Federal Government Confirms Nearing Apocalypse -- it's very hard to dismiss this. - Page 36 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15050323
Truth To Power wrote:Yes, I did, and you know it.

See the title of this thread, child.

That is a bald falsehood. There is lots of room for honest disagreement about various aspects of climate change. My comment was specifically directed at hysterical and delusional apocalypse-mongers.


Quote the exact phrase that you think is such a big deal, and then show how it is wrong.
#15050537
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — Climate change activists stormed the field at the Yale-Harvard football game on Saturday afternoon, disrupting the game at halftime in a protest to call attention to the universities to divest their investments in fossil fuels.

At its peak, the demonstration drew up to 500 people, packing about 45 yards of play between the large numbers that marked yardage, and delaying the game for roughly an hour. “My country is on fire right now,” Akio Ho, a student at Yale said, referring to Australia. “Unprecedented wildfires are ripping through homes right now. Climate change and the climate crisis is an extremely urgent problem.”

The fossil fuel divestment movement, which started small at schools like Swarthmore around 2011, is now a global movement with commitments from more than a thousand organizations and tens of thousands of individuals controlling some $8.8 trillion in combined assets.

Looks like the grownups have all sold out. I guess, as in the Vietnam disaster, we'll have to look to the kids for guidance.
#15050541
jimjam wrote:NEW HAVEN, Conn. — Climate change activists stormed the field at the Yale-Harvard football game on Saturday afternoon, disrupting the game at halftime in a protest to call attention to the universities to divest their investments in fossil fuels.

At its peak, the demonstration drew up to 500 people, packing about 45 yards of play between the large numbers that marked yardage, and delaying the game for roughly an hour. “My country is on fire right now,” Akio Ho, a student at Yale said, referring to Australia. “Unprecedented wildfires are ripping through homes right now. Climate change and the climate crisis is an extremely urgent problem.”

The fossil fuel divestment movement, which started small at schools like Swarthmore around 2011, is now a global movement with commitments from more than a thousand organizations and tens of thousands of individuals controlling some $8.8 trillion in combined assets.

Looks like the grownups have all sold out. I guess, as in the Vietnam disaster, we'll have to look to the kids for guidance.

Unlike you and your crazy left-wing liberals, I am too mature and intelligent to rely on nonsense coming from kids or juvenile delinquents.
#15050654
In August, Chris Cherry, a professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, salvaged a large volume from a stack of vintage journals that a fellow faculty member was about to toss out. He was drawn to a 1966 copy of the industry publication Mining Congress Journal; his father-in-law had been in the industry and he thought it might be an interesting memento.

Cherry flipped it open to a passage from James R. Garvey, who was the president of Bituminous Coal Research Inc., a now-defunct coal mining and processing research organization.

“There is evidence that the amount of carbon dioxide in the earth’s atmosphere is increasing rapidly as a result of the combustion of fossil fuels,” wrote Garvey. “If the future rate of increase continues as it is at the present, it has been predicted that, because the CO2 envelope reduces radiation, the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere will increase and that vast changes in the climates of the earth will result.”

“Such changes in temperature will cause melting of the polar icecaps, which, in turn, would result in the inundation of many coastal cities, including New York and London,” he continued.
#15051011
Four years after countries struck a landmark deal in Paris to rein in greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to avert the worst effects of global warming, humanity is headed toward those very climate catastrophes, according to a United Nations report issued Tuesday, with China and the United States, the two biggest polluters, having expanded their carbon footprints last year.

And yet, renewable energy is spreading faster than could have been anticipated even a few years ago; electric buses and cars are proliferating and young people are protesting by the millions in rich and poor countries alike. Even in the United States, with its persistent denialist movement, how to deal with climate change is a resonant issue in the presidential campaign. ;)

Image

According to Obese Donald the noise from these ^ babies will give you cancer. I really don't think Don believes the endless stream of nonsense he spews every day but there does seem to be a pattern. It is generally designed to promote/protect the big money status quo for special interests like fossil fuel by playing to the low IQ of his infamous "base".
#15051401
jimjam wrote:Four years after countries struck a landmark deal in Paris to rein in greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to avert the worst effects of global warming, humanity is headed toward those very climate catastrophes, according to a United Nations report issued Tuesday, with China and the United States, the two biggest polluters, having expanded their carbon footprints last year.

We don't know that for sure.

Image

jimjam wrote:According to Obese Donald the noise from these ^ babies will give you cancer.

We don't know that for sure, but we do know that they have killed birds.

Wind turbines kill an estimated 140,000 to 328,000 birds each year in North America, making it the most threatening form of green energy.

https://www.audubon.org/news/will-wind- ... safe-birds
#15051514
Image

A mute swan and mallard duck lie dead among plastic pollution in Manchester. The River Tame in Greater Manchester recently recorded the highest level of microplastics anywhere in the world. Combined with toxic algae in river systems due to rising global temperatures, many water birds are dying as a result of pollution.

Have a happy day at the beach ……………..
#15051547
Hindsite wrote:We don't know that for sure.

Image


We don't know that for sure, but we do know that they have killed birds.

Wind turbines kill an estimated 140,000 to 328,000 birds each year in North America, making it the most threatening form of green energy.

https://www.audubon.org/news/will-wind- ... safe-birds
Fossil fuels kill 35 times more birds per GWh than wind farms.
Nuclear power stations kill more than double per GWh

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm ... id=2198024

If the most threatening form of green energy is thirty five times safer than fossil fuels then it really is a no brainer
#15051602
BeesKnee5 wrote:Fossil fuels kill 35 times more birds per GWh than wind farms.
Nuclear power stations kill more than double per GWh

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm ... id=2198024

If the most threatening form of green energy is thirty five times safer than fossil fuels then it really is a no brainer

Wind turbines don't provide much energy now, so those comparisons are like comparing apples with oranges, as the old saying goes. There is no way we can provide the GWh provided by fossil fuel and nuclear by attempting to replace it all with green energy. And if we eliminated fossil fuel and nuclear forms of energy, our standard of living would have to drop dramatically because we would also become a poor nation.
#15051632
Hindsite wrote:Wind turbines don't provide much energy now, so those comparisons are like comparing apples with oranges, as the old saying goes. There is no way we can provide the GWh provided by fossil fuel and nuclear by attempting to replace it all with green energy. And if we eliminated fossil fuel and nuclear forms of energy, our standard of living would have to drop dramatically because we would also become a poor nation.


The measurement is per GWh produced so it's like for like.

We certainly can replace fossil fuels with green energy and it's already happening. I'm yet to see evidence that this transition is causing a drop in the standard of living.
#15052180
BeesKnee5 wrote:The measurement is per GWh produced so it's like for like.

We certainly can replace fossil fuels with green energy and it's already happening. I'm yet to see evidence that this transition is causing a drop in the standard of living.

It is impossible to replace all of fossil fuels with green energy and that is just a fact at the present time, unless you want to go back to the dark ages.
#15052271
Hindsite wrote:It is impossible to replace all of fossil fuels with green energy and that is just a fact at the present time, unless you want to go back to the dark ages.


That you had to qualify your statement shows you aren't so convinced.

Still a long way to go but even with current technology it is more than possible. There have been a couple of times this year when the spot price of electricity has gone negative in the UK. As renewables increase this will happen more and more often.
This creates a market for energy storage which can be sold back later for a profit.
There are already examples of this across the globe and it's growing day by day.

As to this the growing storage in electric vehicles and it's clear that the transition can and will happen.
#15052488
BeesKnee5 wrote:That you had to qualify your statement shows you aren't so convinced.

Still a long way to go but even with current technology it is more than possible. There have been a couple of times this year when the spot price of electricity has gone negative in the UK. As renewables increase this will happen more and more often.
This creates a market for energy storage which can be sold back later for a profit.
There are already examples of this across the globe and it's growing day by day.

As to this the growing storage in electric vehicles and it's clear that the transition can and will happen.

How about jet airplanes and rockets to the moon?
#15052506
Hindsite wrote:How about jet airplanes and rockets to the moon?


Rocket fuel is normally hydrogen and oxygen which can be obtained from hydrolysis and the waste product from combustion is water.

The first electric commercial flight service starts next week. There are plans for more all over the world, current range is 650 miles but it's growing quickly. The current solution is the use of biofuel, this is already available at several airports, mostly in Norway.
Virgin Australia have done hundreds of flights on biofuel, Quantas will use 50:50 biofuel from next year. Virginia Atlantic, British airways and United are all making commitments to increase the use of biofuel but it's not the long term solution imo.
#15052511
BeesKnee5 wrote:
Rocket fuel is normally hydrogen and oxygen which can be obtained from hydrolysis and the waste product from combustion is water.

The first electric commercial flight service starts next week. There are plans for more all over the world, current range is 650 miles but it's growing quickly. The current solution is the use of biofuel, this is already available at several airports, mostly in Norway.
Virgin Australia have done hundreds of flights on biofuel, Quantas will use 50:50 biofuel from next year. Virginia Atlantic, British airways and United are all making commitments to increase the use of biofuel but it's not the long term solution imo.



"Biofuel" is carbon, and carbon is what we are trying to get rid of.

It's PR.

Been hoping to see a hybrid jet, I even have a slogan for it.

'The Prius of the Sky' :D
#15052522
late wrote:
"Biofuel" is carbon, and carbon is what we are trying to get rid of.

It's PR.

Been hoping to see a hybrid jet, I even have a slogan for it.

'The Prius of the Sky' :D


Not quite true, we are trying to stop adding CO2. That does not mean that some of our carbon neutral future can't involve processes that absorb carbon and then release it when used. The key is to ensure overall more is absorbed than emitted.
#15052524
BeesKnee5 wrote:
Not quite true, we are trying to stop adding CO2. That does not mean that some of our carbon neutral future can't involve processes that absorb carbon and then release it when used. The key is to ensure overall more is absorbed than emitted.



There's some wishful thinking there.

We need to make huge cuts in carbon emissions.

Fiddling about the edges when you aren't making those cuts is really just PR.
#15052580
late wrote:
There's some wishful thinking there.

We need to make huge cuts in carbon emissions.

Fiddling about the edges when you aren't making those cuts is really just PR.


There will always be space for renewable energy and replacing fossil fuels. Biofuel is far more than fiddling at the edges. Digesters that convert plant and food waste into methane for fuel instead of just leaving it to rot anyway must be part of the mix.
  • 1
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 50
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Meanwhile, your opponents argue that everyone e[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

Were Israelis not taking Palestinian land and hom[…]

People tend to forget that the French now have a s[…]

Neither is an option too. Neither have your inte[…]