This thread is hilarious. Liberals are, unintentionally, some of the funniest people alive.
Global Climate Changes
- Thread starter Caveman Catfan
- Start date
The point was that whatever was spent would be pissed away without China and India on board.That's a ridiculous line of questioning. Scientists don't know anything about costs, if they wanted to know the true costs/benefits of transition from coal to solar, wind or even nat-gas ask a friggin economist don't has a scientist. Of course their are capital costs associated with any start up energy system.
The capital costs of a wind farm are about $1.3 M per kw, compared to around $2 - $3M for a nuc plant but the operation costs are extremally different with a nuc plant being very high in comparison. Steam plants aren't much better.
There also economic benefits to newer forms of energy production, it isn't like the entire things is nothing more than a zero sum game with governments paying for it like Kennedy was implying. Geezzz
Economic benefits – Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency – Analysis - IEA
Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.www.iea.org
No doubt. Record low temps in SoCal but no mention by the sheeple.This is LA; currently suffering from global warming lol...
SoCal Record Low Temps
Anyone who points to an extreme temperate at any one geographical point, as evidence for or against AGW and isn't being humorous, shows zero knowledge of the science and only exposes their own ignorance.
Agreed, and the same can be said for any strong natural disaster - hurricane, tornado, flood, earthquake, fire, etc.
Agree; why does the Left keep doing that?
Or you could just understand the difference between weather and climate.
I must getting under your skin with my flip mode shit.
Highest February Temperatures in Lexington
www.extremeweatherwatch.com
Extreme Weather Watch
°F
< Previous Month Next Month >
The hottest February temperature in Lexington, Kentucky history was 80 °F which has occurred twice, most recently on February 20, 2018.
© H Brothers Inc, 2021–2023
Contact us | Privacy policy
4 days from 2023 in the all time list. No other year has this many days in the top 20 Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmm
°F
< Previous Month Next Month >
Highest February Temperatures in Lexington
A list of the highest temperatures ever recorded in the month of February in Lexington, Kentucky from 1872–2023.- Lowest temperatures all-time
- Change city
The hottest February temperature in Lexington, Kentucky history was 80 °F which has occurred twice, most recently on February 20, 2018.
| Rank | Temperature | Date |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 80 °F | February 20, 2018 |
| 1 | 80 °F | February 23, 1996 |
| 3 | 79 °F | February 24, 2017 |
| 4 | 77 °F | February 22, 2023 |
| 5 | 76 °F | February 23, 2023 |
| 5 | 76 °F | February 15, 1945 |
| 5 | 76 °F | February 26, 1944 |
| 8 | 75 °F | February 26, 1977 |
| 8 | 75 °F | February 29, 1972 |
| 8 | 75 °F | February 19, 1939 |
| 8 | 75 °F | February 10, 1932 |
| 8 | 75 °F | February 28, 1918 |
| 13 | 74 °F | February 9, 2023 |
| 13 | 74 °F | February 19, 2018 |
| 13 | 74 °F | February 25, 2000 |
| 13 | 74 °F | February 11, 1999 |
| 13 | 74 °F | February 15, 1954 |
| 13 | 74 °F | February 8, 1937 |
| 19 | 73 °F | February 15, 2023 |
| 19 | 73 °F | February 23, 2018 |
| 19 | 73 °F | February 26, 2000 |
| 19 | 73 °F | February 27, 1996 |
| 19 | 73 °F | February 29, 1976 |
| 19 | 73 °F | February 12, 1938 |
Contact us | Privacy policy
4 days from 2023 in the all time list. No other year has this many days in the top 20 Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmm
Last edited:
Ignorant, childish behavior tends to do that to me and obviously many others on here. I'm sure that's your goal so you aren't really worth this or any other response moving forward.I must getting under your skin with my flip mode shit.
Highest February Temperatures in Lexington
I would really be upset, if I could no longer get Fox News regurgitations from you and others
| 1 | 80 °F | February 20, 2018 |
| 1 | 80 °F | February 23, 1996 |
| 3 | 79 °F | February 24, 2017 |
| 4 | 77 °F | February 22, 2023 |
I present to you Fox News genius’s, the top 4 February hottest days ever recorded in Lexington, Ky.
It’s never touched 77 degrees in February prior to 1996 in the Lexington
Here is March....damn those climate nuts....all those hot temps in the early 1900's ruined it for the rest of us today.
| Rank | Temperature | Date |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 86 °F | March 25, 1929 |
| 2 | 85 °F | March 24, 1910 |
| 3 | 84 °F | March 24, 1929 |
| 3 | 84 °F | March 27, 1910 |
| 5 | 83 °F | March 20, 2012 |
| 5 | 83 °F | March 25, 1945 |
| 5 | 83 °F | March 16, 1945 |
| 5 | 83 °F | March 29, 1910 |
| 5 | 83 °F | March 28, 1910 |
| 5 | 83 °F | March 28, 1907 |
| 5 | 83 °F | March 21, 1907 |
| 5 | 83 °F | March 30, 1895 |
No, but it was within 1 degree twice in the 1940's; it was within 2 degrees twice in the 1970's, twice in the 1930's, and once in the 1910's. The "average top 20 hottest temperature" for occurrences prior to 1996 was 74.6; for 1996 and after, it was 75.4. Less than 1 degree hotter in a quarter of a century. Not to mention that once it hit your magical 77-degree mark, it didn't hit it again for another two decades. Why not?
You can make statistics say whatever you want depending on the inputs you choose. Yes, climate change is real and on the whole the planet is warming. But to the consequential extent that climate doomsayers suggest? No.
Its amazing how quickly the doomsayers arguments fall apart with just a smidgen of Google searches... almost as if they're lying lol.
Seems like last year, we get a push of warmer weather in Feb and then below avg temps in March. Playing havoc with the garden.
I wish I had the time to create a product to sell to the deluded Climate Change crowd... like a "Climate Change Survival Kit" or some crap like that...
Would LOVE to bilk those suckers for $99.99 a piece to "Save The Planet"... and laugh all the way to the bank lol.
Last edited:
Sounds exactly like the carbon tax and other nonsense congress passed by selling people exactly that line. "pay this money and you'll be saved".
It's always hilarious to read these sky is falling takes where we should've been melted into goo as of five years ago.
How about a scam like they give you their loot now then after they die some guy lets them live on a cloud forever?
Say you’re completely right, would you sacrifice global supremacy to help save the environment?
I was telling friends I thought it had seemed like winter had been stretching into March last few years. Last year made a trip east, first round of tournament. It snowed from Youngstown to New York City on my drive.
This is a climate change/fraud thread. Not a Bernie Sanders thread
But we could create a general "Fraud" thread... thereby making Bernie Sanders eligible.
Of course it would also include Climate Change as well.
Throw in 8 boosters, triple masks, etc.
From the news, some good news on energy:
the Biden Administration’s approval of the ConocoPhillips Willow site in Alaska
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s decision to allow California last nuclear power plant at Diablo Canyon to keep operating for the next several years while it goes through the long and laborious NRC review process to stay open for another 20 years or more.
PG&E’s claim that it could replace Diablo Canyon’s output, which accounts for nearly 10 percent of California’s total electricity on a 24/7 basis, with wind and solar power and other baubles was simply a lie. As the deadline approached and reality set in, even Gov. Newsom recognized that California had to reverse course on closing Diablo Canyon.
The problem is that PG&E had abandoned its re-licensing application with the NRC back in 2016, and the review period usually takes about five years, so there isn’t time for a proper permit review before the original license expires and the reactors would by need to be shut down. The NRC staff ruled last year that PG&E couldn’t use the license renewal application it had started in 2009, but would have to start over from scratch. The recent decision grants an exception to the usual rules.
Separately, the first new large commercial nuclear reactor in the United States in nearly 40 years—the Vogtle 3 in Georgia—started up for the first time last week, and has reached “criticality,” as it is known in the trade. This 1,000MW reactor is up to 18 percent capacity as of today. (You can see the status of our entire reactor fleet on a daily basis here.) The Vogtle 3 and its twin still under construction, the Vogtle 4, both cost far more than projected, which indicates we have a long way to go if we’re going to have a serious renewal of nuclear power.
the Biden Administration’s approval of the ConocoPhillips Willow site in Alaska
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s decision to allow California last nuclear power plant at Diablo Canyon to keep operating for the next several years while it goes through the long and laborious NRC review process to stay open for another 20 years or more.
PG&E’s claim that it could replace Diablo Canyon’s output, which accounts for nearly 10 percent of California’s total electricity on a 24/7 basis, with wind and solar power and other baubles was simply a lie. As the deadline approached and reality set in, even Gov. Newsom recognized that California had to reverse course on closing Diablo Canyon.
The problem is that PG&E had abandoned its re-licensing application with the NRC back in 2016, and the review period usually takes about five years, so there isn’t time for a proper permit review before the original license expires and the reactors would by need to be shut down. The NRC staff ruled last year that PG&E couldn’t use the license renewal application it had started in 2009, but would have to start over from scratch. The recent decision grants an exception to the usual rules.
Separately, the first new large commercial nuclear reactor in the United States in nearly 40 years—the Vogtle 3 in Georgia—started up for the first time last week, and has reached “criticality,” as it is known in the trade. This 1,000MW reactor is up to 18 percent capacity as of today. (You can see the status of our entire reactor fleet on a daily basis here.) The Vogtle 3 and its twin still under construction, the Vogtle 4, both cost far more than projected, which indicates we have a long way to go if we’re going to have a serious renewal of nuclear power.
Wonder if we'll ever know who they paid to make this happen. Im sure hunter got a cut somehow
Any serious discussion about clean energy must start with nuclear. Period.
Because we know that the threat is not imminent as claimed, the first objective should be to make sure we have energy in abundance and that energy is as cheap as it can possibly be for all peoples. Diversity in energy makes sense. Making a reasonable transition to nuclear also makes sense. Cut the red tape regulations and let’s get moving. Cut the regulations for gas and oil, as well. Quit picking the winners in the name of an exaggerated fear.
The reason the climate alarmists first pushed back hard against nuclear and now just give it lip service, but have don’t little to nothing to reduce the regulatory constraints on nuclear, is that this for them is not about reducing carbon emissions, but about globalism. See woke investors using your money to force compliance in this country, but reward carbon emissions in other countries as an example. Move to nuclear and they lose their leverage.
Plus it would make their "No Nukes" concerts of the late 70's look pretty silly... and most of those morons are still alive.
Good news for all you alarmists with 401(k)s. Your advisors can now place ESG interests above yours when managing your retirement funds thanks to Joe Biden.
It's important to separate fact from speculation. The fact is the earth is warming rapidly and that is going to have negative repercussions. If you don't accept that fact stop reading here because you're uninformed. The speculation is on what exactly the effects will be and on what timeline. Several on here have pointed out that models and other types of predictions have not turned out to be correct in some instances. Fair enough. Just because some but not all predictions have been incorrect doesn't erase the fact that the earth is warming. Those in the scientific community can continue to speculate on the effects but the earth is still warming.
It's also important to realize that not only should the fossil fuel industry not be demonized but it should be recognized as to it's importance. I worked in the energy industry for 12 years and I know a thing or two about coal fired steam plants, nuc plants and gas turbine. We need those industries right now. Those that work in those industry are doing honest necessary work. I know as Kentucky fans we all appreciate the Craft family and all they have done for UK. Mr. Craft started that company when coal was king and we still need today.
Having said all that we are in a transition stage moving away from technologies that largely were developed in the 19th and early 20th century. Fossil fuels create harmful biproducts to human health and the environment. Utilities, and governments, state, federal and local realize that and are taking steps to replace these technologies with modern, cleaner, safer alternatives. That's a process not an event. It will happen over time as technologies improve.
Government's roll in the transition is also a subject that people can debate. Right now the federal government spends more in support of the fossil industry than the alt energy industry but both are being supported, IMO necessarily.
Horse drawn wagons were eventually replaced with trains, trains were largely replaced by the airline industry, radios replaced by TV, dial phones replaced were by cell phones. Throughout history no industry remains stagnate and the energy industry is no exception.
It's also important to realize that not only should the fossil fuel industry not be demonized but it should be recognized as to it's importance. I worked in the energy industry for 12 years and I know a thing or two about coal fired steam plants, nuc plants and gas turbine. We need those industries right now. Those that work in those industry are doing honest necessary work. I know as Kentucky fans we all appreciate the Craft family and all they have done for UK. Mr. Craft started that company when coal was king and we still need today.
Having said all that we are in a transition stage moving away from technologies that largely were developed in the 19th and early 20th century. Fossil fuels create harmful biproducts to human health and the environment. Utilities, and governments, state, federal and local realize that and are taking steps to replace these technologies with modern, cleaner, safer alternatives. That's a process not an event. It will happen over time as technologies improve.
Government's roll in the transition is also a subject that people can debate. Right now the federal government spends more in support of the fossil industry than the alt energy industry but both are being supported, IMO necessarily.
Horse drawn wagons were eventually replaced with trains, trains were largely replaced by the airline industry, radios replaced by TV, dial phones replaced were by cell phones. Throughout history no industry remains stagnate and the energy industry is no exception.
Last edited:
Warming does not only have negative implications. The models, by and large, have been wrong. Not just a few. The objective should be to use every tool to bring cheap energy and food to the world so we can raise people out of poverty and bring opportunity to those in need. We need to stop taking an elitist Western selfish perspective about energy. And, again, the alarmists slow rolling of nuclear demonstrates they do not believe the fear they promote and suggests this is not about global warming, at all.
