Global Climate Changes
- Thread starter Caveman Catfan
- Start date
It is difficult to study climate change without studying virtue signaling.
Fossil Fuel Subsidies Surged to Record $7 Trillion
Scaling back subsidies would reduce air pollution, generate revenue, and make a major contribution to slowing climate change
www.imf.org
I love that people who are the most adamant proponents of green energy are the ones who know the least about how energy actually works.
I must say that I do not think that, despite the best attempts by politicians, world leaders and concerned citizens, the effects of climate change will be slowed enough to make a lasting and effective difference. The most dramatic and damaging effects will not be realized until the vast majority of us on this board are no longer around.
For the sake of mankind and the planet, I sincerely hope I am wrong, of course.
Last edited:
“The best attempts” - just letting that sink in.
Second-warmest November on record means that 2024 is likely to be Earth's hottest year, report says
A new report says Earth just experienced its second-warmest November on record — second only to 2023 — making it all but certain that 2024 will end as the hottest year ever measured.
apnews.com
Key term…. “On record”.
Second-warmest November on record means that 2024 is likely to be Earth's hottest year, report says
A new report says Earth just experienced its second-warmest November on record — second only to 2023 — making it all but certain that 2024 will end as the hottest year ever measured.
Anything can set records if you pick the right parameters.
From the article: Last year was the hottest on record due to human-caused climate change
I want to see the statistics, and how they specifically relate to temperature. Does one extra spray of Aqua Net = .005° F, for example?
I want to see the statistics, and how they specifically relate to temperature. Does one extra spray of Aqua Net = .005° F, for example?
on record refers to the last 130-150 years. Hottest out of 130 years is cause for concern
Avg temp in 1921.....54.4F
Avg temp in 2019....53.6F
Avg. temp in 1910....54.5F
Damn those steamships and trains.
Why concern? Were there less cold related deaths? Is there more vegetation and food capacity? How should we express our concern? Social media posts? Votes in elections?
Maybe this is better posted here:
Depressing to see how much microplastics are put into the environment by the degradation of tires and that tires on heavy vehicle shed more, like the tires on electric vehicles.
Cue depressing music here. Will we die from climate change or from microplastics in the environment?
Keep plastics off of Neptune!!
Depressing to see how much microplastics are put into the environment by the degradation of tires and that tires on heavy vehicle shed more, like the tires on electric vehicles.
Cue depressing music here. Will we die from climate change or from microplastics in the environment?
Keep plastics off of Neptune!!
May I have the attention of the class
www.forbes.com
Companies That Don’t Adapt To Climate Change Could See Earnings Hit
In this week's Current Climate newsletter, companies that fail to adapt to climate change could lose 7% of annual earnings by 2035; factory-built apartment complexes that may have climate advantages; and potential clean energy policy changes under Trump
www.forbes.com
May I have the attention of the class
Companies That Don’t Adapt To Climate Change Could See Earnings Hit
In this week's Current Climate newsletter, companies that fail to adapt to climate change could lose 7% of annual earnings by 2035; factory-built apartment complexes that may have climate advantages; and potential clean energy policy changes under Trump
Ah yes. The always objective World Economic Forum just looking out for the planet.
I've literally heard no one say ever that China would take a lead on environmental issues. lol.... The argument is typically "But China is going to do it anyways"
Are we seeing fewer white Christmases due to climate change?
Winter has been the fastest-warming season for most of the U.S. since 1970, increasing the likelihood of winter precipitation falling as rain rather than snow.
www.usatoday.com
Are we seeing fewer white Christmases due to climate change?
Winter has been the fastest-warming season for most of the U.S. since 1970, increasing the likelihood of winter precipitation falling as rain rather than snow.www.usatoday.com
"Climate change threatens symbols of the holiday season from Christmas tree growth, winter recreation, and cozy drinks to Arctic wildlife."
Jesus is the reason for the season.
Ahh climate change. It is a good thing it never changed in the past because we would not be here to bitch about something we have no control over. Oh wait...never mind.
I watched a PBS newscast about the huge wind turbines being pounding into the ocean floor about 15 miles off the coast. Their blades each the length of a football field. As can be expected, there was a manufacturing defect with at least one of the blades made in Canada. It broke into the ocean. Who knows the environmental impact of that awful event? The report did not say if the investigation called any of the other blades into question. It also did not say how long these huge blades would last and what would be done with them when they failed. They did fly out to the wind mills and, of course, there was no wind, so …
The report praised this scientist for having solar panels on her house and driving an electric car. It did not highlight that her job was taking a huge research ship out to the deep waters and researching. I suspect that leaves a carbon mark.
These reports always like to talk about the environment in silos. This was about climate change. So, no discussion on how all of that product and science impacts the environment in other ways. Or even the carbon footprint required to build those things.
Finally, it talked about how to address this climate emergency, mentioning solar, wind, and hydro, but no mention of nukes. Hard to believe it to be an emergency if nukes are not discussed. Meanwhile, we pay billions for wind.
The report praised this scientist for having solar panels on her house and driving an electric car. It did not highlight that her job was taking a huge research ship out to the deep waters and researching. I suspect that leaves a carbon mark.
These reports always like to talk about the environment in silos. This was about climate change. So, no discussion on how all of that product and science impacts the environment in other ways. Or even the carbon footprint required to build those things.
Finally, it talked about how to address this climate emergency, mentioning solar, wind, and hydro, but no mention of nukes. Hard to believe it to be an emergency if nukes are not discussed. Meanwhile, we pay billions for wind.
7 trillion annually for fossil fuel subsidies.
A Nuclear power plant takes 6-8 years to build and about 2-4 billion to construct. and has devastating consequences if it explodes. See fukishima and Chernobyl
Having written that, I am for nuclear if built and operated correctly. But, I get why folks are afraid. Chernobyl will never be habitable again
A Nuclear power plant takes 6-8 years to build and about 2-4 billion to construct. and has devastating consequences if it explodes. See fukishima and Chernobyl
Having written that, I am for nuclear if built and operated correctly. But, I get why folks are afraid. Chernobyl will never be habitable again
Last edited:
I am definitely for nuclear energy and hope it can be generated safely, too.
SMH
I think they spent 40 billion [maybe it was over 10 billion, I will have to go back and see] on the off shore windmills. lol
Your post confirms it ain’t an emergency to you.
The interviewee said 4 billion, but one other offshore site lowballed its estimate and came in at 10 billion.
Sorry, not sorry, but oil and gas should be here to stay unless we find something more reliable.
Key paragraph
So, what is needed to actually bring about the “green” transformation?
Key paragraph
So, what is needed to actually bring about the “green” transformation?
This is all sheer fantasy, with one exception: the need for a “strategic reserve” of natural gas, although five percent is no doubt much too low. Why is that “strategic reserve” necessary? Because, no matter how much you spend, there will always be times–frequent times, in fact–when the wind doesn’t blow and the Sun doesn’t shine. So a reliable energy source will always be needed.
Very interesting.
/Best Arte Johnson voice
Makes perfect sense. "Follow the money". If the people telling me I need to buy an EV for $10k more, don't have a problem flying private Jets.. then that tells me this isn't too big of a problem. If it was a big problem? They'd get rid of their jets post-haste. Same with beach houses about to be swallowed up by the ocean in 5 years.
Rules for thee, not for me.
The coldest recorded temp in Kentucky was 1/19/1994 in Shelbyville (-37 F). Need to remember that as we dip below 10 again this week. Be safe. Cold weather kills.
Giant wind turbines are the easiest proof of the clean energy scam. Negatives far outpace their positives.
Wind and solar generate a lot of power that can be used across the country. They aren’t perfect, but we should definitely take advantage of wind and sun.
The 2023 decline in wind generation indicates that wind as a generation source is maturing after decades of rapid growth. Slower wind speeds than normal affected wind generation in 2023, especially during the first half of the year when wind generation dropped by 14% compared with the same period in 2022
why the supposed costs of wind and solar projects that you see reported in the press, and alleged by “green” advocates, are always wildly off base:
why the supposed costs of wind and solar projects that you see reported in the press, and alleged by “green” advocates, are always wildly off base:
The cost of the NJ offshore wind farm has been said to be between 40 billion and 74 billion (such a gap can only be politically motivated - how don’t they know?). It is expected to take about 10 years to build.
A nuclear power plant has been estimated to cost between 6 and 9 billion. And, to take 5-10 years to build.
Nuclear power is about 3 times more reliable than wind and present a a smaller carbon footprint. It takes less land space.
What the hell are these quacks doing? If the world is truly in trouble, they are either idiots or snake oil salesmen.
Nuclear generation (or gas-fired for that matter) isn’t causing whales to beach themselves either.
And there’s zero reason to respond to GJ (he’s just a troll), but if California actually spent the time/money to do things like clearing out old brush and such, fires wouldn’t be as bad as they are.
