Climate Change Report

#2,727
#2,727
Woodrow Call said:
No, it's literally cost and engineers. I was on an energy list for years with a bunch of PhD's and engineers that follow this topic closely. My daughter, also a PhD, is publishing a book soon about the evolution of the nuclear power industry in the American South, and we discuss this often. It's really hard to find enough qualified people to build the number of plants we need in order to meet demand.
Click to expand...
If this was a cataclysmic event, I refuse to believe we couldn't figure out how to build the same 1970s era gen II reactors. The folks would learn on the job, the same way everybody else did, but with a lot more technology guiding their hands. It's really just a matter of will. Are we willing to say, you know what, those reactors that we plan on running 80 years today weren't that bad. Let's do what France did and decarbonize doing a massive build-out. But we will never do that. Because we will never get over the irrational fear of all things nuclear. And everything has to be new and safer, despite never having a deadly accident within our borders.

Also, Natural Gas prices are not as cheap as they used to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#2,729
#2,729
Taylor Swift responds to critics after jet tops worst private plane CO2 emissions list: 'Loaned out' to others

Lol. Be sure to listen to these dipsh!ts on all political issues .


Swift’s total flight emissions for the year total 8,240 metric tons, or 1,185 times more than the average person’s total annual emissions, according to the report.

Mayweather comes in closely behind Swift, emitting 7,077 metric tons of carbon dioxide while flying private this year, 1,011 times more than the average flyer annually, according to the study.

Other celebrities accused of not being climate conscious are Jay-Z, former New York Yankees star Alex Rodriguez, Blake Shelton, Steven Spielberg and Oprah.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#2,730
#2,730
marcusluvsvols said:
First we were all gonna freeze to death they said in the 70s...

Then came the 80s and CFCs in aerosols were gonna fry us all...

Then in the 90s "global warming" would have coastal cities like Miami under water by 2020...

Nobody listened to the Chicken Littles so in the 2000s they changed the name to "climate change"...

FACTS: Empirical data shows Earths climate is CYCLICAL with an ICE AGE about every 20,000 years. Between those ICE AGES it gets HOT as HELL.

The LAST ICE AGE was about 10,000 years ago. Fact.



This always falls on deaf ears though because shrub hugger liberals have too much free time but cannot seem to grasp these undisputed climate facts....

So I DREW YOU A PICTURE to help you dense folks understand:
Click to expand...
Don’t forget the acid rain BS of late 80s lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1
#2,732
#2,732
US regulators will certify first small nuclear reactor design

Yes yes and more yes ! These new projects are the golden tickets for all the climate emergency chicken littles and their fossil fuel hatred . What I don’t understand is how hard is it to grasp that we aren’t going to do anything but pay more taxes / fees, for example : carbon footprints , if we don’t first wean our grids off of coal . It’s not that complicated people . Knowing what we will spend trillions on at the drop of a hat , this part blows my mind …

AB5030B9-523A-4777-8A9C-F65F7246E63B.jpeg
 
#2,733
#2,733
marcusluvsvols said:
First we were all gonna freeze to death they said in the 70s...

Then came the 80s and CFCs in aerosols were gonna fry us all...

Then in the 90s "global warming" would have coastal cities like Miami under water by 2020...

Nobody listened to the Chicken Littles so in the 2000s they changed the name to "climate change"...

FACTS: Empirical data shows Earths climate is CYCLICAL with an ICE AGE about every 20,000 years. Between those ICE AGES it gets HOT as HELL.

The LAST ICE AGE was about 10,000 years ago. Fact.



This always falls on deaf ears though because shrub hugger liberals have too much free time but cannot seem to grasp these undisputed climate facts....

So I DREW YOU A PICTURE to help you dense folks understand:
Click to expand...
The reason we don't hear about CFCs anymore is because they were banned worldwide and the Ozone layer slowly regenerated, thanks to science. Bad example for your cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OHvol40
#2,736
#2,736
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, Rickyvol77, hog88 and 2 others
#2,738
#2,738
There was an o zone hole in 1973. It healed then came back in 1984 and healed then again in 89 healed then again in the 90s and then again in 2013. Turns out the ozone layer takes a regular beating and heals but has nothing to do with human activity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88, NorthDallas40 and Wireless1
#2,740
#2,740
Orangeslice13 said:
We do have an actual problem that could legitimately kill a large part of the population of the planet but nobody wants to talk about micro plastic.
Click to expand...

That way too logical and people aren’t willing to give up plastic , fossil fuel without a replacement source , yes in a ny second but not plastic water bottles . 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and Wireless1
#2,741
#2,741
K-town Vol Fan said:
The reason we don't hear about CFCs anymore is because they were banned worldwide and the Ozone layer slowly regenerated, thanks to science. Bad example for your cause.
Click to expand...
First I’ll start by acknowledging that CFC have some bad characteristics.
AIR, the original “crisis” science you refer to was somewhat debunked. The CFC that’s supposed to be so bad take 100 years plus to break down, and the ban was on manufacture, not on use. You can still purchase Freon 12, but it’s been recycled. Any “healing” hasn’t been from the ban of manufacture.
Also wasn’t it found that DuPont was behind the “science” because their patent had run out and all their replacements were less efficient?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88, Rickyvol77 and Orangeslice13
#2,743
#2,743
Orangeslice13 said:
Oddly, if we solve the plastic problem we solve the supposed climate problem as a result.
Click to expand...

Same with Nuclear power , but you can’t convince stupid countries to pay huge carbon taxes if you do away with large carbon footprints .
 
#2,744
#2,744
Orangeslice13 said:
This is just like the o zone hole. Science is wrong at every turn and prediction but keep the faith
Click to expand...
The effects of increasing co2 in a finite container isn’t difficult science.

It really does perplex me that we can’t have a sincere conversation about this subject. Why is it so hard for the FF industry to admit “yeah, the effects of our emissions are p*ss poor for air quality, water quality, ecosystems in general… but the demand is so high we have nothing to currently replace the fuels we currently use.” Maybe if there was some sincerity behind their stance, people wouldn’t think they are heartless, money-crazed monsters.

Also, why can’t eco advocates flat-out explain that we currently don’t have any practical solutions to meet energy demand? That clearly we aren’t going to lessen our demand because humans are naturally glutinous, so we have to stop demonizing FF and come up with some happy-medium hybrid approaches to bridge the gap into the future while we wean off of carbon emissions, which will clearly take quite a long time.
 
Last edited:
#2,745
#2,745
OHvol40 said:
The effects of increasing co2 in a finite container isn’t difficult science.

It really does perplex me that we can’t have a sincere conversation about this subject. Why is it so hard for the FF industry to admit “yeah, the effects of our admissions are p*ss poor for air quality, water quality, ecosystems in general… but the demand is so high we have nothing to currently replace the fuels we currently use.” Maybe if there was some sincerity behind their stance, people wouldn’t think they are heartless, money-crazed monsters.

Also, why can’t eco advocates flat-out explain that we currently don’t have any practical solutions to meet energy demand? That clearly we aren’t going to lessen our demand because humans are naturally glutinous, so we have to stop demonizing FF and come up with some happy-medium hybrid approaches to bridge the gap into the future while we wean off of carbon emissions, which will clearly take quite a long time.
Click to expand...

Because … $$$
 
#2,746
#2,746
OHvol40 said:
The effects of increasing co2 in a finite container isn’t difficult science.

It really does perplex me that we can’t have a sincere conversation about this subject. Why is it so hard for the FF industry to admit “yeah, the effects of our admissions are p*ss poor for air quality, water quality, ecosystems in general… but the demand is so high we have nothing to currently replace the fuels we currently use.” Maybe if there was some sincerity behind their stance, people wouldn’t think they are heartless, money-crazed monsters.

Also, why can’t eco advocates flat-out explain that we currently don’t have any practical solutions to meet energy demand? That clearly we aren’t going to lessen our demand because humans are naturally glutinous, so we have to stop demonizing FF and come up with some happy-medium hybrid approaches to bridge the gap into the future while we wean off of carbon emissions, which will clearly take quite a long time.
Click to expand...

what do solar flares have to do with climate change?
 
#2,749
#2,749
I went out to red rocks not long ago. The mountains in Colorado are impressive to see. Those mountains were made by glaciers.
How did that happen?
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top