Reefkeepers Tackling Global Warming

[awestruck]

Well said HippieSmell. I guess it would be nice if everything was black n' white, but that's just not the way the world works. BTW, several months ago many, many scientists were speaking and concluded that YES, global warming is occurring and they are VERY concerned about its effects on planet earth.

[maddyfish]

Originally posted by Leilani57
Hi All, Global warming is a serious threat to not only our every day living but to the marine environment we all love.

You state this as a fact, can you prove it? I thought it was still an theory.

[Shoestring Reefer]

Global warming is a myth, and cigarrettes don't really cause cancer, either. You're all just a bunch of paranoid hippies!

Originally posted by samtheman
There is nothing but a correlation that suggests Global Warming has any manmade content. Consensus is not science.

You tell em, Sammy!

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by maddyfish
You state this as a fact, can you prove it? I thought it was still an theory.

Even many "facts" that are regarded as being self evident never get a label past "theory". It doesn't make the theory incorrect. A simple google search will provide you with countless studies regarding the impact of GW on the oceans.

[Shoestring Reefer]

Maddyfish - Global warming has a mountain of supporting evidence. No credible scientist doubts that the earth is warming. The only real question is: are we making it worse?

One thing to point out is, the majority of solutions are either energy-conservation techniques that make long-term financial sense anyways, or also benefit the local environment. It's the short term financials that hurt.

I'd LOVE to install solar or wind power, and get off the grid. I'd help the environment, and over the course of 20 or 30 years I'd save money, I just can't afford it right now (and, I still rent, so...).

Raise your hand if you think people move to the city because they enjoy the smog. No? Then cutting auto emmisions 'aint such a bad thing. Cars are so much cleaner and run so much better than in 1969, they are just as fast, and get better fuel milage - and that's money in my pocket!

[samtheman]

"Maddyfish - Global warming has a mountain of supporting evidence. No credible scientist doubts that the earth is warming. The only real question is: are we making it worse?"

So if you don't join the Global Warming community, you are not credible. How is that? Global warming is not supported by evidence as is serious scientific theory. It is suported by a correlation that my not be the cause. Because "normal" science can't be utilized, a new type of arguement had to be invented to support it. It is called consensus. Not enough data to prove the point, so lets vote. How many votes and who gets to vote is not very well defined. If you don't agree you are not"credible". What a load!

[HippieSmell]

Ahhh, it's not "normal" science. What is normal science? Please, tell us. And again, you can't PROVE emissions are the cause of GW. You can only show that it's very, very likely a major contributor. It's the same process most decisions in life are based upon. It's not black and white, I'm sorry.

[HippieSmell]

Don't articles like this one (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1207-04.htm) make you wonder? Just a little?

[MCary]

Go get em Hippie! Back at it. I'm like you, after our little game of dueling data, I don't really have the heart to get back into this debate.

I wanted to stay out of it all together but I always have to jump in when people say things they really don't understand.

One thing to point out is, the majority of solutions are either energy-conservation techniques that make long-term financial sense anyways, or also benefit the local environment. It's the short term financials that hurt.

I'd LOVE to install solar or wind power, and get off the grid. I'd help the environment, and over the course of 20 or 30 years I'd save money, I just can't afford it right now (and, I still rent, so...).

Raise your hand if you think people move to the city because they enjoy the smog. No? Then cutting auto emmisions 'aint such a bad thing. Cars are so much cleaner and run so much better than in 1969, they are just as fast, and get better fuel milage - and that's money in my pocket!

Sorry Mike, I have to address what you said here. Maybe give you more to look up or think about.

The amount of energy that it takes to build a solar panel is more than the solar panel can produce in its lifetime. So if you get one you are only shifting the energy use from your house to the factory that builds them. Plus to have any significant impact on the countries energy need we'd need to cover an area about the size of Nevada.

One area I find interesting is wave and tide power. I still haven't educated myself enough to know whether is a good thing or a "feel good" thing yet.

Nothing makes financial long term sense. Oil is a cheap energy source. That's why its used. There are lots of alternative energy sources. Just none that we can afford. To give you an example of political priorities when it comes to money, if we take just 25% of the money that adherance to the Kyoto would cost us, we could feed and vaccinate every single person in Africa. We could end world hunger.

As far as cutting auto emmissions. We are pretty much at the point of diminishing returns. That is a point where the cost of doing something is way to high for the benefit recieved. Lets take some made up figures. Suppose a car put out 1000 ppm of pollutant X. The Govmint says to reduce emmissions of X by 50%. Now the car puts out 500 ppm of X and costs $1000 more. Now thats a significant improvement and can be argued that its a good thing. So the Gov says 50% more and the car maker puts out a car that only emmits 250ppm of X and costs $1000 more. You can see the progression, 125, 62, 31, 15, 7.5, 3.7..... at some point the benfits of reducing X is not going to be worth $1000.

Oh and Hippie, Normal or Hard science is one that can reproduced in a controlled environment.

Mike

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by MCary
Oh and Hippie, Normal or Hard science is one that can reproduced in a controlled environment.

Mike

Lol, hi Mike, I was wondering if you would pipe in.

I guess you could call that "normal" science, but I might not. It's normal Western scientific method, but "science" is pretty vague and encompasses much, much more than that which can be reproduced in a lab.

As far as solar panels needing more energy to produce than they create is concerned, I would need to see where you got that data before I believe it. Sorry, you know how I am .

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by MCary
As far as cutting auto emmissions. We are pretty much at the point of diminishing returns. That is a point where the cost of doing something is way to high for the benefit recieved. Lets take some made up figures. Suppose a car put out 1000 ppm of pollutant X. The Govmint says to reduce emmissions of X by 50%. Now the car puts out 500 ppm of X and costs $1000 more. Now thats a significant improvement and can be argued that its a good thing. So the Gov says 50% more and the car maker puts out a car that only emmits 250ppm of X and costs $1000 more. You can see the progression, 125, 62, 31, 15, 7.5, 3.7..... at some point the benfits of reducing X is not going to be worth $1000.

Mike

I guess we should just get rid of cars that need gasoline, huh? We should go electric. Oh, wait, we tried that. It's odd that the oil companies didn't like it and dropped the hammer.

[MCary]

Your welcome to look up all the data you wish about solar panels. I did not bring them up to start a debate about there merits. Only to express the hurdles that need to be cleared to solve our energy needs. It isn't just as simple as switching to wind, solar, etc.

When you can get an electric car that goes 300 miles on a single charge, can recharge in 10 minutes, has recharging stations with convenience stores, goes 75 miles an hour, and costs less that $20,000 then you may have something.

Mike

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by MCary
When you can get an electric car that goes 300 miles on a single charge, can recharge in 10 minutes, has recharging stations with convenience stores, goes 75 miles an hour, and costs less that $20,000 then you may have something.

Mike

We are really, really close. It's like any "new" technology, it isn't quite for the masses yet, but it should have been there 10 years ago. The Volvo 3CC looks pretty nice, and just like most innovative cars, it isn't American (why is that?).

[MCary]

Yeah, I think it'll be great when they get those cars into mass production. Trouble is, for now they're like plasma TV's. When they came out they were 42 inches and cost $20,000. Now I see a 50 inch for $2000. When the new cars are finally produced at a decent cost and performance is improved, consumers may actually buy them. Fingers crossed.

I'm not a big environmentalist. My motivation is more into the greed and safety side of the argument. If we can reduce demand the price of oil will go down. I'll save money. And since terrorism is funded by oil, the explosions will be smaller. Win win.

Now if they could just develop a more economical airplane engine.

Mike

[JER-Z]

is global warming real? yes

did we cause it? I don't think so.

The earth is still coming out of an Ice Age...The glaciers started melting long before us humans were around.

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by MCary
If we can reduce demand the price of oil will go down. I'll save money. And since terrorism is funded by oil, the explosions will be smaller. Win win.
Mike

There is no shortage of oil, all we have to do to lower the price is increase output. But then profits go down, and we can't have that. Not that I think we should do that, as I'm not a big fan of burning more fossil fuels.

Also, terrorism might be funded by oil, but it's not caused by oil (not directly at least).

I'm not a big environmentalist. My motivation is more into the greed and safety side of the argument.

Lol, really?

[MCary]

Jer-z,

I think you are asking the wrong questions...

Is GLobal Warming Bad?
Can we do anything about it?

The whole global warming issue always turns into a big guilt trip. It has become a wedge issue to divide people into groups that can then be exploited for political power.

Like you said, we know the earth has warmed since the Ice Age, and Little Ice age, it is also apparant than in the US at least it has warmed significantly since the 1970's which were a cyclically cool period. The question is, is this a bad thing. Predictions of increase hurricane activity due to Global Warming this year were completely wrong. The reasons are unimportant, it only illustrates the inaccuracy of the predictions of results. I personally believe that computer models do a poor job of factoring the Earth self regulating ability. I say personally because I don't want to have to look it up for Hippie.

The second thing, can we stop and reverse it without going back to the stone age. You must remember that poverty is the number one killer in the world. Poverty kills 100x more people than heart disease. The middle class needs cheap energy to remain middle class. If anything we do to stop global warming collapses economies then the damage done will be far worse than anything global warming can do. Even if the problem is real, it may be too far along or too massive for us to fix. In which case, trying to fix it is a waste of resources. But you can still feel good about yourself if you separate your recyclables. Your really not helping, but we can pretend.

Mike

[MCary]

Hippie, sometimes I think you just like to argue. I haven't disagreed strongly to anything you've said. I would like to add something to your conspiracy thinking. Even if oil production was raised, it would do little good. Refineries are running at full capacity. And even though capacity at refineries have been expanded, environmentalists have blocked any plans for building new ones. I'm sure that at $30 a barrel your ideas might have to be considered, but at $80 every producer and oil company wants to sell everything it has. And the slipping back down of prices shows that they could not keep it at 80.

Mike

[JER-Z]

Mike,

I could't agree more.

Wes

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by MCary
Hippie, sometimes I think you just like to argue. I haven't disagreed strongly to anything you've said. I would like to add something to your conspiracy thinking. Even if oil production was raised, it would do little good. Refineries are running at full capacity. And even though capacity at refineries have been expanded, environmentalists have blocked any plans for building new ones. I'm sure that at $30 a barrel your ideas might have to be considered, but at $80 every producer and oil company wants to sell everything it has. And the slipping back down of prices shows that they could not keep it at 80.

Mike

Right, it's those darn tree huggers: http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Group_..._up__0907.html

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by MCary
Jer-z,

I think you are asking the wrong questions...

Is GLobal Warming Bad?
Can we do anything about it?

The whole global warming issue always turns into a big guilt trip. It has become a wedge issue to divide people into groups that can then be exploited for political power.

Like you said, we know the earth has warmed since the Ice Age, and Little Ice age, it is also apparant than in the US at least it has warmed significantly since the 1970's which were a cyclically cool period. The question is, is this a bad thing. Predictions of increase hurricane activity due to Global Warming this year were completely wrong. The reasons are unimportant, it only illustrates the inaccuracy of the predictions of results. I personally believe that computer models do a poor job of factoring the Earth self regulating ability. I say personally because I don't want to have to look it up for Hippie.

The second thing, can we stop and reverse it without going back to the stone age. You must remember that poverty is the number one killer in the world. Poverty kills 100x more people than heart disease. The middle class needs cheap energy to remain middle class. If anything we do to stop global warming collapses economies then the damage done will be far worse than anything global warming can do. Even if the problem is real, it may be too far along or too massive for us to fix. In which case, trying to fix it is a waste of resources. But you can still feel good about yourself if you separate your recyclables. Your really not helping, but we can pretend.

Mike

You really don't know what would happen with an increase in temp, do you? A complete restructuring of the planet's ecosystems will dwarf the cost of reducing emissions today. I'm sorry if that makes you feel guilty, apparently you're a sensitive guy.

[MCary]

You really don't know what would happen with an increase in temp, do you?

Nope, and neither do you.

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by MCary
Nope, and neither do you.

I most certainly do, it's basic ecology. Temperature affects everything in very predictable ways. Look into it.

Nice job of ignoring the refineries issue. I know it's easy to blow off oil company conspiracies as being paranoid delusions, but the fact is they are very well connected and financed mega-corporations that want to protect their empire. Oil is the keystone of the global economy and the American dollar. Don't you think that everything that may become a threat to that empire will be fought (i.e. CO2 causing GW, electric cars, nationalization of oil supplies, etc)? Don't you see a pattern?

[Rossini]

Originally posted by HippieSmell
I most certainly do, it's basic ecology. Temperature affects everything in very predictable ways. Look into it.

Nice job of ignoring the refineries issue. I know it's easy to blow off oil company conspiracies as being paranoid delusions, but the fact is they are very well connected and financed mega-corporations that want to protect their empire. Oil is the keystone of the global economy and the American dollar. Don't you think that everything that may become a threat to that empire will be fought (i.e. CO2 causing GW, electric cars, nationalization of oil supplies, etc)? Don't you see a pattern?

Nail on the head.

Wish more people had your intelligence and humilty towards a planet under major threat.

Why do all/most americans drive such large engine vehichles? There is no need is there?!

[scottras]

Originally posted by Rossini
Nail on the head.

Wish more people had your intelligence and humilty towards a planet under major threat.

Why do all/most americans drive such large engine vehichles? There is no need is there?!

I heard recently that 50% of US fleet cars are less fuel efficient than a Model T. I will try and track down the source for you all if you want it.

I also read in this thread about the cost of adhearing to Kyoto. Well the cost not to is far worse. A lot of the world population lives next to the coast, and although people can move, the industries and cities that make civilization what it is today cannot.