Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by StuM

Care to explain how AGW makes weather more unstable and how these atmospheric patterns will alter?

One of the central predictions of AGW is that the poles will warm more than the equator.

Weather is not caused by "temperature", it the the result of temperature/pressure differentials - primarily between polar and equatorial regions. With lower temperature differentials, you should see lower highs and higher lows, not the opposite.

I'm hearing a hair splitting, I think.

Instability has always been part of the prediction, I believe. The poles won't seriously warm until the ice is mostly gone, yes?

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by StuM

Which of these two statements is false?

The first one. I did write the first comment after quitting the article in disgust, but then I figured the thought police would call me on it so I forced myself to read it.

Seriously, when you read it, did you think you were reading a reasoned argument, or a tortured argument tilted towards an obvious end?

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by StuM

You could try these links for a start.

Virus Outbreak Traced to Reusable Grocery Bag

Plastic Bag Ban Responsible For Spike In E. Coli Infections, Study Says

The California Dept of Public Health even so far as to publish an advisory warning of the dangers and advising on care of reusable bags. How many people do you think follow these guidelines strictly:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/pubsforms/Do...usableBags.pdf

Honestly, in my part of the world, I've seen nothing to suggest that we're seeing increased problems from illness transmitted thru reusable bags. Could be something more likely to happen in warmer climates?

The first link refers to illness from a norovirus. Have you ever been hit by one? I have, courtesy of one ill person at a family reunion; it moves through a population like a wildfire through drought-stricken California hills. Anything can carry it. So in the discussed case, I don't see that grocery bag as being a significant factor, when any form of person to person contact will transmit it. A plastic bag would have done the same job.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Exile

Kinda Scroogy to say on X-Mas eve, but just got back from the county landfill and they said this coming weekend will be their busiest of the year. I guess that follows with the day after Thanksgiving being the busiest shopping day of the year.

I know you took it in the manner intended; lightly poking fun at the whole season. But you did hit on the serious aspect of it all. No matter where you sit on the climate change spectrum, it's surely hard to accept the crass consumerism that this holiday has come to focus on.


Why go fast, when you can go slow

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I know you took it in the manner intended; lightly poking fun at the whole season. But you did hit on the serious aspect of it all. No matter where you sit on the climate change spectrum, it's surely hard to accept the crass consumerism that this holiday has come to focus on.

No, my thoughts are more in line with yours on this one, Mike, but I can see how my post could have been read as being more sarcastic. Visiting the landfill earlier today just highlighted it. Not my fav holiday but good reason to wish everyone good cheer!

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

I'm hearing a hair splitting, I think.

Instability has always been part of the prediction, I believe. The poles won't seriously warm until the ice is mostly gone, yes?

No, instablilty has only recent been raised as a bugbear - from about the time that the pause was getting so long that they had to come up with a different scary scenario

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0615143834.htm

"The Arctic amplification phenomenon refers to the faster rate of warming in the Arctic compared to places further south. It is this phenomenon that has been linked to a spike in the number of severe cold spells experienced in recent years over Europe and North America. However, new research by University of Exeter expert Dr James Screen has shown that Arctic amplification has actually reduced the risk of cold extremes across large swathes of the Northern Hemisphere."

[IdoraKeeper]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Part of a well-constructed plan to phase out the reliance on fossil fuels would include some contingency for workers displaced by the loss of related jobs. In this anti-AGW, greenies is soshulist atmosphere, not much chance of movement towards a well-constructed plan.

Fossil fuel jobs aren't a social program or charity as far as I know; regions that for whatever reason have gone all-in on fossil fuels and have not diversified enough when the money was rolling in (our Alberta is sort of in that boat) are partially to blame for tying their finances themselves so tightly to one commodity.

Biking in North America is on the rise. When big cities put in the right support (bike lanes, etc), you'll find many people biking by choice. In North America the missing ingredients are still driver awareness and courtesy. That will come. If your son feels unsafe on bike or transit, then there's work to be done.

Coal miners in Appalachia have suffered the contempt of their employers and neglect of the government for generations. There is furthermore a condition resembling Stockholm syndrome in their devotion to the life they live (endure).

[Simonsays]

i read today that temperatures in New York broke the previous recorded record high in December by 10° which reminded me of this thread. how is your white christmas this year? any out of season tornados near you?

merry christmas

[Eclipsed]

Sorry I didn't read all of the posts. Too Many to digest, however I did not see any mention of LFTR. That's Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor, safer, cleaner,
less hot waste, and on and on. Google it.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Eclipsed

Sorry I didn't read all of the posts. Too Many to digest, however I did not see any mention of LFTR. That's Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor, safer, cleaner,
less hot waste, and on and on. Google it.

There is a reason and that is that it is actually still just theoretical and has been deemed not comertially viable they have never had a ground up LFTR reactor to actually even prove that the technology would work.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Eclipsed

Sorry I didn't read all of the posts. Too Many to digest, however I did not see any mention of LFTR. That's Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor, safer, cleaner, less hot waste, and on and on. Google it.

I am unfamiliar with this fission reactor technology, but one thing I do wish is that all environmentalists would embrace nuclear energy as a positive way forward. I drives me bananas to see so-called environmentalist demonize nuclear power. Any rational view of nuclear power reveals it is far cleaner and safer than any other practical option we have before us.

[Simonsays]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

I am unfamiliar with this fission reactor technology, but one thing I do wish is that all environmentalists would embrace nuclear energy as a positive way forward. I drives me bananas to see so-called environmentalist demonize nuclear power. Any rational view of nuclear power reveals it is far cleaner and safer than any other practical option we have before us.

can we store the radioactive waste in your neighborhood? no state around here wants it.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Simonsays

can we store the radioactive waste in your neighborhood? no state around here wants it.

Is this is due to the influence of your environmental movement? If so, I would say it is sadly misguided.

Actually, there are serious contenders for a permanent storage site quite near where I used to live. I personally have no reservations about living near a storage site, as long as it was done properly. And yes, we have the capacity to build storage facilities that are extremely safe. Of course nothing is 100% safe, but by any measure nuclear is far safer, and far less damaging, than almost all other bulk-load power sources.

Personally I would much prefer to see our societies address environmental problems by using a lot less energy (as well as all other resources). But I am a realist. Our societies will never embrace "less" until forced to. Until that time, the least worst option is nuclear.

[newhaul]

Mike the people that live here near the Hanford disposal site would beg to differ on that.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Mike the people that live here near the Hanford disposal site would beg to differ on that.

I only know what the wiki gods just told me about this site Newhaul. Sounds pretty bad, and not an actual permanent storage facility like the kind being contemplated here in Canada.


Why go fast, when you can go slow