New York, March 2004: "Gore chose January 15, 2004, one of the coldest days in New York City’s history, to rail against the Bush administration and global warming skeptics... Global warming, Gore told a startled audience, is causing record cold temperatures." (NY Environment News)


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gore+Effect”

“There are more scientific journals experimenting with opening their peer review process to more referees. So far the response has been positive.

More informed input = better science.”

“Ah, here it is. It was the lead article from the December 16 Science News... Sorry the article isn't online, but here are a few publications exploring a more open process:

Nature

Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

Phillica (still in development)”

“Yes, except the first two letters, ALGORE is not an ALBERT clone.”

“"Global warming is destined to have a far more destructive and earlier impact than previously estimated, the most authoritative report yet produced on climate change will warn next week.
A draft copy of the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, obtained by The Observer, shows the frequency of devastating storms - like the ones that battered Britain last week - will increase dramatically. Sea levels will rise over the century by around half a metre; snow will disappear from all but the highest mountains; deserts will spread; oceans become acidic, leading to the destruction of coral reefs and atolls; and deadly heatwaves will become more prevalent."

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_n...1995348,00.html”

“One more time for that link:

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1995472,00.html


Thanks for the heads-up.”

“YAAAAWWWWN...and it is amazing that the only thing that can save the planet is for AMERICA to assume a third world economy and lifestyle. This is the flaw. The facts bear out.
1. The SUN is HOTTER (reference ice caps melting on MARS!!!)
2. We do not deny Global Climate change as is evidenced by a history of Ice Ages (the most recent ended in the mid 1800s) and the fact the enviornment changes over millinea..
3. Records kept for only a few hundred years do not represent a scinetific sampling of Millions of years of earth history.

I find it hilarious that every major prediction so far shows that the weather nutjobs have been wrong...or did I miss the horrible hurricanes last year? The Oceans did not die in 2001 as predicted by the Envior Wackos in 1991. So this is all typical Socialist "spread the pain damn the successful" fearmongering.

Yet we still have a short rememberance of Islamic Fascisim (same goals by the way as the National Socialist Fascisim of the 1920's 1930's and 1940's) which has killed REALLY killed hundreds of thousands. But that is not an immediate threat?”

“"and it is amazing that the only thing that can save the planet is for AMERICA to assume a third world economy and lifestyle" - XL


You go on and keep believing that. I have proved you wrong, and your continued tirade now pushes you into the radical righty wing instead of potentially credible. I think you must walk around with your fingers in your ears screaming "la-la-la-la-la" all day. Must be hard on your co-workers.”

“You have not ever proved me wrong in this assertion...look at the Vaunted KYOTO ACCORD...let see...the two biggest polluters....India and China are NOWHERE in there...however they can SELL pollution rights to America...it is called UN enforced Redistribution of wealth. THe truth is you don't have the GUTS to see the threat or make a difference. So you want GOVERNMENT to protect you and steal.”

“I don't want the gov't to protect me, I've shown you how I've cut my own emissions without the gov'ts help, without affecting my lifestyle at all. Which I've said a half-dozen times now....


la-la-la-la-la


The Kyoto accord is crumbling and won't be a factor within a few years, so stop worrying about it.”

“
”

“

”

“Yeah, it does seem like the global warming Chicken Littles who advocate alternative energy sources are mindlessly (surprise) against nuclear energy, which of course is highly likely the best alternative.”

“Sure, if you like dieing from nuclear fallout. Modern reactor designs are still not immune from meltdowns, including the "favorite" pebble reactors. If the same money that has been pumped into the oil industry for the last 50 years gets pumped into renewables for the next 50 years, we'll be set - without the need for a single nuclear reactor.”

“I'll tell ya what, the more these wack jobs try and shove it down our throats the less I even care. Have ya seen the new commercials they're running?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-_LBXWMCAM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghUVT_Z5oDs

I don't know if it's the propaganda they will go to or the blatant use of fear tactics that piss me off.

These people remind me of the crazy bum walking around with an "The End is Near!" sandwich board. It's like global warming is the new religion of the left and push it harder than any evangelical group ever could push Jesus.”

“Yea tho I walk through the valley of nuclear winter I will fear global warming?....

and you thought the Jesus freaks were bad Nigal :}”

“Yup, because the end will be near if we don't do something about it. This isn't about maybe loosing a species or two and turning up the A/C a notch. Its about major catastrophic problems within the lifetime of someone born today.

The last ice age ended 10,000 years ago and we should be well on the way towards a 4F global temerature decline (it swings from -2F below average to +2F above average "overnight" when each ice age ends, then slowly declines again over the next 100,000 years). It should take a whole 25,000 years for us to drop one degree. Instead, we've gone up a whole degree in just one century.

But you know, Nigal, even if global warming had absolutely nothing to do with it, wouldn't you rather have your own personal power source sitting on your roof, nearly immune from the power outages you get from the local power company? Paying yourself back with free power for 20 years out of 30, instead of paying the power company for 30 years? Avoiding even the potential for a nuclear disaster? Having lower taxes because you aren't indirectly paying the power company even more money through tax subsidies?

Even if I were a chain-smokin' Hummer drivin' dude who flew to Europe every weekend, those advantages would be very appealing to me.”

“Global warming is the new religion of the left. - Nigal


Dang!!! And here I thought the lefties were against people of faith. Guess it has to be the correct faith.
LOL”

“But you know, Nigal, even if global warming had absolutely nothing to do with it, wouldn't you rather have your own personal power source sitting on your roof, nearly immune from the power outages you get from the local power company? Paying yourself back with free power for 20 years out of 30, instead of paying the power company for 30 years? Avoiding even the potential for a nuclear disaster? Having lower taxes because you aren't indirectly paying the power company even more money through tax subsidies?

This is all great but I get so damn tired of the hype and rhetoric of people and their pet movements. Propaganda and fear are used so much today. Cancer is the #1 killer! Heart attacks are the #1 killers! Secondhand smoke is the #1 killer! Monkey fecal born pathogens from secondhand butt smegma is the #1 killer!

Run for your fukcing lives!!!”

“Does conservation ever enter your feuding? Do all the other more apparent consequences of over use of energy ever follow with your polar bear debate? No of course, your start attacking each other over a bunch of pseudo science which has only the point of pushing each extreme in its' favored direction.The overall picture is that, we a the worlds envy have the responsibility to better guide the rest of the envious world to make better choices of how they handle their own approaching mess.”

“ Modern reactor designs are still not immune from meltdowns, including the "favorite" pebble reactors. - techntrek

You vastly overstate the risks of pebble bed reactors. They are designed so that if everything goes wrong, nothing bad happens. Basic information can be found here.

I'll grant that it's probably impossible to make nuclear energy 100% safe, but 99.999% is good enough for the real world. Anyway, we don't live in a world where individual energy sources exist in a vacuum. They all have to be considered, and they all have their benefits and risks. They must be measured against a number of criteria, and no single source is going to meet every criteria (supply, sustainability, environment, security, technology, etc). When one does not go Chicken Little on nuclear's stigma ("omg radioactive air"), nuclear meets more of those criteria than most. It should - and likely will - be a major player in the switch from traditional sources.”

“The final straw for me was the Weather Channel demanding all be decertified if they didn't get into the pro Global Warming group ASAP.
That's just like the facist 'libbies' to wish to control science, and scientific debate.”

“Mutt, the wiki piece doesn't tell the whole story, and even lies about the reason the test unit in Germany was shut down. "The unit's first criticality was on August 26, 1966." (from the wiki piece). Yeah, it was the first. Another "criticality" (in other words... meltdown) happened in May of 1986, just 9 days after Chernobyl, which is why you didn't hear much about it since it was so overshadowed. That was the final straw, which caused the final closure, not "in the wake of the Chernobyl disaster" as the piece says. It was as a result of its own meltdown! A pebble got stuck and radioactive material was released into the atmosphere.

Here is the full rundown:

1. It has no containment building.

2. It uses flammable graphite as a moderator. (that's what burned at Chernobyl)

3. It produces more high level nuclear wastes than current nuclear reactor designs. (its a breeder design)

4. It relies heavily on nearly perfect fuel pebbles. (there's at least one defect per pebble, admitted by the industry)

5. It relies heavily upon fuel handling as the pebbles are cycled through the reactor. (the more you move something, the better the chance it will fail, like in Germany)

http://www.tmia.com/industry/pebbles.html

p.s. I do see way down under "criticisms" they do mention the German meltdown and that it was the real reason for the shutdown. The whole piece should be edited to reflect that.
last edited: 1/25/07 10:51:04 AM”

“
note:
MTHM...... Metric Tons of Heavy Metal
SNF......... Spent Nuclear Fuel
DOE........ Department Of Energy


http://www.eh.doe.gov/NEPA/eis/eis0203f/vol1apdx/vol1appj.html


"More than 100,000 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM) of SNF was produced by DOE and its predecessor agencies since 1943. In the past, most of the SNF was chemically processed to recover the fissile materials, largely uranium-235 and plutonium-239, either for the national defense programs or reactor research and development.

With the end of the Cold War, DOE and the U.S. Department of Defense reevaluated the scale of their weapons production, nuclear propulsion, and research missions. Because of the lack of need for additional fissile materials, DOE decided in 1992 to phase out reprocessing for the recovery of fissile materials. Approximately 2,700 MTHM of SNF remains that has not been processed. Additionally, approximately 100 MTHM of DOE SNF is expected to be generated in the next 40 years. This DOE SNF, which is in a wide range of enrichments and physical conditions, is stored at various locations in the United States and overseas. This material requires management until a decision regarding its ultimate disposition is reached.

Most of the existing fuel is currently stored in 10- to 40-year-old water pools (designed for temporary storage of SNF until it could be reprocessed) at several locations at the Hanford Site, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, and Savannah River Site. Smaller quantities are stored at approximately 60 locations nationwide, including 55 non-DOE United States research reactor facilities. The vulnerabilities associated with the storage of SNF are identified in a recent DOE report to the Secretary of Energy entitled, Spent Fuel Working Group Report on Inventory and Storage of the Department's Spent Nuclear Fuel and Other Reactor Irradiated Nuclear Materials and Their Environment, Safety, and Health Vulnerabilities (DOE 1993). A DOE plan of action (Phases I, II, and III) to address these vulnerabilities has been issued (DOE 1994a, b, c)."


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Just wondering --

It is ironic in the extreme that someone who cannot stand up for his own point of view in person while blazing away at strangers from the safety of his cube would refer to anyone other than himself as a 'chicken' under any circumstance. If you prefer animal imagery, the lion on the Internet is in reality a kitten by his own admission.

Why would this person post an account of his spinelessness to the same forum where he blusters and struts about on a daily basis? It's like the punchline to the classic joke:

"If you're up to your neck in #&%!$, it doesn't pay to advertise."


Now I'm wondering if he isn't simply emulating his chosen role models in the District.”

“techntrek, I'm not sure I'm going to trust any info from that anti-nuke site. I've read both pro an con regarding nuclear energy. Yes, nuclear has its problems mostly due to older technology. But there are advances in reactor design, fuel reprocessing and safety in terms of proliferation in 3rd world areas.

What I find interesting is that the anti's never seem to turn their anti-nuke arguments back on their "alt energy" darlings: current technology is lacking; technological innovations are likely some time off; safety issues abound; financing is sketchy; availability is hit or miss; security is a problem; environmental impacts are unknown.

That's what I was talking about before. Nuclear energy may have its problems, but it also meets those concerns better than most pipe-dream alt-energies. It is a viable mid-term energy solution. It can be done on a global scale in the next 20-30 years, with today's technology. And that technology will get better as we go through that process. Obviously renewable energy is a worthy goal and will fulfill some energy demand, but in all probability the future belongs to fusion energy. Fusion should be our long-term goal to energy shortages, along with renewables (to likely a greatly less extent).

Another interesting thing about the anti's that I've noticed is that they go Chicken Little over nuke's pollution problems, but are content to wait for their alt-energies while breathing in all the pollution and greenhouse gasses caused by fossil fuels. Nuclear energy can reduce reliance on coal et al now.

Personally I feel a lot of the negativity towards nuke energy is caused by social, rather than logical, reasons, but that's a whole 'nother subject.”

“Don't the French have pretty good nuke plants?”

“LOL - I just read Tilt's diatribe. You're going to have to do better than that. Making sense would be a starting point.”

“tiltypoo and 'sense' does not compute. LOL”