Official Global Warming thread (merged)

#5,479
#5,479
BartW said:
Fair point, but these companies are still backing policies that would hurt many assets. BP, Shell, Total, Statoil, ... these are all companies with vast oil reserves that stand to lose a lot. There is no ulterior motive.

But you guys can just rationalize that they're all in on the liberal science conspiracy too. Whatever floats your boat
Click to expand...

No ulterior motive my ass. Look at oil prices. NG is cheaper to get to, hell they flare off more in a month than we use in a year so they wants bigger market for it.
 
#5,483
#5,483
Report: Science Behind NY Fracking Ban Tainted by Money, Politics | Washington Free Beacon

One peer reviewer, Professor Sandra Steingraber of Ithaca College, is the cofounder of New Yorkers Against Fracking. Another, Professor Robert Oswald of Cornell University, has actively campaigned for a fracking ban. A third peer-reviewer has called for fracking moratoriums.

All three peer-reviewers declared that they had “no competing interests” in the fracking debate.

However, Steingraber has worked extensively with—and received financial support from—the Ithaca-based Park Foundation, which is explicitly opposed to fracking. Its president called for a New York fracking ban in 2011.
Click to expand...

But it's peer reviewed!

The two groups created an “echo chamber,” EID says: They funded studies on fracking’s supposed dangers, activist groups to promote the studies and to leverage them into political advantage, and friendly media outlets to report on the process.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,486
#5,486
13523_1090412084313135_6889245357920517770_n.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,489
#5,489
hog88 said:
No ulterior motive my ass. Look at oil prices. NG is cheaper to get to, hell they flare off more in a month than we use in a year so they wants bigger market for it.
Click to expand...
1. As of the end of 2011, 150 × 10^9 cubic meters (5.3 × 10^12 cubic feet) of associated gas are flared annually. That is equivalent to about 25 per cent of the annual natural gas consumption in the United States or about 30 per cent of the annual gas consumption in the European Union.[12]

2. The natural gas we flare off is a by-product from conventional drilling for petroleum. It’s flared when it’s too expensive to capture and/or there is no infrastructure (pipeline) to transport it. It’s not flared because there is no market for it.

3. The natural gas we do drill for is obtained via fracking, which is actually more expensive than conventional drilling.


What’s the ulterior motive? BP, Shell, and Total have the 4th, 5th, and 7th largest oil reserves, respectively. Sure they have significant natural gas holdings too, but that doesn’t rationalize their risking substantial assets (especially if they secretly know climate change is actually a hoax).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,490
#5,490
Sandvol said:
No, you still don't get it. The free market is saying it isn't a problem. The free market will know when it is a problem before you pointy heads do.
Click to expand...
What you said was
Sandvol said:
This guys says that sea levels aren't rising. Based on what? The free market.
Click to expand...
What your article said was
Sea levels aren’t rising. It’s not popular to be a climate denier these days, but Tamny is a skeptic. Markets talk to us through price signals, and they tell us that climate change will not have the disastrous effects described in former Vice President Al Gore’s movie, “An Inconvenient Truth.” If climate change were resulting in rising sea levels, coastal homes would not go for such fabulous sums. Rather, properties near the sea would be dropping in value every year. A quick look at the “Mansion” section of Friday’s Wall Street Journal shows that this isn’t happening.

“Even more troublesome for climate alarmists is that the most expensive coastal communities — places like Malibu, Manhattan and the Hamptons — are filled with people who say they believe in man-made global warming,” writes Tamny. Al Gore’s mansion close to Montecito, Calif., shows that “global warming’s most famous advocates apparently don’t take their cause all that seriously.” When climate change begins to cause the seas to rise, expect prices to fall.
Click to expand...
Nice try backpedaling though

So how can the free market tell us more about sea level rise than physical reality, especially when the government already heavily subsidizes coastal communities?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,491
#5,491
BartW said:
What you said was

What your article said was

Nice try backpedaling though

So how can the free market tell us more about sea level rise than physical reality, especially when the government already heavily subsidizes coastal communities?
Click to expand...

Wait a minute Bart. You know I've said the sea level has been rising for 18,000 years ever since the end of the last ice age. You know I've said that. So no back peddling.
 
#5,492
#5,492
Op-ed on CNN from the senator with the snowball

Obama should embrace nuclear energy

I actually agree with him for once.
A group of University of Tennessee graduate students made this point to EPA at a public hearing last summer.

Using EPA's own data, the graduate students showed that EPA's energy policy plan creates incentives for states to shut down nuclear power plants and replace them with natural gas combined cycle plants. The students demonstrated that under this scenario, EPA's model shows emission reductions while real world emissions actually increase.

President Obama's EPA has shifted its position on nuclear energy and hidden that policy shift in a model.

For example, when EPA modeled the Lieberman-Warner bill in 2008, the agency indicated 44 nuclear plants would need to be built by 2030 in order to achieve the carbon reductions mandated in the bill. EPA's modeling of the 2009 Waxman-Markey bill showed the need to build 275 new nuclear plants by 2050 to meet the carbon reduction targets in the legislation.

Where did this policy shift come from?

At a recent hearing in the Environment and Public Works Committee, Mary Nichols, chairman of the California Air Resources Board, told Congress that EPA looked at California's California Global Warming Solutions Act when developing its so-called Clean Power Plan and that EPA's plan adopts the same policy choices -- limited credit for either nuclear or hydropower -- both of which are carbon-free.

Thus, EPA is assuming legislative powers and is making policy choices that favor some forms of carbon-free energy over others.
Click to expand...
Hopefully the EPA acts on the comments and makes appropriate fixes before finalizing the rule.

Again, this could all be avoided with a simple national carbon tax or cap-and-trade program. There are viable solutions that are palatable for conservatives (even invented by conservatives!), but if we refuse to take part in honest discussion we will have no input in the solutions. Hence Obama's EPA plan :whistling:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,495
#5,495
BartW said:
Do you prefer flip-flopper?

:)
Click to expand...

You might think you have me on a point but you don't and it just illustrates your willful ignorance. The free market is telling us that sea level rise isn't a problem. It has been rising at such a minutely slow rate that the free market adapts as the landscape has changed but that it is so insignificant that it isn't a problem. And, it surely doesn't require government intervention.
 
#5,496
#5,496
You know Bart, water causes erosion. Do we need the government to intervene in every case of erosion or do we let the free market handle it?
 
#5,498
#5,498
Sandvol said:
You might think you have me on a point but you don't and it just illustrates your willful ignorance. The free market is telling us that sea level rise isn't a problem. It has been rising at such a minutely slow rate that the free market adapts as the landscape has changed but that it is so insignificant that it isn't a problem. And, it surely doesn't require government intervention.
Click to expand...
:eek:k:
Sandvol said:
You know Bart, water causes erosion. Do we need the government to intervene in every case of erosion or do we let the free market handle it?
Click to expand...
The government already spends millions and millions of dollars on increasingly expensive beach renourishment each year...

Reminds me of a funny story though:

Oil refinery threatened by sea-level rise, asks government to fix problem
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,499
#5,499
HSBC Warns Clients of Fossil Fuel Investment Risks

Global banking giant HSBC has warned investors of the growing risk of their fossil fuel assets becoming useless, in a private report seen by Newsweek.

In the report, titled ‘Stranded assets: what next?’, analysts warn of the growing likelihood that fossil fuel companies may become “economically non-viable”, as people move away from carbon energy and fossil fuels are left in the ground.


The paper proposes three options for investors - divesting completely from fossil fuels; shedding the highest risk investments such as coal and oil; or staying the course and engaging with fossil fuel companies as an investor. The report argues that investors who stay in fossil fuels “may one day be seen to be late movers, on ‘the wrong side of history’”.
Click to expand...
 
#5,500
#5,500
We just don't focus on the positive enough in this thread...

Global warming (or climate change if you prefer) causes the following:

Higher temperatures, which in turn causes
People to be hotter, which in turn causes
People to drink more water, which in turn causes
Higher metabolism, which in turn causes
Less fat, which in turn causes
Healthier female bodies, which in turn causes
Women to wear more scanty and revealing clothing, which in turn causes
Them to tan more (except those soulless gingers), which in turn causes
Better looking, more shapely, tanned women

Who wants to stop the drilling now? You can have this:

Bar-Refaeli-Inline-467.jpg


In only a few short years.

Support global warming. For the women!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top