Official Global Warming thread (merged)

Maybe in 100 years.


There is more than enough petroleum to run our country for a 1,000 years. Quit being so dramatic.

I'm not sure what about my post is dramatic. The quantity is not in question. I don't really have a problem with petroleum. I was pointing out that nuclear and solar will become viable energy alternatives but there really is no viable alternative for the production of plastics besides petroleum
 
When I was in college, we were taught that the world would already have run out of oil by now.

Thats what my mother was told in high school in the late 40s . Estimate of 30 years.

It was in my 7th grade physical sciencevtext book, too.
 
Fukushima anyone??

Fish in California are glowing in the dark. The tech is dangerous.

I'll stick with coal and diesel fuel. (Pick the occasional Prius out from under my truck)
 
I'm not sure what about my post is dramatic. The quantity is not in question. I don't really have a problem with petroleum. I was pointing out that nuclear and solar will become viable energy alternatives but there really is no viable alternative for the production of plastics besides petroleum

Arent some plastics made with bio oils and synthetics?
 
Understood. Dats why i axed.

Do you think attitudes on Nuclear are shifting in your community of zealots :)))

Many of us in the science community who feel strongly about climate change are also big advocates for nuclear. I know Corker has a former ORNL scientist hired on in a consulting position who is a huge advocate as well.
 
Many of us in the science community who feel strongly about climate change are also big advocates for nuclear. I know Corker has a former ORNL scientist hired on in a consulting position who is a huge advocate as well.

You in the science community?

Corker protecting Oak Ridge.
 
Arent some plastics made with bio oils and synthetics?

Yes, you can fabricate some plastics by alternative means. But the fabrication of PS, PE, PP, PVC and other commodity plastics is generally done from petroleum. When I talk about petroleum I'm also including natural gas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I think there should be some federal regulations and oversight. Canton NC paper mill comes to mind. Dumping tons of toxins in the Little pigeon river. NC wasn't going to do anything about it as it ends up in TN.

Then NC sued TVA over toxic coal smoke as a public nuisance and won.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/North_Carolina_v._TVA

Citizen Joe won on both counts.

However, "clean coal" power generation stations can help meet baseline electricity demand.

Search

"clean coal" "coal CO2 sequestration"
 
Oceans will overtake us soon, as well.

Funny thing, I've been going to the same beaches for 40 years and everything is still in the same place. Soil must be rising at the same rate as the oceans.

Dang, you've got a good point. I blame sand fleas, they're carrying more sand to the beach.
 
Geothermal is the way to go

With all the extra water coming from the caps and the extra rainfall, we could bore to a depth where the temps are significant enough to boil water. Lay in pipes, fill with water, and vent the steam to power steam piston generators
 
Geothermal is the way to go

With all the extra water coming from the caps and the extra rainfall, we could bore to a depth where the temps are significant enough to boil water. Lay in pipes, fill with water, and vent the steam to power steam piston generators

What if we strike oil in the process? See what kind of mess you make? Come on, man! We need to go back to the Stone age.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
How much is the debatable part of the argument. I posted scientific evidence showing how climate change is currently abnormal compared to the last 650k+ years despite going through 7 major glaciations

Conservatives won't discuss science. Their backward party was against stem cell research for crying out loud and is mostly opposed to scientific discovery in general. Everything they argue is in terms of an alleged political agenda. You bring up scientific facts when discussing climate change with a conservative and they won't dispute what you say (because it's usually over their ignorant heads), they will just attack Al Gore (like we are supposed to care about that) or call you a tree hugger or some other pejorative term.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Conservatives won't discuss science. Their backward party was against stem cell research for crying out loud and is mostly opposed to scientific discovery in general. Everything they argue is in terms of an alleged political agenda. You bring up scientific facts when discussing climate change with a conservative and they won't dispute what you say (because it's usually over their ignorant heads), they will just attack Al Gore (like we are supposed to care about that) or call you a tree hugger or some other pejorative term.

Are there more than two genders?
 
Conservatives won't discuss science. Their backward party was against stem cell research for crying out loud and is mostly opposed to scientific discovery in general. Everything they argue is in terms of an alleged political agenda. You bring up scientific facts when discussing climate change with a conservative and they won't dispute what you say (because it's usually over their ignorant heads), they will just attack Al Gore (like we are supposed to care about that) or call you a tree hugger or some other pejorative term.

Yeah, this is healthy political discourse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
This shouldn't be a political issue is my point. This should be only about science... my problem with conservatives is they make it political and ignore the science.

Do you just ignore the fact that the whole political agenda of the left for the last 12 years has been the environment or lgbtxyz?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

VN Store



Back
Top