U.S. summer a global warming preview, scientists say

[petros]

If we ever get a cold summer we will have to see what we "are told."

This 'hot' summer is the sixteenth of the past seventeen that are all the warmest in the record. That is a trend that cannot be denied and the couple of decades prior also produced records - just not every year.

This is the first real summer in 15-16 years. I'm glad it's back.

 

[EagleSmack]

Arguing with global warming deniers is like fighting the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Actually it isn't. The Black Knight lost in that movie.

Money changing hands affects other things, something you probably understand well. Money changing hands will affect Anthropogenic climate change in a variety of ways. Smart businesses and governments will commit to measures that will save them from having to be the side that is passing out the cash. Other businesses won't.

Feel free to buy carbon credits.

But the US isn't going to be flushing money as a result of these silly conferences.

Obama believes in climate change but even he isn't so stupid to realize that it is a cash grab unfairly targeting western nations while giving other nations a free pass.

Besides, that money would simply be wasted.

The Climate is changing, yes, and no deep thinking needed to see that. And it has always changed, again no big difference in opinion. I haven't seen any estimates of those change in history/prehistory, which in any way approach the projections of the abruptness of climate changes that science is now estimating.

So we have climate changing around us, quickly. In the past when climate changed human population was a tiny fraction of what it is now. there was room to move on. Ain't no more room. Now it is going to require major bloodshed to succeed or defend against a move. That is problem number one. Problem number two is that there may not be any place better to move to even if we are willing to spill all those red blood cells.

So let us hope that businesses and governments of whatever stripe opt out for a sustainable population, and aim low in doing it.

Desperate? Just informing the ignorant. Maybe you have the same problem as Koko and Durpy, the world doesn't revolve around you.

The world doesn't revolve around me? Really? I guess you are desperate to use that. Heck I don't even know where you got that from.

The temperate zone is huge. So when someone says something about winter and it's effects on temperate agriculture, maybe google before you make ignorant sarcastic comments.

Actually it is you that should be Googling these things as the others pointed out.

 

[WJW]

Precisely: the global warming deniers have not a leg to stand on anymore.
Advice on Warming: Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way | NewAmerica.net

 

[EagleSmack]

I love how when a heat wave hits we get the lecture of it being a preview of global warming (records being broken or tied have stood for 100 years -- imagine that it got this hot 100 years ago) but if we get a cold summer, we are told we can't look at current weather as an indicator of global warming or not.

Exactly! They have no shame at all. Hot summers, cool summers, Bad Winters, Mild Winters... all because of Global Warming.

Oh... and bad hurricane seasons and mild hurricane seasons... global warming.

Precisely: the global warming deniers have not a leg to stand on anymore.
Advice on Warming: Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way | NewAmerica.net

Ah yes we do... and we're doing quite well.

How did the last conferences go for the GW activists? Not so good huh?

No Money For You!

 

[petros]

Oh... and bad hurricane seasons and mild hurricane seasons... global warming.

If memory serve me right two or three years ago there really wan't much of an Atlantic storm season at all.

 

[EagleSmack]

If memory serve me right two or three years ago there really wan't much of an Atlantic storm season at all.

That is correct. After the season with Katrina we were told that this will be the norm... bad hurricane seasons. Then when it didn't happen they said it was because of global warming. No wonder they have no credibility.

 

[lone wolf]

The Dust Bowl of the 1930s

 

[petros]

The Dust Bowl of the 1930s

Triggered by the same anomilies that is driving the current heat wave in Nor AM today. Go figure.

That is correct. After the season with Katrina we were told that this will be the norm... bad hurricane seasons. Then when it didn't happen they said it was because of global warming. No wonder they have no credibility.

it's allllll marketing.

 

[Redmonton_Rebel]

Nuclear is a non starter in much of NIMBY land.
Wind and Tidal only permitted if it does not obstruct the view or playgrounds of rich greenies.
Same goes for Biomass. Good luck getting the necessary permits to set up a hog fuel or garbage fired generator near any city.

Which is why effective education is so important.

With modern slow neutron reactors and coming developments like 4th generation fast reactors, nuclear power could provide relatively safe and almost unlimited power. Fast reactors can "burn" all the waste that has accumulated over the decades from slow power reactors and weapons production, about 600,000 tons in the US alone. Extracting uranium from sea water could become economical with fast reactor technology, there's enough there for millions of years at current levels of demand.

There are processes that duplicate the natural process that takes long-chain hydrocabons and breaks them down with heat and pressure over millions of years to produce oil, and natural gas and do it in hours. Thermal depolymerization can even be used to process medical waste as it's one of the few processes that destroys prions(mad cow disease). It can use many different carbon based feed stocks, including wood, automobile tires, human waste, and animal offal.

Thermal depolymerization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Think of the oil business going green and planting tree farms to produce fast growing tree species like aspen and mixing them with sewage and other waste to produce light crude.

Right now something like 1,000,000 people die a year as a result of air pollution from fossil fuels, we're already putting up with some nasty stuff in our backyards.

Solar power roof shingles have been available for about 20 years, there's a new process that allows you to "paint" solar power producing nano particles onto materials.

Nanosolar

You can't say there aren't economically viable alternatives to fossil fuels, you could build a much more competitive and innovative economy based on modern energy sources, why are we still stuck in the 1800s when it comes to providing power?

 

[petros]

Which is why effective education is so important.

With modern slow neutron reactors and coming developments like 4th generation fast reactors, nuclear power could provide relatively safe and almost unlimited power. Fast reactors can "burn" all the waste that has accumulated over the decades from slow power reactors and weapons production, about 600,000 tons in the US alone. Extracting uranium from sea water could become economical with fast reactor technology, there's enough there for millions of years at current levels of demand.

There are processes that duplicate the natural process that takes long-chain hydrocabons and breaks them down with heat and pressure over millions of years to produce oil, and natural gas and do it in hours. Thermal depolymerization can even be used to process medical waste as it's one of the few processes that destroys prions(mad cow disease). It can use many different carbon based feed stocks, including wood, automobile tires, human waste, and animal offal.

Thermal depolymerization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Think of the oil business going green and planting tree farms to produce fast growing tree species like aspen and mixing them with sewage and other waste to produce light crude.

Right now something like 1,000,000 people die a year as a result of air pollution from fossil fuels, we're already putting up with some nasty stuff in our backyards.

Solar power roof shingles have been available for about 20 years, there's a new process that allows you to "paint" solar power producing nano particles onto materials.

Nanosolar

You can't say there aren't economically viable alternatives to fossil fuels, you could build a much more competitive and innovative economy based on modern energy sources, why are we still stuck in the 1800s when it comes to providing power?

Your ideas were just as stupid under your old handle, did you think a name change would ease your stupidity?

How do you plan on doing all this without fossil fuels?

 

[Redmonton_Rebel]

Straw man.

Yes.

I wouldn't be considered a greenie by committed environmentalists anyway becuase I firmly believe we should be putting a huge investment into modern 3rd. and 4th generation nuclear power technology to provide electrical baseload.

I'm not against the petro-chemical industry either, I favor moving into a much more sustainable phase.

Your ideas were just as stupid under your old handle, did you think a name change would ease your stupidity?

How do you plan on doing all this without fossil fuels?

Sorry, but this just comes across as mentally ill to me.

If you need psychiatric help I hope you get some.

About the last semi-rational part of your post, the fossil fuel sector doesn't own the natural resource they're exploiting, we do. Let a dedicated carbon tax pay for developing the new energy infrastructure.

 

[EagleSmack]

Let a dedicated carbon tax pay for developing the new energy infrastructure.

That is not very bright. Let someone develop one on their own. Why flush money away like Obama has been doing with solar companies? Hundreds of millions GONE with the former owners giving themselves golden parachutes. It is not very responsible.

 

[Redmonton_Rebel]

That is not very bright. Let someone develop one on their own. Why flush money away like Obama has been doing with solar companies? Hundreds of millions GONE with the former owners giving themselves golden parachutes. It is not very responsible.

We're going to be paying anyway, why not get something in return.

I just heard a few weeks back that OPEC has decided $70 or $80 a barrel just doesn't cut it and wants the level at around $120 or higher. At some point we're going to have to get the monkey off our backs.

And I have no problem in the world with demanding a lot more accountability from the process.

politics btw is the art of the possible, not the impossible as some of the posters here seem to think. If we want something enough we're going to get it.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

This would be a valid point if we have had commentary on an equal number of cold and hot summers.

I just know being in Columbus, OH the temp was record breaking .... 100 year old records. If last summer or the past 15 were hotter than norm, you would think the record would have been more recent would it not?

2 summers ago was a cold summer. I recall the arguments from then. And it was as stupid a comment then as the premise of this thread is now.

 

[petros]

About the last semi-rational part of your post, the fossil fuel sector doesn't own the natural resource they're exploiting, we do. Let a dedicated carbon tax pay for developing the new energy infrastructure.

We own it until we sell the rights and then get a royalty. Why a carbon tax? WTF is a carbon tax going to do for a diminishing magnetosphere with a massive hole in it?

 

[Redmonton_Rebel]

We own it until we sell the rights and then get a royalty. Why a carbon tax? WTF is a carbon tax going to do for a diminishing magnetosphere with a massive hole in it?

That's so close to making sense.

The magnetosphere could disappear tomorrow and we'd still be stuck with the problem of too much CO2 trapping electromagnetic radiation which isn't even affected by a magnetic field. Photons have no charge.

A tax on fossil fuels if applied correctly will have several affects.

1. It will place a realistic cost on the use of fossil fuels which get a huge subsidy by not being held responsible for negative impacts.

2. If distributed as a dividend to consumers will give them the ability to choose other sources of power(remember fossil fuels become less competetive when their true cost is applied)

 

[WJW]

I don’t know about the state of the law in Canada, but in the United States, it’s no longer the subject to challenge. The regulation of greenhouse gas emissions is mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Air Act; which regulatory authority has been upheld by the United States Supreme Court. See Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007); American Electric Power Co., Inc. V. Connecticut, 564 U.S. ____ (2011). American global warming deniers can piss and moan about it; but they are just pissing in the wind.

 

[EagleSmack]

We're going to be paying anyway, why not get something in return.

Unless you own a solar company and cut yourself a nice severance package with tax payer money when you go bankrupt... what are you getting in return?

I just heard a few weeks back that OPEC has decided $70 or $80 a barrel just doesn't cut it and wants the level at around $120 or higher. At some point we're going to have to get the monkey off our backs.

I agree. That is why we need to develop and use our own fossil resources more. I'd like to get the monkey off our backs as well. If my chance a technology that can replace fossil fuels is developed GREAT! However, raping the wallets of industry to pay for something that doesn't and may never exist is silly.

Did the government force carriage makers and horse breeders to pay for the development of the auto industry?

And I have no problem in the world with demanding a lot more accountability from the process.

They do demand... unfairly. GREED

politics btw is the art of the possible, not the impossible as some of the posters here seem to think. If we want something enough we're going to get it.

Like what exactly?

 

[Ron in Regina]

That's so close to making sense.

The magnetosphere could disappear tomorrow and we'd still be stuck with the problem of too much CO2 trapping electromagnetic radiation which isn't even affected by a magnetic field. Photons have no charge.

A tax on fossil fuels if applied correctly will have several affects.

1. It will place a realistic cost on the use of fossil fuels which get a huge subsidy by not being held responsible for negative impacts.

2. If distributed as a dividend to consumers will give them the ability to choose other sources of power(remember fossil fuels become less competetive when their true cost is applied)

So.....when the fossil fuel dependency drops, what will subsidize these
other sources of power? Yes I understand that they'll be the only kid on
the block.....but if they can only get there on the back of subsidies, what
will keep them affordable to the many and not just the few?

For example, the push is for more fuel efficient vehicles, & that is happening,
and lots of little cars going further on less fuel now, etc...but road tax's are
charged on fuel purchases, so there's less $$$ for road tax's that the little
cars (& commuter bus's, etc...) are still using. so the road taxes must increase
on the less fuel being purchased, which will lead to more tax increases on that
same fuel, etc...& eventually more taxes (toll roads, per mile travelled, etc...)
will be needed on top of the current per/litre/gallon fuel tax. See where I'm going?

 

[petros]

The magnetosphere could disappear tomorrow and we'd still be stuck with the problem of too much CO2 trapping electromagnetic radiation which isn't even affected by a magnetic field. Photons have no charge.

No we wouldn't. Without a magnetosphere we'd have no atmosphere at all. Don't think so, ask a Martian.

P.S. photons aren't the only radiation the sun emits.