|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
10-09-2011, 08:49 PM
Again, those papers are produced by hacks with thier own agenda. The leaked UN papers even proved how they tried to smother any desent from within and from without. The EPA itself states that C02 as a greenhouse gas is only .083% of the total gases involved. That means alot of other gases play a much larger role, includeing water vapor.
I never said the earth wasn't old, nor do I deny that nature is dog eat dog. You try to denouce the dog eat dog aspect when it comes to humanity and I'm telling you you can't. Either "evolution" as you see it, defines all aspects of life, or it doesn't. You can't say humans are above the dog eat dog world, because they are a central part of it. The enviromental science Major is From William Penn University.. Again, It doesn't matter, I'm going to live how I want to, it's a free country. You can live how you want to. 
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
10-10-2011, 03:43 AM
Once again it's not about changing the way you live. It's about changing the way we source much of our energy currently. We already have the technology to change over to a much more carbon neutral economy. It's the vested interests in the industries that mine and use fossil fuels that have so much power that are hindering this transition. All this rubbish about the science being a hoax is just a ridiculous sideshow being played out to muddy and confuse the real science going on. As I keep saying I'm more than happy to have a robust debate on the policies to deal with what the science is telling us. These policies must weigh up effects on jobs and economies and a transition to a new way of sourcing our energy will mean upheaval for some of the biggest industries on planet currently. But it will also create jobs and new industries. We've done it throughout our history. Horses and steam gave way cars and internal combustion engines. We are now on the verge on another trnasition to how we create the energy to fuel our society. It's inevitable and those at the forefront of the new technology will benefit the most.
The IPCC is a multi-national political body within the UN set up to collate and present the latest science on global warming and to lobby governments on action to reduce our effects on climate. The vast majority of peer reviewed and published science continues to support the theory that increasing C02 in our atmosphere will have a warming effect. There is no science I have seen that comes close to disproving this. So the IPCC has a responsibility to present this science. It is not their role to present every single paper published or to assist the deniers by presenting their psuedo-science and conspiracies. If there truly was any credible science that brought into question the role of C02 in our atmosphere it's not like many governments and all the big fossil fuel companies wouldn't jump on it immediately is it? But it's just not there. The whole denial of the science only exists on a few internet blogs, none of which have any real credibility. Your dismissal of the role of C02 as a greenhouse gas really just shows how little you understand. Let's say we look at a greenhouse covered in plastic. What percentage of the total volume of the greenhouse does the plastic covering represent? A very, very small percentage and yet it is this thin layer of plastic that makes all the difference in retaining the heat. It is the same with C02. It is so important as it is opaque to a wide range of the infrared spectrum that radiates from the earth. This can't be argued against, it is fact. So if you increase the amount of C02 it increases the heat rentention of the troposphere. Again that is fact and can't be argued against, not scientifically anyway. Just saying that it is a small percentage of the total composition of the atmosphere means nothing as you are basically just disregarding the physics involved.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
10-10-2011, 06:03 PM
Greenhouses also create large robust plants , so it's not allways a bad thing.
I do agree that we can supplement our energy with renewable types and Nuclear. However, it's won't replace fossil fuels for jobs or costs. Spain is the greenest country in Europe and has cronic 20% plus unemployment. The USA Today had a front page article last week showing how "green energy" just doesn't make any money. Money is what creats incentive for development of new resources. Until it's created in such a way that companies can provide a inexspensive fuel source that they can also make money on, Fossil fuels will remain the primary source.
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
sorta wrong again -
10-10-2011, 06:37 PM
Quote:
Across the political spectrum, all major German parties support an industrial transformation toward a low-carbon economy, and there is a strong consensus concerning the need to address climate change. Constituent groups from both the progressive (e.g., renewable-energy industry) and conservative side (e.g., farm community) benefit from this approach. The understanding is that strong environmental policies drive ecological modernization and create new market opportunities.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
10-11-2011, 01:34 AM
Sorry, it's Spain, with 20% unemployment. Germany is the industrial center of Europe with several nuclear reactors to boot. You can't green industry nearly as much as you would like to claim, it requires more power output than can be reliably garnered from "green fuel". Also, I doubt they will stay on top economically for very long if they have to bail out Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugual and Ireland. Joining one monatary standard with several countries who's economies couldn't match up was a horrible mistake.
Plus the US, in retrospect to Europe, can't utilize as effcient a green system because it's 3000 miles across and requires alot more energy just to transverse. Germany nor any other European country has that type of geographic problem to over come.
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
sort not again -
10-11-2011, 04:09 AM
Quote:
Tues 11 Oct 2011 The Telegraph Germany 'is world's greenest country' By Harry de Quetteville in Berlin Germany has been labelled the world's greenest country after it cut its energy use by more than any other state .. As usual you have no sources or facts except your 'opinion'. NYT Political Fallout of Japan's Nuclear Crisis Reaches Europe Posted by Jerome Roos on March 14, 2011 Just days after the heaviest earthquake and largest tsunami in Japan's recorded history triggered the greatest nuclear crisis since Chernobyl, the political shockwaves appear to have struck Europe. Angela Merkel today signaled the closure of 17 nuclear plants in Germany,. Mon, Oct 10, 2011 The Wall Street Journal European edition Rally Has Legs: Dow Up 330.06 Stocks soared as investors put their faith in a resolution to Europe's debt crisis,.. Asian Shares Rise on Europe Hopes Asian shares were higher, with regional banking stocks underpinning gains following a Franco-German pledge to resolve Europe's banking and sovereign debt problems. The Nikkei climbed 2.3%.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
10-11-2011, 05:21 AM
Quote:
$550 Billion in Fossil Fuel Subsidies: Scientific American If we put anywhere near the same money into renewable resource energy production I'm sure we would see it not only become much more competitive on pricing but move ahead leaps and bounds in technological advancement. It currently costs us a fortune to prop up the aging industry of fossil fuels. It's time we stopped. Let it compete on a level field with renewable energy sources and we'll see which comes out on top.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
10-12-2011, 01:30 AM
Fossil fuel doesn't need subsidy it makes enough...No, that much wouldn't do anything for green...it needs the ability to sell alot for a little and still make alot...it doesn't. I'm not saying it might not at some time..but right now it doesn't. Till then, the US anyway, needs fossil fuel. It's just how things are here..cheap fuel is the lifeblood of this country.
Spain is the greenest country...I didn't say largest economy that was going green, I said Greenist as far as it's energy needs are, and it's employment sucks...
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
sort of have no sources other than hot air -
10-12-2011, 06:42 AM
Quote:
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
