BajaNomad

The palm tree is going two feet under water

 Pages:  1  ..  17    19    21

RFClark - 11-15-2023 at 04:32 PM

S,

So were my political posts as should be. goat’s and your’s were up first!
Which shouldn’t be!

Doug chose to remove them because they were derogatory and political.

Still Crickets - Crickets - Crickets on Hansen but lots of wasted bandwidth on punctuation!

As previously stated your dogma doesn't allow you to even acknowledge anything outside of it.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1253358

Cycling water through the transition zone

“The water cycle involves more than just the water that circulates between the atmosphere, oceans, and surface waters. It extends deep into Earth's interior as the oceanic crust subducts, or slides, under adjoining plates of crust and sinks into the mantle, carrying water with it. Schmandt et al. combined seismological observations beneath North America with geodynamical modeling and high-pressure and -temperature melting experiments. They conclude that the mantle transition zone—410 to 660 km below Earth's surface—acts as a large reservoir of water.”


[Edited on 11-15-2023 by RFClark]

IMG_4714.jpeg - 248kB

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by RFClark]

surabi - 11-15-2023 at 08:43 PM

That's all very interesting science research, but you still haven't explained how you think this could be some useful thing regarding climate change.

And do you not understand how everything is interconnected? Does it not occur to you that even if we could extract water from 400 miles below the earth's crust, that extracting it could cause some other dire consequence? Also it isn't water- it's water trapped in a mineral.

Talking about something that has no relation to solving climate change problems now or even in my grandkids' lifetime, is rather pointless as anything but scientific curiosity.

RFClark - 11-15-2023 at 09:46 PM

S,

Crickets - crickets - crickets still on Hansen’s paper! Who would have thought he would turn out to be the Martin Luther of Human Climate Change? You can’t make this stuff up!

On other subjects, you obviously don’t understand this paper. It’s not about us humans doing anything! It’s about us humans discovering that the earth’s natural water cycle used in our current climate models is incomplete so it’s forecasts are incomplete.

If you think that this has nothing to do with now watch Iceland and Italy. Both are due volcanic eruptions, possibly very large ones. Those eruptions do effect the climate in real time. Think those sulfur compounds in the air that you loath here.

It is believed that this deep hydrated zone plays a major part of the natural carbon (think CO2 here) as well as the water cycle. It’s a very important part of how the earth’s climate works and constantly changes.

surabi - 11-15-2023 at 10:37 PM

Blah blah blah. How about never mind the "forecasts"- there are catastrophic things happening right now, in real time. The glaciers are melting, the rivers are running low, the ocean level is rising, this year we just had the hottest months on record, an unprecedented numbers and intensity of wildfires, and the heat has been rising for years, the strength and number of hurricanes has increased, terrible flooding has increased.
Those aren't forecasts. But carry on living in your metal box bubble.

RFClark - 11-15-2023 at 11:22 PM

S,

Still more dogma and crickets. Hansen says some of your solutions likely will make things worse not better. Make it hotter not cooler!

Those things you mention like the sea rising have been occurring these last 12,000 plus years to the sum of 150,000mm sea level rise, 80mm of which have occurred since 1995. All of it was caused by melting ice.

The US and China met today if China’s 50% contribution to climate change was discussed it wasn’t mentioned in the press coverage.

mtgoat666 - 11-16-2023 at 07:37 AM

When i see the stupidity and cruelty of my fellow humans, i sometimes think maybe life on earth will be better for all species when evolution marches on and homo sapiens is replaced by one or more species.




Goat, I think you’ll be disappointed with the results!

RFClark - 11-16-2023 at 07:57 AM



IMG_4716.jpeg - 186kB

surabi - 11-16-2023 at 10:25 AM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
S,


Those things you mention like the sea rising have been occurring these last 12,000 plus years to the sum of 150,000mm sea level rise, 80mm of which have occurred since 1995. All of it was caused by melting ice.

The US and China met today if China’s 50% contribution to climate change was discussed it wasn’t mentioned in the press coverage.


As for that first statement, so what? That's just more of your blah blah. So what if something has been going on for a long time? That doesn't negate the fact that the rate has been accelerating or reached a critical stage. By your line of reasoning, that someone has become obese, which is impacting their health, is no big deal, and nothing to be concerned about because they've been slowly but steadily gaining weight over the past 3 decades.

As for your second statement, perhaps you should expand your choice of "press coverage".


https://apnews.com/article/climate-china-us-apec-methane-522...

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by surabi]

RFClark - 11-16-2023 at 12:05 PM

S,

“Crickets still on Hansen’s paper! Who would have thought he would turn out to be the Martin Luther of Human Climate Change? You can’t make this stuff up!”

Can’t deal with it cause your dogma won’t let you! Just blah-blah-blah, my head is stuck in the ground. I can’t hear you!

With history as a guide Hansen will probably get what Luther got for his effort. People with closely held beliefs are very touchy when they’re questioned.

I’ll let you read the 2 quotes and “discover” the difference! If I named those not discussing the danger posed to the world by climate change yesterday it would be “politics”. “Climate Change” being the world’s major issue it’s fair to note that the 2 participants didn’t mention or take credit for “The Agreement(s)”? Oh, excuse me not agreements just “pledges”.

“China and the US pledge to step up climate efforts ahead of Biden-Xi summit and UN meeting”

“The US and China met today if China’s 50% contribution to climate change was discussed it wasn’t mentioned in the press coverage.”

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by RFClark]

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by RFClark]

mtgoat666 - 11-16-2023 at 12:37 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
S,

“Crickets still on Hansen’s paper! Who would have thought he would turn out to be the Martin Luther of Human Climate Change? You can’t make this stuff up!”


You post lots of stuff, most of it from questionable websites. Don't make us click on your tik toks and other foreign links of dubious nature. Why don’t you post the abstract here so we know what you are rambling on about…

RFClark - 11-16-2023 at 12:52 PM

Goat,

Really? Not a single quote from Fox News:

Apple News - News Service World Wide

Science.org

Nature.com

TheGuardian.com

Inside Climate News - source for the Hansen news

Right Wing Rags All. I’ve never seen a goat with its head in the sand but it must be possable.

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by RFClark]

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by RFClark]

mtgoat666 - 11-16-2023 at 01:04 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
Goat,

Really? Not a single quote from Fox News:

Apple News - News Service World Wide

Science.org

Nature.com

TheGuardian.com

Inside Climate News - source for the Hansen news

Right Wing Rags All. I’ve never seen a goat with its head in the sand but it must be possable.

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by RFClark]

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by RFClark]


Still don't know what you’re talking about. Are you referring to the pop science article you read about water content in the earth’s mantle?


Goat,

RFClark - 11-16-2023 at 01:10 PM

No, here’s the paper’s abstract $15 to read the paper.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1253358


mtgoat666 - 11-16-2023 at 01:33 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
No, here’s the paper’s abstract $15 to read the paper.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1253358



4 authors on that paper, and none named Hansen!

The topic of this thread is anthropogenic climate/sea level change (and david k’s family photo album),… the paper you cite (Dehydration melting at the top of the lower mantle) has nothing to do with the price of tea in China!



[Edited on 11-16-2023 by mtgoat666]

RFClark - 11-16-2023 at 01:44 PM

Goat,

So what you really want is my source for Hansen’s statements that removing the sulphur from the air is causing the temperatures to rise faster. Inside Climate News is a major climate news source. Link to articles below one of which quotes Hansen on the subject.
https://arstechnica.com/author/insideclimatenews/

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/11/former-head-of-nasas...

Here’s more reading on the aerosol issue,

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/05/wildfire-smoke-from-...

Remember that Murphy is totally apolitical in metering out punishment for sloppy science and crappy engineering.

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by RFClark]

[Edited on 11-16-2023 by RFClark]

mtgoat666 - 11-16-2023 at 01:58 PM

Clarkles:
Still waiting for you to explain the link between anthropogenic global warming and water content of the earth’s mantle!

RFClark - 11-16-2023 at 03:15 PM

Goat,

Different subject. There are citations for all of this, no I won’t post them as few, possibly including you will read any of this.

Start with the fact that for more than 70% of the earth we don’t have much good data prior to about 1995. Things are so bad that Grad Students are manually entering weather information derived from reading paper ship logs. Especially for the Pacific Ocean.

The Climate People are trying to forecast 70+ years into the future based on less than 30 years of reasonable good data. There is also a profound lack of understanding of what the cycles even are and how they work.

It turns out that a new AI weather forecaster running on a single super computer is now generating better 10 day weather forecasts much faster (minutes not hours) not using reams of weather data but weather satellite images. So there is hope going forward

Major players

CO2: most living non-plants generate it, most plants require it. A majority of earth’s CO2 is stored in a variety of sinks, both long and short term outside of the atmosphere. The Oceans being a major short term sink. The cycle times and budgets for CO2 are not well understood

Methane: We are just in the first stages of developing a methane budget for the earth. The fight about organic vs inorganic methane is ongoing. Everyone agrees that there’s methane hydrates on the sea floor but no agreement on how much methane also leaks from the ground as well as the sea floor in quantities only now being measured.

Sulfur compounds: again both organic and inorganic sources. The first satellite to monitor some of these compounds in the atmosphere launches next year, primarily thanks to Hansen. Volcanos release much of these compounds along with internal combustion engines which burn hydrocarbons. Again the cycle time and budget is not well understood.

Smoke and aerosols : Organic and inorganic sources, Volcanos, Fires, various wind blown substances including NaCl and bacteria. All of which support cloud formation and directly modulate the amount of insolation received and held by the earth. Very complicated cycle times and budgets not well defined or measured yet.

Above are just 3 classes out of many that modulate the earth’s climate. The Sun and Orbital forcing also have cycles that modulate our climate.

Then there is Man who has modulated the earth’s climate since he started using fire long ago.

The point of the deep ground water discovery paper is we now find that there could be 4 times as much water in play affecting these cycles and the climate as we previously thought we knew about.

It’s a poorly understood complicated dynamic system that we need to modify and monitor in real time. Just do something now won’t cut it nor will dogma! This isn’t a forest just following your footsteps backwards won’t get you out again.

Hansen’s paper already points out the negative consequences of some of our “improvements”.

AKgringo - 11-16-2023 at 04:24 PM

Water vapor is still the leading greenhouse gas, and warm air is capable of holding more water vapor than cold air.

RFClark - 11-16-2023 at 05:35 PM

Ak,

That is the point I was trying to make water is the solvent that drives the cycles the other things are generally impurities in the water.

Finding that we only know about part of the H2O cycle and 25% of the water is huge.

It’s like finally accepting that continents actually drift when I was a teen. My lifelong friend’s dad was the Chair of the Geology Dept at a major LA University and a major part of the continental drift debate.

There are people, some very well educated who are incapable of changing their worldviews even unto their deaths. They simply can’t process the information that conflicts with what they know that they know. Usually it’s necessary to wait for them to retire before progress can be made.

Not a few such people went down with the Titanic because they couldn't process what they could see with their own eyes.

BajaMama - 11-17-2023 at 12:55 PM

Look at the evidence. Don't bother with pundit opinions. Look at the world around you to decide whether climate change, global warming, rising seas are happening. Read and make sense of information, data and facts that come your way.

Are storms getting stronger? Are weather patterns shifting? Are fires bigger, more frequent and more destructive?

And most importantly, remember that A LOT of data conclusion is skewed to fit a point of view. And a lot of people who read good data do so with a bias.

But for the sake of all that is holy, stop bickering at each other because your conclusions are different. A photo of a normal tidal ebb and flow, or a storm surge that reaches the beach is not evidence of CC or GW.

However, glaciers disappearing at the current unprecedented rate does speak volumes. The disappearance of ice at the poles is happening faster than predicted with CC and GW data. Do what you want with that, I don't care. Just look at the data, the facts, the evidence. Make your own conclusions.

RFClark - 11-17-2023 at 01:45 PM

BajaM,

The only point I’m trying to make is what the Climate Scolds want to do isn’t the right thing and even if it was it’s not enough to do more than “rearrange the deckchairs on the Titanic”.

Read what a top climate scientist thinks.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/11/former-head-of-nasas...

Maybe Rumsfeld was talking about the climate twenty years ago

AKgringo - 11-17-2023 at 03:42 PM

www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=CFBfVtzW&a...

surabi - 11-17-2023 at 04:52 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
BajaM,

The only point I’m trying to make is what the Climate Scolds want to do isn’t the right thing...


The instant you find it necessary to demean those you don't agree with by attaching names to them like Climate Scolds, 3 year olds, or profess to know everything that an individual believes, and call it dogma, you lose all credibility.

surabi - 11-17-2023 at 08:25 PM

There's a difference between being snarky to an individual you think is posting stupid things and making up terms for an entire demographic of people intended to demean and dismiss their point of view.

RFClark - 11-17-2023 at 10:34 PM

I reviewed what I posted. I still don't see anyone’s name attached to it.

Anyone who personally takes exception, especially those who maliciously label others who don’t agree with there dogma, climate or otherwise, with specific personalized pejoratives. All I can say is if you think it applies to you personally. You would know that better than anyone else.

Much as I would enjoy taking credit tor the term “climate scold” I can’t. It’s been in common usage for years.

https://thefederalist.com/2023/11/08/like-father-like-son-ec...

[Edited on 11-18-2023 by RFClark]

[Edited on 11-18-2023 by RFClark]

surabi - 11-18-2023 at 09:54 AM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
I reviewed what I posted. I still don't see anyone’s name attached to it.

Anyone who personally takes exception, especially those who maliciously label others who don’t agree with there dogma, climate or otherwise, with specific personalized pejoratives. All I can say is if you think it applies to you personally. You would know that better than anyone else.

Much as I would enjoy taking credit tor the term “climate scold” I can’t. It’s been in common usage for years.



You need to work on your reading comprehension. You missed my point entirely, which is that labelling a whole demographic of people with some derogatory term designed to dismiss their point of view is what those who can't make their points on their own merits do.
It has nothing to do with "taking it personally" nor whether you made up the term yourself or not.

mtgoat666 - 11-18-2023 at 10:04 AM

Quote: Originally posted by surabi  
Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
I reviewed what I posted. I still don't see anyone’s name attached to it.

Anyone who personally takes exception, especially those who maliciously label others who don’t agree with there dogma, climate or otherwise, with specific personalized pejoratives. All I can say is if you think it applies to you personally. You would know that better than anyone else.

Much as I would enjoy taking credit tor the term “climate scold” I can’t. It’s been in common usage for years.



You need to work on your reading comprehension. You missed my point entirely, which is that labelling a whole demographic of people with some derogatory term designed to dismiss their point of view is what those who can't make their points on their own merits do.
It has nothing to do with "taking it personally" nor whether you made up the term yourself or not.


You guys should spend less time peeing on each other and more time discussing the threatened palm trees of baja!

RFClark - 11-18-2023 at 02:54 PM

So Goat,

Do you want to comment on my climate change answers as you requested or do you want to just sling shade as others do?

mtgoat666 - 11-18-2023 at 04:08 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
So Goat,

Do you want to comment on my climate change answers as you requested or do you want to just sling shade as others do?


My comment: you post nonsense from incompetent and/or partisan hacks.

RFClark - 11-18-2023 at 06:22 PM

Goat,

So you turned on Hansen too cause he went against your dogma. Probably haven't read the paper quoted either. “Blah blah my eyes and ears are covered, I can’t hear you!” You just keep on shuffling those deckchairs and slinging that shade.

BTW is there much OSB incorporated in your pad?

mtgoat666 - 11-18-2023 at 06:59 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
Goat,

So you turned on Hansen too cause he went against your dogma. Probably haven't read the paper quoted either. “Blah blah my eyes and ears are covered, I can’t hear you!” You just keep on shuffling those deckchairs and slinging that shade.

BTW is there much OSB incorporated in your pad?


How can i turn on someone when i dont even know of that person? Who is hansen? And what paper quote? You still talking about water content in the mantle?


RFClark - 11-18-2023 at 08:40 PM

https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/11/former-head-of-nasas...

Above is the other topic I posted the other day and you didn’t see. It ties in with the deep water paper.

Water is the primary solvent (carrier) for most of the compounds that regulate energy transmission into and out of the atmosphere as well as a regulator in and of itself. Finding that there is 4X the amount of water allowed for in the models is a relatively big thing.

Hansen was the head of NASA’s climate group. The quote below has most Green’s undies in knots for obvious reasons.



“Are aerosols driving the current surge of warming?

For several years, Hansen and Simons have proposed that the recent and ongoing surge in a wide range of global climate indicators—not just average global temperatures—may be driven in large part by a sharp reduction in tiny sulfuric particles produced by burning shipping fuels and other fossil fuels, and by other industrial processes.

Those aerosol particles, spewed into the atmosphere in massive quantities since the start of the industrial revolution, often make clouds brighter and more persistent, so they reflect more of the sun’s incoming heat energy back to space. While carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have been warming the planet since at least 1850, other byproducts of burning fossil fuels were cooling the planet at the same time, although the effects of aerosols only last for a fraction of the time that the heat-trapping gases persist in the atmosphere.”

mtgoat666 - 11-18-2023 at 11:15 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/11/former-head-of-nasas...

Above is the other topic I posted the other day and you didn’t see. It ties in with the deep water paper.

Water is the primary solvent (carrier) for most of the compounds that regulate energy transmission into and out of the atmosphere as well as a regulator in and of itself. Finding that there is 4X the amount of water allowed for in the models is a relatively big thing.

Hansen was the head of NASA’s climate group. The quote below has most Green’s undies in knots for obvious reasons.



“Are aerosols driving the current surge of warming?

For several years, Hansen and Simons have proposed that the recent and ongoing surge in a wide range of global climate indicators—not just average global temperatures—may be driven in large part by a sharp reduction in tiny sulfuric particles produced by burning shipping fuels and other fossil fuels, and by other industrial processes.

Those aerosol particles, spewed into the atmosphere in massive quantities since the start of the industrial revolution, often make clouds brighter and more persistent, so they reflect more of the sun’s incoming heat energy back to space. While carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have been warming the planet since at least 1850, other byproducts of burning fossil fuels were cooling the planet at the same time, although the effects of aerosols only last for a fraction of the time that the heat-trapping gases persist in the atmosphere.”


So your solution is more SO2 emissions? (More acid rain?)

You are a funny little man, clarkles!

Hansen! :lol::lol::lol::lol:

I liked the hansen brothers in Slapshot. They were based on the carlson bros




[Edited on 11-19-2023 by mtgoat666]

RFClark - 11-19-2023 at 04:04 AM

Goat,

No! A solution, not mine, is to replace the Sulphur with aluminum oxide. Also a paper I posted that you didn’t read. Of course there will still be lots of sulphur from natural sources like volcanos from time to time.

Acid rain in NA didn’t come from the US primarily. It came from Sudbury Ontario courtesy of the Canadian Governments. Those government agencies controlled the largest acid rain producer in NA (and the world) for decades before attempting to solve some of the problems. You probably didn’t read that either.

“ Sudbury’s pollution even sullied relations between the U.S. and Canada, as acid rain emerged as a significant environmental issue. “I traveled to Washington, New York City, and a couple of other places in the United States and tried to persuade them to cut their emissions. And when I would go down to lecture them on their problems, the first word that would come out was Inco,” says Jim Bradley, who was Ontario’s environmental minister at the time and grew up in Sudbury. “Inco was the largest single emitter of sulfur dioxide in North America at the time.”

I suppose all that reading would take away from your time to scold and scoff. But that’s who you are!

[Edited on 11-19-2023 by RFClark]

[Edited on 11-19-2023 by RFClark]

It's time to limit how often we can travel abroad – 'carbon passports' may be the answer

RFClark - 11-27-2023 at 11:16 AM


“The average annual carbon footprint for a person in the US is 16 tons – one of the highest rates in the world. In the UK this figure sits at 11.7 tons, still more than five times the figure recommended by the Paris Agreement to keep global temperature rise below 1.5 Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels.

Globally, the average annual carbon footprint of a person is closer to 4 tons. But, to have the best chance of preventing temperature rise from overshooting 2 Celsius, the average global carbon footprint needs to drop to under two tons by 2050. This figure equates to around two roundtrip flights between London and New York.”


https://www.kake.com/story/50100379/its-time-to-limit-how-of...

mtgoat666 - 11-27-2023 at 05:24 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  

“The average annual carbon footprint for a person in the US is 16 tons – one of the highest rates in the world. In the UK this figure sits at 11.7 tons, still more than five times the figure recommended by the Paris Agreement to keep global temperature rise below 1.5 Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels.

Globally, the average annual carbon footprint of a person is closer to 4 tons. But, to have the best chance of preventing temperature rise from overshooting 2 Celsius, the average global carbon footprint needs to drop to under two tons by 2050. This figure equates to around two roundtrip flights between London and New York.”


https://www.kake.com/story/50100379/its-time-to-limit-how-of...


Relevance to baja… Are you saying that nomads should trade in their jeeps for mountain bikes?
Trade in their motor bikes for surfboards?
Do shore fishing in lieu of offshore fishing?
Take the bus in lieu of Volaris flights?
Use a prius iinstead of a 3/4 ton PU for trips to the grocery store?

Wonder when the nattering nabobs will chime in with their pledge to do nothing until john kerry becomes a monk and takes a vow of poverty? :lol:

Think global, act local!


[Edited on 11-28-2023 by mtgoat666]

RFClark - 11-27-2023 at 11:16 PM

Goat,

I think the message here is if these folks get their way and you get 2T of carbon before regressive taxes, sanctions or both. You won’t visit Baja often outside of your dreams. Left unsaid is the market in selling carbon credits that will develop and those who are connected will profit from.

The rich and politically connected will live as they always have. The poor will get subsidies (which, like food stamps they will sell) as they often have and you will pay for it as you always have.

The planet will continue to get warmer as it has since the end of the last ice age. The seas will continue to rise as they have since the end of the last ice age. Not much else will change unless we start actively managing the weather.

I’ll “chime in” I have EVs to drive to Baja and the store! What’s in your garage? I know how to generate electricity. Do you know how to make gasoline?


mtgoat666 - 11-28-2023 at 08:26 AM

Clarkles:

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
What’s in your garage?


Lots of stuff, but no automobiles. We park in the driveway!

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
I know how to generate electricity.


I actually generate electricity. On net metering. On an annual basis, i am a net producer.

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
Do you know how to make gasoline?


Yes.

[Edited on 11-28-2023 by mtgoat666]

surabi - 11-28-2023 at 09:05 AM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  




The planet will continue to get warmer as it has since the end of the last ice age. The seas will continue to rise as they have since the end of the last ice age. Not much else will change...





Except the ability of humans and animals to survive.

Living the 2 tons/year of Carbon Life

RFClark - 11-28-2023 at 10:30 AM

We could just clean up (as pictured) Or we could clean up and manage the weather! See the next picture!

IMG_4809.jpeg - 117kB

[Edited on 11-29-2023 by RFClark]

StuckSucks - 11-28-2023 at 05:29 PM

IMG_2672.JPG - 152kB

[Edited on 11-29-2023 by StuckSucks]

RFClark - 11-28-2023 at 07:16 PM

👍:bounce:

“Why Norway — the poster child for electric cars — is having second thoughts
Electric cars are crucial, but not enough to solve climate change. We can’t let them crowd out car-free transit options”

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23939076/norway-electric-...

[Edited on 11-29-2023 by RFClark]

surabi - 11-29-2023 at 01:24 PM

Climate change activists have been saying this for years- the most important step everyone can take is firstly, reducing their consumption. Obviously EVs are better for the environment than gas-powered vehicles, but utilizing public transportation is obviously better than driving a private vehicle at all. (For this to be an option, of course the powers that be have to make sure there are viable public transportation options)

But the majority of people, especially in North America, are unwilling to change anything about their lifestyle for the common good.

RFClark - 11-30-2023 at 12:31 PM

Since a discussion of politics is not allowed here at least for me. Let’s discuss the recent meeting in San Francisco where the climate was slightly discussed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/us/san-francisco-apec-cit...

You would need to have your heads pretty far in the sand not to understand how public health and safety for the common good rates.

surabi - 11-30-2023 at 01:52 PM

Every place in the world races to "clean up" when there is some major international event taking place in their city. It's not something unique to SF, nor is it political.

RFClark - 11-30-2023 at 02:42 PM

No of course it’s not “political” that’s why they did zip nothing to clean up the place for the last 2 or more decades. They’re really concerned for the common good you are always talking about.

surabi - 11-30-2023 at 03:13 PM

As I said, everyplace, many of which have issues under normal circumstances, disappear the homeless people, the drug addicts and dealers, the garbage and the potholes before a major event. Not sure what's so hard for you to acknowledge about that, and why you feel the need to characterize it as political.

And when I've talked about the "common good, it has been in reference to individuals putting the common good above their own personal "wants" and comfy lifestyles, not in reference to how whoever happens to be in political power deals with things. Choosing not to buy a gas-guzzling truck is a lot easier than trying to solve a homeless, drug, or violent crime problem.




mtgoat666 - 11-30-2023 at 06:04 PM

Interesting

The States Producing the Most CO2 Per Capita

https://www.statista.com/chart/20848/per-capita-co2-emission...




And this is interesting too…

List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_...



[Edited on 12-1-2023 by mtgoat666]

CO2 Emissions by country & Per Capita

RFClark - 11-30-2023 at 09:42 PM

Note that China where many of the solar and wind generators come from is at the top of the list. Also note that Canadians emit more CO2 per capita than the US citizens do. Note as well that Mexico emits way less per capita.

The added chart is self explanatory. It graphs consumption and production CO2. It’s easy to see where the increases are,

India actually meets the 2T/y emission standard so to live like they do in India is your goal.
IMG_4817.jpeg - 263kB

IMG_4819.jpeg - 167kB

[Edited on 12-1-2023 by RFClark]

surabi - 11-30-2023 at 10:11 PM

You're using a chart of stats from 2016? From before there were serious efforts to reduce carbon emissions? How pointless, RFC.

Aside from that, CO2 emissions per capita aren't really pertinent, because it's big industries, rather than individuals, that are the major producers of CO2. So countries with heavy CO2 producing factories, and large populations, as opposed to countries with heavy CO2 producing industries, but comparatively low populations, skew the "per capita" rates. Also, both China and India have high CO2 emissions, but those countries are creating that CO2 mostly through manufacturing for export to world markets. So it's the consumers of the products produced there, who aren't the Chinese or East Indians, who are actually the people who should be counted in the per capita rate for those countries' pollution.

If everyone only consumed products manufactured in their own countries, then per capita rates would be of interest. But the world isn't like that.

[Edited on 12-1-2023 by surabi]

[Edited on 12-1-2023 by surabi]

mtgoat666 - 12-1-2023 at 12:32 AM

Clarkles,
Post the ranking of per capita co2 emissions.
Can’t handle the truth?


mtgoat666 - 12-1-2023 at 12:36 AM

Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666  

https://www.statista.com/chart/20848/per-capita-co2-emission...


Those green states must be doing something better, eh?

RFClark - 12-1-2023 at 07:58 AM

Goat,

Per capita has been posted Canada’s per capita is higher. You can’t read!

surabi - 12-1-2023 at 10:28 AM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
Goat,

Per capita has been posted Canada’s per capita is higher. You can’t read!


In 2016. Your posted information is out of date by 7 years. Nice way to disseminate disinformation.

2022 and Canada is still higher Per Capita

RFClark - 12-1-2023 at 11:44 AM



IMG_4822.jpeg - 129kB

[Edited on 12-1-2023 by RFClark]

stillnbaja - 12-1-2023 at 12:29 PM

why not just offer the whole story?
https://climate.selectra.com/en/carbon-footprint/most-pollut...

RFClark - 12-1-2023 at 01:09 PM

Hi,

Read back. I did post that. The climate scolds here don’t want to deal with the fact that China emits the most CO2 (29+%) mostly in the support of manufacturing “Green” solar, wind and EV parts/systems. The cost of that CO2 is mostly swept under the rug.

The scolds have a goal of forcing change through pressure and legislation. As demonstrated recently what really drives them is their image. San Francisco has had a decades long problem with dirty, unsanitary and unsafe street's/sidewalks. Almost nothing has been done to solve the problem. The opposite is the case. The “Right” to camp, poop, shoot up and steal has been defended in word and deed.

Comes a pending visit from a foreign dictator and a clean up must be done not for the health or safety of the citizens, but for the protection of their image.

When the Russians built Potemkin Villages for the Tsar to drive by. We scorned them! How times change. One must wonder if they dressed the homeless drug users and staged the abandoned stores and shops.

Wonder no more! Yes they did!


“ San Francisco had the air this week of teenagers frantically cleaning up after a house party with their parents on the way home.

On Market Street, the city’s main thoroughfare, maintenance workers resurfaced uneven sidewalks and installed plywood over empty tree wells.

Nearby, a crew gave a long-derelict plaza a makeover by turning it into a skateboard park and outdoor cafe with pingpong tables, chess boards and scores of potted plants. Elsewhere, workers painted decorative crosswalks and new murals, wiped away graffiti, picked up piles of trash and removed scaffolding to show off a refurbished clock tower at the Ferry Building.”

[Edited on 12-1-2023 by RFClark]

surabi - 12-1-2023 at 01:25 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
Hi,

China emits the most CO2 (29+%) mostly in the support of manufacturing “Green” solar, wind and EV parts/systems.



Source for that statement? And why are you conflating dirty sidewalks and homeless encampments with global pollution that affects the entire planet and every living thing on it? How absurd.

mtgoat666 - 12-1-2023 at 01:27 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
Hi,

Read back. I did post that. The climate scolds here don’t want to deal with the fact that China emits the most CO2 (29+%) mostly in the support of manufacturing “Green” solar, wind and EV parts/systems. The cost of that CO2 is mostly swept under the rug.

The scolds have a goal of forcing change through pressure and legislation. As demonstrated recently what really drives them is their image. San Francisco has had a decades long problem with dirty, unsanitary and unsafe street's/sidewalks. Almost nothing has been done to solve the problem. The opposite is the case. The “Right” to camp, poop, shoot up and steal has been defended in word and deed.

Comes a pending visit from a foreign dictator and a clean up must be done not for the health or safety of the citizens, but for the protection of their image.

When the Russians built Potemkin Villages for the Tsar to drive by. We scorned them! How times change. One must wonder if they dressed the homeless drug users and staged the abandoned stores and shops.


On a per capita basis, china emits half of what usa emits. China has many more people than usa, so total exceeds usa.
china performs well when you look at per capita emissions.
Americans are fat, lazy, gluttonous— so high per capita emissions.

surabi - 12-1-2023 at 01:30 PM

Quote: Originally posted by stillnbaja  
why not just offer the whole story?
https://climate.selectra.com/en/carbon-footprint/most-pollut...


Telling the whole story wouldn't be convenient for his agenda, would it?

RFClark - 12-1-2023 at 01:39 PM

Yes, and SFO is our “Tsar’s Potemkin village”!

The posted charts show all of those things. Including that Canada emits more per capita CO2 than the US. Your dogma won’t allow you to deal with that.



[Edited on 12-1-2023 by RFClark]

surabi - 12-1-2023 at 03:21 PM

What part of per capita rates being largely pointless, as a total country's CO2 emissions are not based upon the carbon footprint of individuals, eludes you?

And it's absurd that you find it necessary to prove that Americans are somehow more responsible than Canadians when it comes to curbing emissions, when you are quibbling about a 1.11% difference, according to your chart.

RFClark - 12-1-2023 at 08:03 PM

You will have to take per capita pollution up with the goat. Personally I think the total CO2 is more important.

That said Canada has been a gross polluter.

Does the Sudbury Super Stack jog your memory?

[Edited on 12-2-2023 by RFClark]

RFClark - 12-1-2023 at 08:20 PM

China's progress on renewables to meet climate goals undermined by coal expansion-research


https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/chinas...

surabi - 12-1-2023 at 08:24 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  


That said Canada has been a gross polluter.

Does the Sudbury Super Stack jog your memory?

[Edited on 12-2-2023 by RFClark]


What is your point, RFClark? I have never defended any country's pollution output. And it isn't some "who's worse" competition. Everyone needs to lower their emissions.

RFClark - 12-1-2023 at 08:27 PM

My point is that you probably never herd of the Sudbury Super Stack.

Just like removing Sulphur from the air without replacing it with something else to reflect the sun’s energy is making the world hotter, using Chinese Solar built with coal fired power is net also not reducing CO2 production either.

[Edited on 12-2-2023 by RFClark]

surabi - 12-1-2023 at 08:55 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
My point is that you probably never herd of the Sudbury Super Stack.


[Edited on 12-2-2023 by RFClark]


Your point is that you assume I've never heard of something? :lol: There's lots of things I've never heard of. Lots of things you've never heard of, too. So what?

[Edited on 12-2-2023 by surabi]

Here’s a clue Sudbury was both the world’s largest point source Sulphur Dioxide emitter and an international Success Story in cleaning up SO2 emissions.

RFClark - 12-3-2023 at 09:16 PM





IMG_4829.jpeg - 187kB

mtgoat666 - 12-3-2023 at 09:46 PM

Clarkie:
What is the point of you blathering on about last century’s pollution? I think all you are illustrating is that cutting emissions works. Illustrating that cutting GHG emissions may be good for the climate in eastern USA and Canada, and the world!

RFClark - 12-4-2023 at 04:58 AM

Goat,

There are several points here.

The Sudbury problem was identified and finally solved. It was solved by an agreement between Canada’s PM and the US President.

China currently emits about 4X as much SO2 as Sudbury at its worst. China is still building hundreds of megawatts of new coal fired generating capacity. The US is retiring its SO2 clean coal plants to reduce CO2 not building more.

The Chinese Dictator and the current US President just met in SFO. Overlooking the fact that SFO had to be staged to look like a going concern rather than the disaster it has become. China agreed to use its new coal fired power plants to build solar panels and the US agreed to buy them rather than boycott them until china actually cleans up its act rather than just talk about it.

It does remind one of the US policy of selling scrap metal to a far Eastern country that ultimately returned some of that metal in the form of bombs delivered back to the US about 3 days from now in 1941!

The current agreement is a rather different outcome than that agreement from the last century!

That difference is the point!

[Edited on 12-4-2023 by RFClark]

Global carbon emissions from fossil fuels are at a record HIGH

RFClark - 12-5-2023 at 04:26 AM

The largest total increases came from India and China, where carbon emissions rose by 8.2 and four per cent respectively. 
But In the EU, total emissions actually fell by 7.4 per cent compared with the previous year.
Emissions also began to decline slowly in the US, where the amount of CO2 released decreased by three per cent. 

https://apple.news/AWEcN1YIRTvmlJTuAl7Zb0g

IMG_4831.jpeg - 139kB

To quote Mark Twain......

AKgringo - 12-6-2023 at 09:06 AM

"If you don't read a newspaper, you are uninformed. If you do read a newspaper, you are misinformed."

RFClark - 12-6-2023 at 09:13 AM


:lol:👍
IMG_4721.jpeg - 341kB

surabi - 12-6-2023 at 11:25 AM

The comment you quoted above was based on what he posted, not presumptions about what anyone reads or doesn't read, what their lifestyle is, or anything else I have no direct knowledge about and simply make up.

FYI JZ makes it a habit to make up things about me all the time and post his baseless lies about me.

[Edited on 12-6-2023 by surabi]

Cut down the Palm Tree!

RFClark - 12-7-2023 at 11:57 AM

Recycling palm trees could cut methane emissions and create a green alternative to plywood.


https://apple.news/AJoSz8qnpTPytN-nLlU_nPw

Tall Grass as a CO2 & Pollution Control Option

RFClark - 12-10-2023 at 11:43 AM

Where we live has a problem with dust pollution from the dirt roads. As an attempt to mitigate that problem we planted very fast growing grass next to the street and in front of the house.

We are allowing the grass to grow 6” tall to facilitate dust control. I decided to look into the possible Carbon benefits of grass as well. As it turns out there’s a body of work on the subject.

Tall grass turns out to sequester as much Carbon as trees, but unlike trees, grass sequesters most of the Carbon in the earth.

The water requirement for 2500 sq ft of tall grass is around 4 CU. M. Per month which about equals our gray water production. The grass probably sequesters about a ton of Carbon per year. Since the water is pumped by solar there is no Carbon offset.

Growing more grass is one of the quickest ways to sequester Carbon and involves no expensive technology. Some sanitation districts supply processed water to golf courses and grasslands currently. Unfortunately many others simply allow the processed water to flow out to the sea and be wasted.

IMG_3385.jpeg - 190kB

Cliffy - 12-11-2023 at 10:15 PM

There are alternatives to returning to the cave dwelling days

There are also alternatives to the current "the sky is falling" mentality.

surabi - 12-11-2023 at 10:48 PM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
Unfortunately many others simply allow the processed water to flow out to the sea and be wasted.



Water that flows out to sea isn't "wasted". 86% of rain and snow come from evaporated ocean water. And while it works for you, because you are using your grey water (mine also flows out to various parts of my garden), the majority of people don't have grey water systems and growing grass for most people uses far too much water.

RFClark - 12-11-2023 at 11:43 PM

“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that [is] it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”

During the period between the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise in temperatures around the world a large group of activists were without a compelling cause. Now again they have one. “The fear of Hell has always been more compelling than the love of Heaven”. Today’s “Dogma” is The “science” is settled. End your evil ways and do as we say (but not as we do) or you will all be drowned in boiling water!



RFClark - 12-12-2023 at 12:21 AM

Treated wastewater that flows into the sea is wasted. Los Angeles as an example. The LA river averages a flow of around 100 cu ft/sec. The majority of which is from wastewater treatment plants located along it. The water quality of which is required to be safe for human contact.

100 cu ft/sec of water waters a lot of golf courses, greenbelts, parks (Griffith Park is adjacent to the LA river) and lawns. All of which sequester lots of Carbon in their grass. But that’s not what’s being done. The water is wasted so “back to nature types” can have a “natural” river of treated sewer water to canoe down!

That’s 360,000 cu ft/hr times 7.48 gal wasted 24 hrs a day.

Cliffy - 12-12-2023 at 10:34 AM

Use the LA river water?
OK how are you going to treat it?
Where are you going to use it?
How are you going to transport it to its end use?
How much will it cost to treat it?
How much environmental affect is there in building the treatment facility and operating it? (Certainly not built with electric vehicles)
What do we do with the now dry river bed?
Do we just kill the entire eco-system that now resides in the river system?
Its easy to say we need to use the water Its another thing to have a plan for the postulation

By one article the greening of the river is discrimination against people of color because it causes a change in the demographics of those living in neighborhoods along the river

One side wants to preserve the green space and another wants to call it discrimination!
Looks like a circular firing squad to me.


Why has no one brought up the much larger issue of where the Hyperion Sewer Plant dumps its daily treated sewage?

RFClark - 12-12-2023 at 12:23 PM

Cliffy,

I grew up in LA. As a Child the LA river was known as the deerpee river because between heavy rains the only time there was water in it was when a deer upstream peeed in it. All of that has changed since LA has increased in size.

The water in the river meets the current very high clean water standards. The treatment plants already treat and discharge into the river. That water can be distributed as is for watering green areas. This will both impound Carbon and recharge the ground water. It should have been done decades ago.

The expense would be in the distribution system. LA already has problems with a very old water distribution system, potholes and broken sidewalks. The reduction in Colorado river water will necessitate reusing water going forward. Now is the time to start.


The Hyperion plant is a separate issue. Growing up its outfall turned SM bay into a “desert”. The changes in the clean water laws mostly fixed that but the plant is still at the bottom of the hill so using that water would require a major pumping station. That said ultimately that too will happen as water becomes even more scarce. The best use for that treated water is probably direct in-ground injection along the coast as a protection against salt incursion into the basin ground water supply.

In the past and recently the area governments have been criminally negligent in dealing with water in the basin. The limits on water from the Owens Valley and the Colorado river will force a “come to Jesus” moment very soon. It would have already happened if not for last winter.

Then there are the San Gabriel and Santa Ana rivers, both of which are underutilized as well.

Basically it comes down to a new car and better compensation for a government employee or upgrading the infrastructure. Guess which has historically won that battle!

pauldavidmena - 12-13-2023 at 06:16 AM

Meanwhile, Cape Cod is about to tap into energy from a new wind turbine farm located off the coast of Martha's Vineyard.

pacificobob - 12-13-2023 at 07:35 AM

Quote: Originally posted by pauldavidmena  
Meanwhile, Cape Cod is about to tap into energy from a new wind turbine farm located off the coast of Martha's Vineyard.


I hope the resulting cases of cancer will be minimal.

pauldavidmena - 12-13-2023 at 08:51 AM

Quote: Originally posted by pacificobob  
Quote: Originally posted by pauldavidmena  
Meanwhile, Cape Cod is about to tap into energy from a new wind turbine farm located off the coast of Martha's Vineyard.


I hope the resulting cases of cancer will be minimal.


It will be interesting to see how it compares with the diesel plants it hopes to replace. There was a lot of opposition to the project from Day One, whether it was cancer concerns, sudden interest in marine life, or rich Islanders wanting an unobstructed view of the ocean.

RFClark - 12-13-2023 at 11:26 AM

The project has a few unanswered questions. Upmost is how long will the service life of the turbines be in actuality. The weather offshore is severe. Turbine corrosion, icing and asymmetrical blade loading from wind gusts, icing as well as spray are some of the issues. How many dead sea birds wash up is another.

Yes, all of this has been modeled to death. But ***ushima was modeled as well. GIGO!

Murphy can always outbid your worst nightmares!

pauldavidmena - 12-14-2023 at 07:55 AM

Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
The project has a few unanswered questions. Upmost is how long will the service life of the turbines be in actuality. The weather offshore is severe. Turbine corrosion, icing and asymmetrical blade loading from wind gusts, icing as well as spray are some of the issues. How many dead sea birds wash up is another.

Yes, all of this has been modeled to death. But ***ushima was modeled as well. GIGO!

Murphy can always outbid your worst nightmares!


Each turbine blade is the length of a football field. There's a part of me that doesn't take pleasure in knowing that there is an engineering marvel pretty much in my backyard. And while wind turbine technology has been well-proven, it's never been done at this scale before. It could be a long, expensive experiment.

On the other hand, generating energy from a non-renewal source like diesel fuel is unsustainable. And the only nuclear plant near Cape Cod was shut down fairly recently due to quality issues. I'm glad we're trying something, but I sure hope it works.

stillnbaja - 12-14-2023 at 08:41 AM

Quote: Originally posted by pauldavidmena  
Quote: Originally posted by RFClark  
The project has a few unanswered questions. Upmost is how long will the service life of the turbines be in actuality. The weather offshore is severe. Turbine corrosion, icing and asymmetrical blade loading from wind gusts, icing as well as spray are some of the issues. How many dead sea birds wash up is another.

Yes, all of this has been modeled to death. But ***ushima was modeled as well. GIGO!

Murphy can always outbid your worst nightmares!


Each turbine blade is the length of a football field. There's a part of me that doesn't take pleasure in knowing that there is an engineering marvel pretty much in my backyard. And while wind turbine technology has been well-proven, it's never been done at this scale before. It could be a long, expensive experiment.

On the other hand, generating energy from a non-renewal source like diesel fuel is unsustainable. And the only nuclear plant near Cape Cod was shut down fairly recently due to quality issues. I'm glad we're trying something, but I sure hope it works.



:O now those are some big azz windmills!

RFClark - 12-14-2023 at 11:49 AM

A quick review of the project raises several questions.

Not seeing the rotating wind turbines is an important aspect of the project. The minimum tip hight above the low mean sea level is just 105’. This was raised 3’ at the request of the WF operator.

The blades are typical hollow fiberglass carbon fiber wind turbine blades with a C1 wind rating that deliver maximum power at around 10-12 M/sec of wind and weigh in excess of 40T each. They don’t seem to incorporate any active anti-icing technology.


The issue is will 105’ be enough to clear the wave tops and heavy wind driven spray? The operator requested 3’ additional so perhaps they were concerned. I would be as a 100’ wave would really spoil your day.

The other issues are icing and asymmetrical loading (the difference in wind speed and direction between the lowest blade tip and the highest blade tip. (Generally wind speed increases with altitude)

It will be interesting to see how things go this winter. The blades have a rated 25 year life to failure. The experience at the Palm Springs Wind Farm speaks to failures much sooner. (Less than 10 years)

The other unanswered question is storage as this project doesn’t seem to have any storage component associated with it yet.

The experience in South Australia was that for large wind farms to be useful in supplementing base load a large Storage component was required (supplied by Tesla). There is currently a very large storage facility being constructed in Beaumont CA. for the Palm Springs Wind Farm.

Cliffy - 12-15-2023 at 09:18 PM

Yes without storage a base load is needed
The dino juice electricity is not going away anytime soon.

There is a recent article showing that an area the size of Texas is needed to fulfill the energy needs of the USA if all renewables are to be used. That means someone has to give up property somewhere.

Remember all solar fields scrape the ground clean and keep it sterile for the life of the solar farm. Natural ecosystems disappear underneath them.
How many square miles of the earth's eco-system are you willing to give up in the effort to go Green?
Where is the accounting for this in the overall proposals?

We still have the cradle to grave costs to account for on both wind and solar.
Neither can stand alone on its own merits without a subsidy

We still have the disposal problems of hundreds of square miles of either solar or wind to account for.

Now if you want to really go Green then its nuclear power like the Brits are doing (which I'm all in for)

https://flipboard.com/video/stringershub/a6fa67158a

BTW the storage of the nuclear waste problem is all political and not engineering like the solar and wind are.


RFClark - 12-15-2023 at 10:44 PM

Cliffy,

Nukes are good base load power. Hydro is good base load power. Currently California is relying on one nuke and a lot of hydro for base load. Much of the rest of the base load comes from out of state and country.

Wind and solar are not base load even with attached storrage.

JDCanuck - 12-16-2023 at 07:03 AM

I think the most viable future for non CO2 reliable and rapidly scalable power is this hydrogen fired combined cycle. Byproducts are water, heat and small amounts of NOX. Even the waste heat can be made use of in greenhouses or other industrial processes.
Combined cycle efficiencies are extremely high (65%), and its very easily rampable. Renewables can be used to produce the hydrogen:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214157X2...

There are already hydrogen fuel cell ships being built to reduce the CO2 impact of global shipping.
Unfortunately, the masses think anything involving combustion is bad and they face a lot of opposition.

JDCanuck - 12-16-2023 at 08:25 AM

When we finally find a way to dispose safely of radioactive waste from Nuclear plants it may become viable as an energy source. Hanford leaks continue to grow despite past inadequate remediation attempts and governments are still arguing over who is going to foot the bill before they get serious about rectifying it.
Nuclear power has become a very costly alternative to renewables.
Look at the multiple years arguing over how to dispose of the ***ashima leaks and the cost to effected industries. This one was an eye opener to me as when it occurred the Japanese were leading in Nuclear safety and technology.
Combined cycle natural gas plants are the only power sources at present that can compare to the very cheap power available from Utility scale solar at less than half the cost of Nuclear even ignoring long term waste storage costs. They have already broken 60% and are very soon expected to break 65% efficiencies. France plans on replacing their heavy 75% Nuclear reliance following this latest installation

https://www.powermag.com/worlds-most-efficient-combined-cycl...

https://www.statista.com/statistics/493797/estimated-leveliz...



[Edited on 12-16-2023 by JDCanuck]

JZ - 12-16-2023 at 12:37 PM

Quote: Originally posted by pauldavidmena  
Meanwhile, Cape Cod is about to tap into energy from a new wind turbine farm located off the coast of Martha's Vineyard.


How many millions of birds are they going to kill? (Spare me a Lib report downplaying this and claiming cats kill more birds. It's a nice story to hide the ugly truth of those eye sores).

Plus those giant blades can't be recycled and pollute the Earth.


[Edited on 12-16-2023 by JZ]

mtgoat666 - 12-16-2023 at 01:08 PM

Quote: Originally posted by JZ  


Plus those giant blades can't be recycled and pollute the Earth.


[Edited on 12-16-2023 by JZ]


You are such a hypocrite, you wee little wanker. If you were concerned that fiberglass turbine blades are not recyclable, then you would not have bought your overpriced mcboat which is made of fiberglass that cannot be recycled.

Fiberglass is recyclable, there are uses for the material, but no one does it because it is cheaper to landfill the waste.

If we had a policy of taxing petroleum more, people would be forced to recycle fiberglass, which would be better for world.

Sometimes taxes are best incentive for coercing market to find solutions to waste problems :light:


surabi - 12-16-2023 at 01:47 PM

Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666  
Quote: Originally posted by JZ  


Plus those giant blades can't be recycled and pollute the Earth.


[Edited on 12-16-2023 by JZ]


You are such a hypocrite, you wee little wanker. If you were concerned that fiberglass turbine blades are not recyclable, then you would not have bought your overpriced mcboat which is made of fiberglass that cannot be recycled.




Yep, more faux outrage from a guy who brags about how many flights he takes everywhere- his polluting carbon footprint.

RFClark - 12-16-2023 at 06:44 PM

Sorry to disappoint. Those blades aren’t recyclable. Making them generates a fair amount of CO2. Were they not made in France where much of the power is from Nukes it would be even worse. They are a b-tch to dispose of as well.

I don’t have a fiberglass boat for you to throw shade at. You might wait through winter to see how the first turbines do before taking your victory lap.

In my opinion the blades come too close to the surface. (105’) We’ll see how that works out and how many birds are killed.

[Edited on 12-17-2023 by RFClark]

Don Pisto - 12-16-2023 at 08:36 PM

Quote: Originally posted by surabi  
Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666  
Quote: Originally posted by JZ  


Plus those giant blades can't be recycled and pollute the Earth.


[Edited on 12-16-2023 by JZ]


You are such a hypocrite, you wee little wanker. If you were concerned that fiberglass turbine blades are not recyclable, then you would not have bought your overpriced mcboat which is made of fiberglass that cannot be recycled.




Yep, more faux outrage from a guy who brags about how many flights he takes everywhere- his polluting carbon footprint.


hey wanker junior deleted his upcoming flight itinerary....whats up with that?:?:

pacificobob - 12-17-2023 at 07:39 AM

Quote: Originally posted by surabi  
Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666  
Quote: Originally posted by JZ  


Plus those giant blades can't be recycled and pollute the Earth.


[Edited on 12-16-2023 by JZ]


You are such a hypocrite, you wee little wanker. If you were concerned that fiberglass turbine blades are not recyclable, then you would not have bought your overpriced mcboat which is made of fiberglass that cannot be recycled.




Yep, more faux outrage from a guy who brags about how many flights he takes everywhere- his polluting carbon footprint.


Ya, your hypocrisy is glaringly transparent

RFClark - 12-17-2023 at 01:07 PM

This certainly sounds just like Cyber Bullying! I don’t see where a person’s physical appearance, imagined personal and political beliefs are an appropriate topic for this blog discussion. Especially as it’s a discussion on climate change.

Past being bullying it also lacks class!

 Pages:  1  ..  17    19    21