Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Climate Change
#26

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 05:37 PM)Yonadav Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 04:23 PM)Thoreauvian Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 03:42 PM)Yonadav Wrote: The rampant Trump era exploration of very serious issues through the lens of hobbyhorse villainy became very tedious to me, very fast.

Yabut, it gives you so many opportunities to express your peculiar brand of sneery superiority!   Wink

Uh huh.  Whereas hobbyhorse villainy is a popular rather than a peculiar sneering superiority.

It of course follows that if you were merely being superior, the "hobbyhorse villainy" is really no such thing at all.  I found the book well thought out and researched.  Trump's people really did drop the ball in multiple areas in the transition; that's well-documented from mutliple sources.  And that lack of follow-through does endanger long-term federal efforts, and especially climate change.

Of course, you may argue that this is mere ego-driven incompetence rather than deliberate evil, and you might have a point there.  But at that level, I have a hard time discriminating between the two.
The following 1 user Likes Alan V's post:
  • Chas
Reply
#27

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 07:08 PM)Thoreauvian Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 05:37 PM)Yonadav Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 04:23 PM)Thoreauvian Wrote: Yabut, it gives you so many opportunities to express your peculiar brand of sneery superiority!   Wink

Uh huh.  Whereas hobbyhorse villainy is a popular rather than a peculiar sneering superiority.

It of course follows that if you were merely being superior, the "hobbyhorse villainy" is really no such thing at all.  I found the book well thought out and researched.  Trump's people really did drop the ball in the transition; that's well-documented from mutliple sources.  And that lack of follow-through does endanger long-term federal efforts, and especially climate change.

Of course, you may argue that this is mere ego-driven incompetence rather than deliberate evil, and you might have a point there.  But at that level, I have a hard time discriminating between the two.

Not a whole lot of argument from me. I think that Trump is both evil and incompetent. His incompetence is evident in his failure as a businessman who bankrupted everything that he touched. He is competent as a showman. He is evil because he aspired to the presidency only for personal gain.

If Trump is PT Barnum, then we are clowns.  There are more registered vehicles than there are licensed drivers, so clearly almost no one in America takes climate change very seriously. We claim to hate burning coal, and yet we sent most of our manufacturing to places where coal is burned aggressively.  We really are clowns.

So Michael Lewis wrote a book where he described how good our government is at doing things that it gets little credit for.  Too bad that he didn't keep writing along those lines.  A widespread distrust of government is our biggest problem with getting anything done.
Reply
#28

Climate Change
So are you guys friends now, or what?
You know, living in hell is a lot more boring than I thought it would be.
Reply
#29

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 09:42 PM)Kaneda Wrote: So are you guys friends now, or what?

Jay and I have known each other for a very long time, by internet standards.  We've been posting back and forth for at least 12 years, I think?
The following 1 user Likes Yonadav's post:
  • GirlyMan
Reply
#30

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 09:42 PM)Kaneda Wrote: So are you guys friends now, or what?

We agree or disagree on a point-by-point basis. 

Yonadav makes many good points and certainly adds to discussions.  I just wish he would be more careful to avoid exaggerating how awful people are.

As for friends -- well, he still annoys the hell out of me from time to time, just as he did for years at the Amazon forums.
The following 1 user Likes Alan V's post:
  • GirlyMan
Reply
#31

Climate Change
(10-26-2018, 11:55 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Most of you people are screwed. I'm lucky, I have emphysema. I'll go early.

I'm so ill I won't even have to watch the second half of Idiocracy. Thank Bob. Smile
Amor fati.
The following 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post:
  • Gawdzilla Sama
Reply
#32

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 10:06 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:
(10-26-2018, 11:55 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Most of you people are screwed. I'm lucky, I have emphysema. I'll go early.

I'm so ill I won't even have to watch the second half of Idiocracy. Thank Bob. Smile

How’s that stomach-thingy been for you this past week, BTW?
You know, living in hell is a lot more boring than I thought it would be.
Reply
#33

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 11:08 PM)Kaneda Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 10:06 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:
(10-26-2018, 11:55 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Most of you people are screwed. I'm lucky, I have emphysema. I'll go early.

I'm so ill I won't even have to watch the second half of Idiocracy. Thank Bob. Smile

How’s that stomach-thingy been for you this past week, BTW?

Worst diagnosis possible. I am extremely fortunate to be treated by the top specialists on the planet. If you're gonna get sick, the DC-Baltimore area is the place to do it. But only if you got kickass insurance.
Amor fati.
Reply
#34

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 09:56 PM)Thoreauvian Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 09:42 PM)Kaneda Wrote: So are you guys friends now, or what?

We agree or disagree on a point-by-point basis. 

Yonadav makes many good points and certainly adds to discussions.  I just wish he would be more careful to avoid exaggerating how awful people are.

As for friends -- well, he still annoys the hell out of me from time to time, just as he did for years at the Amazon forums.

Be fair. Libtards are pretty awful.  They are against everything.  They will attack anyone who is for anything.  Never ever suggest a constructive solution to anything while any libtards are around.
Reply
#35

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 11:16 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 11:08 PM)Kaneda Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 10:06 PM)GirlyMan Wrote: I'm so ill I won't even have to watch the second half of Idiocracy. Thank Bob. Smile

How’s that stomach-thingy been for you this past week, BTW?

Worst diagnosis possible. I am extremely fortunate to be treated by the top specialists on the planet. If you're gonna get sick, the DC-Baltimore area is the place to do it. But only if you got kickass insurance.

Get checked early, get checked often, the saying goes. This year my Dad discovered he had intestinal cancer too late for them to operate.

I sincerely wish you well, whatever this is.
You know, living in hell is a lot more boring than I thought it would be.
Reply
#36

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 09:48 PM)Yonadav Wrote: Jay and I have known each other for a very long time, by internet standards.  We've been posting back and forth for at least 12 years, I think?

Yeah, I had a hunch when you came on to the old Climate Change thread that you two knew each other. Maybe not as best friends, but...

(10-29-2018, 09:56 PM)Thoreauvian Wrote: We agree or disagree on a point-by-point basis.

Yonadav makes many good points and certainly adds to discussions.  I just wish he would be more careful to avoid exaggerating how awful people are.

As for friends -- well, he still annoys the hell out of me from time to time, just as he did for years at the Amazon forums.

I get a strong Rosencrantz & Guildenstern vibe from you guys. There’s something peculiar about the way you two play off one another...
You know, living in hell is a lot more boring than I thought it would be.
The following 2 users Like Kaneda's post:
  • Alan V, Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#37

Climate Change
(10-26-2018, 11:55 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Most of you people are screwed. I'm lucky, I have emphysema. I'll go early.

Emphysema’s a real bitch. Not saying I ain’t a little jealous about the timing you got to leave this screwed-up word, but all the same, I’m sorry about your circumstances.
You know, living in hell is a lot more boring than I thought it would be.
The following 1 user Likes Kaneda's post:
  • Gawdzilla Sama
Reply
#38

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 11:18 PM)Yonadav Wrote: Libtards are pretty awful.  They are against everything.  They will attack anyone who is for anything.  Never ever suggest a constructive solution to anything while any libtards are around.

I don't know this Libtards person of whom you speak.
The following 2 users Like Alan V's post:
  • Smercury44, Chas
Reply
#39

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 11:39 PM)Kaneda Wrote:
(10-26-2018, 11:55 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Most of you people are screwed. I'm lucky, I have emphysema. I'll go early.

Emphysema’s a real bitch. Not saying I ain’t a little jealous about the timing you got to leave this screwed-up word, but all the same, I’m sorry about your circumstances.

Meh, I've lead three/four lives and loved most of them. I have no complaints.

Besides, I ain't dead yet. Whistling
  [Image: pirates.gif] Dog  
The following 2 users Like Gawdzilla Sama's post:
  • GirlyMan, Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#40

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 09:42 PM)Kaneda Wrote: So are you guys friends now, or what?

It has been an odd and fascinating experience watching two people I like really get after each other on occasion.  So...thanks?
The following 4 users Like jerry mcmasters's post:
  • Kaneda, GirlyMan, Alan V, Yonadav
Reply
#41

Climate Change
(10-29-2018, 05:37 PM)Yonadav Wrote: Uh huh.  Whereas hobbyhorse villainy is a popular rather than a peculiar sneering superiority.

As an Aussie, I'm unfamiliar with the US (?) term "hobby horse villainy".  Please explain.        Huh
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 1 user Likes SYZ's post:
  • GirlyMan
Reply
#42

Climate Change
(10-30-2018, 12:23 PM)SYZ Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 05:37 PM)Yonadav Wrote: Uh huh.  Whereas hobbyhorse villainy is a popular rather than a peculiar sneering superiority.

As an Aussie, I'm unfamiliar with the US (?) term "hobby horse villainy".  Please explain.        Huh

As an American, I am unfamiliar with that metaphor as well. ... Probably a Jewish thing. Smile
Amor fati.
Reply
#43

Climate Change
Hobby horse: Obsession

Villainy: T.rump
  [Image: pirates.gif] Dog  
Reply
#44

Climate Change
(10-30-2018, 12:23 PM)SYZ Wrote:
(10-29-2018, 05:37 PM)Yonadav Wrote: Uh huh.  Whereas hobbyhorse villainy is a popular rather than a peculiar sneering superiority.

As an Aussie, I'm unfamiliar with the US (?) term "hobby horse villainy".  Please explain.        Huh

Hobbyhorse villainy is the inability or unwillingness to understand things in terms other than how they relate to one's villain of choice.  The mass murderer who shot up the synagogue in Squirrel Hill believed that the immigrant caravan was being funded by Jews.  That's hobbyhorse villainy.  You reasoned that the victims of that shooting would not have died had they not been religious.  That's hobbyhorse villainy.  Another poster in this forum has posted that they suspect the immigrant caravan is funded by a Trump conspiracy.  That's hobbyhorse villainy.

With hobbyhorse villainy, there is no need to examine the pressure that people are feeling to leave the Central American northern triangle.  There is no need to examine what pressures caused them to switch from lone immigration to mass immigration.  The only important thing about the immigrant caravan is how it relates to our hobbyhorse villains.
The following 3 users Like Yonadav's post:
  • Kaneda, GirlyMan, SYZ
Reply
#45

Climate Change
Well, this is interesting...

The EPA's Climate Change Page Is Just Gone Now
By Caroline Haskins | Nov 1 2018, 4:19pm
[Image: 919-B0-A67-7270-4850-A9-A8-D346-B9-F81-D01.jpg]

“A report released this week by the Environmental Data & Governance Initiative reveals that the removal of climate change information from the EPA website is set to be a long-term policy of the Trump administration.

EPA.gov pages that previously provided information about climate change have been changed from claiming that they are "updating" to an error message that reads, "We want to help you find what you are looking for," as revealed by a report released this week by the Environmental Data & Governance Initiative. The change indicates that information related climate change is not being “updated,” but removed entirely.”

More at https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/artic...t-gone-now
The following 1 user Likes Kaneda's post:
  • Yonadav
Reply
#46

Climate Change
Why Plans to Turn America’s Rust Belt into a New Plastics Belt Are Bad News for the Climate

Posted on November 5, 2018 by Jerri-Lynn Scofield


By Sharon Kelly, an attorney and freelance writer based in Philadelphia. She has reported for The New York Times, The Guardian, The Nation, National Wildlife, Earth Island Journal, and a variety of other publications. Prior to beginning freelance writing, she worked as a law clerk for the ACLU of Delaware. Originally published at DeSmogBlog.

[Image: 97904696-A609-48-C8-9-AC2-75-FBC44-FD091.jpg]

The petrochemical industry anticipates spending a total of over $200 billion on factories, pipelines, and other infrastructure in the U.S. that will rely on shale gas, the American Chemistry Council announcedin September. Construction is already underway at many sites.
This building spree would dramatically expand the Gulf Coast’s petrochemical corridor (known locally as “Cancer Alley”) — and establish a new plastics and petrochemical belt across states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.
If those projects are completed, analysts predict the U.S. would flip from one of the world’s highest-cost producers of plastics and chemicals to one of the cheapest, using raw materials and energy from fracked gas wells in states like Texas, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania.
Those petrochemical plans could have profound consequences for a planet already showing signs of dangerous warming and a cascade of other impacts from climate change.
The gathering wave of construction comes as the Trump administration works to deregulate American industry and roll back pollution controls, putting the U.S. at odds with the rest of the world’s efforts to slow climate change.
Trump announced in June 2017 that the U.S. had halted all implementation of the 2015 Paris Agreement and intends to fully withdraw. America is now the world’s only state refusing participation in the global agreement to curb climate change (after Syria, the final holdout, signed in November 2017).
This petrochemical industry expansion — much of it funded by foreign investors — makes America’s refusal to participate in the Paris Agreement all the more significant, because much of this new U.S. infrastructure would be built outside of the greenhouse gas agreement affecting the rest of the globe.
If American policy makers approve this wave of new plastics and petrochemical plants with little regard to curbing climate change and reducing fossil fuel use, environmentalists warn, they’ll be greenlighting hundreds of billions of dollars of investment into projects at risk of becoming stranded assets.

From Rust Belt to Plastics Belt
Some of the largest and most expensive petrochemical projects in the U.S. are planned in the Rust Belt states of Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and New York, a region that has suffered for decades from the collapse of the domestic steel industry but that has relatively little experience with the kind of petrochemical complexes that are now primarily found on the Gulf Coast.
In November 2017, the China Energy Investment Corp., signed a Memorandum of Understanding with West Virginia that would result in the construction of $83.7 billion in plastics and petrochemicals projects over the next 20 years in that state alone — a huge slice of the $202.4 billion U.S. total. Those plans have run into snagsdue to trade disputes between the >U.S. and China and a corruption probe, though Chinese officials said in late August that investment was moving forward.
The petrochemical industry’s interest is spurred by the fact that the region’s Marcellus and Utica shales contain significant supplies of so-called “wet gas.” This wet gas often is treated as a footnote in discussions of fracking, which tend to focus on the methane gas, called “dry gas” by industry — and not the ethane, propane, butane, and other hydrocarbons that also come from those same wells.
Those “wet” fossil fuels and chemical feedstocks are commonly referred to as “natural gas liquids,” or NGLs, because they are delivered to customers condensed into a liquid form — like the liquid butane trapped in a Bic lighter, which expands into a stream of flammable gas when you flick that lighter on.
Ethane can represent a surprising amount of the fossil fuel from a fracked shale well, particularly in the Marcellus. For every 6,000 cubic feet of methane (the energy equivalent of the industry’s standard 42 gallon barrel of oil), Marcellus wet gas wells can produce up to roughly 35 gallons of ethane, based on data reported by the American Oil and Gas Reporterin 2011.
And U.S.ethane production is projected to grow dramatically. By 2022, the region will produce roughly 800,000 barrels of ethane per day, up from 470,000 barrels a day in 2017, according to energy consultant RBN Energy.
That supply glut is driving down ethane prices in the Rust Belt.
The lowest price ethane on the planet is here in this region,” Brian Anderson, Director of the West Virginia University Energy Institute, told the NEP Northeast U.S.Petrochemical Construction conference in Pittsburgh in June.

Chemicals and the Climate
The petrochemical and plastics industries are notoriously polluting, not only when it comes to toxic air pollution and plastic waste, but also because of the industry’s significant greenhouse gas footprint — affecting not only the U.S., but the entire world.
“The chemical and petrochemical sector is by far the largest industrial energy user, accounting for roughly 10 percent of total worldwide final energy demand and 7 percent of global [greenhouse gas] emissions,” the International Energy Agency reported in 2013. Since then the numbers have crept up, with the IEA finding petrochemicals responsible for an additional percentage point of the world’s total energy consumption in 2017.
Carbon emissions from petrochemical and plastics manufacturing are expected to grow 20 percent by 2030 (in other words, in just over a decade), the IEA concluded in a report released October 5. A few days later, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that by 2030, the world needs to have reduced its greenhouse gas pollution 45 percent from 2010 levels, in order to achieve the goal of limiting global warming to a less-catastrophic 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit).
The petrochemicals industry has so far drawn relatively little attention from oil and gas analysts and policy makers. “Petrochemicals are one of the key blind spots in the global energy debate, especially given the influence they will exert on future energy trends,” Dr. Fatih Birol, the IEA’s Executive Director, said in a statement this month.
“In fact,” he added, “our analysis shows they will have a greater influence on the future of oil demand than cars, trucks and aviation.”
The new investments, which will rely on decades of continued fracking in the U.S, offer the oil and gas industry a serious hedge against competition from renewable energy, even in the event that climate policies push fossil fuel energy to the margins.
“Unlike refining, and ultimately unlike oil, which will see a moment when the growth will stop, we actually don’t anticipate that with petrochemicals,” Andrew Brown, upstream director for Royal Dutch Shell,told the San Antonio Express News in March.
The planned infrastructure could also help bail out the heavily indebted shale drilling industry financially by consuming vast amounts of fossil fuels, both for power and as a raw material.
The American Chemistry Council has linked 333 chemical industry projects, all announced since 2010, to shale gas — that is, gas that is produced using fracking. Forty-one percent of those projects are still in the planning phase as of September, according to the council, and 68 percent of the projects are linked to foreign investment.
State regulators in Texas and Louisiana have already issued permits that would allow a group of 74 petrochemical and liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects along the Gulf Coast to add 134 million tons of greenhouse gases a year to the atmosphere, an Environmental Integrity Project analysis found in September. The group said that was equal to the pollution from running 29 new coal power plants around the clock.
The expansion of plastics manufacturing in America also has environmentalists worried over a plastics pollution crisis. “We could be locking in decades of expanded plastics production at precisely the time the world is realizing we should use far less of it,” Carroll Muffett, president of the U.S. Center for International Environmental Law, told The Guardian in December 2017.

[Image: D0-F902-F7-3313-4-E68-B16-A-ABC1-DAF2-C1-FB.png]

This story is part of Fracking for Plastics, a DeSmog investigation into the proposed petrochemical build-out in the Rust Belt and the major players involved, along with the environmental, health, and socio-economic implications.

Petrochemical Paradox
The petrochemical industry transforms ethane and other raw material into a huge range of products, including not only plastic, but also vinyl, fertilizers, Styrofoam, beauty products, chemicals, and pesticides.
The petrochemicals industry itself straddles an uncomfortable fence when it comes to renewable energy and climate change. A significant portion of its revenue comes from “clean” technology sectors, as it provides materials used to make batteries and electric cars.
One report last year concluded that roughly 20 percent of the industry’s revenue comes from products designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, the American Chemistry Council cited the industry’s role supplying “materials and technologies that improve energy efficiency and reduce emissions,” as it opposed Trump’s decision to drop out of the Paris Agreement.
But petrochemical manufacturers are also heavily reliant on fossil fuels. They need them to power and supply a dreamed-of “manufacturing renaissance,” as the ExxonMobil-funded Competitive Enterprise Institute explained as it pushed for Trump to abandon the Paris Agreement.
Plans to use American shale gas would also link petrochemicals to the expansion of fracking, which carries its own environmental concerns. The U.S.Environmental Protection Agency’s landmark study on fracking and drinking water concluded in 2016 that fracking has led to water contamination and poses continued risks to American water supplies.
In addition, though conversations about climate change usually focus on carbon emissions, the gas industry has such a bad methane leak problem that using natural gas can be even worse for the climate than burning coal.
“We share IEA’s view that the production, use and disposal of petrochemical-derived products present a variety of environmental challenges that need to be addressed,” the American Chemistry Council said in a statement sent to DeSmog, which also cited the use of petrochemical products in the renewable energy industry and the manufacture of products that raise energy efficiency like home insulation and lighter auto parts. “We are committed to managing energy use in our companies and manufacturing facilities.”

Pittsburgh and Paris
Climate implications make a petrochemical build-out risky, not only from an environmental perspective, but also from a fiscal perspective, Mark Dixon, co-founder of NoPetroPA, which opposes fracking-based petrochemicals projects, told DeSmog.
One plant, Shell’s $6 billion ethane “cracker” plant currently under construction in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, has permits to pump 2.25 million tons of CO2 equivalent per year into the air near Pittsburgh, roughly equal to the annual carbon pollution from 430,000 cars.
Industry advocates say the region can produce enough ethane to support up to seven more ethane cracker plantslike Shell’s.
“We’re trying to drop our emissions 50 percent by 2030,” Dixon said, referring to Pittsburgh’s highly touted plans to comply with international climate targets despite the federal government’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. “The Shell cracker alone will decimate that.”

Stranding Assets
International negotiators met in Bangkok in September to hash out details on how the Paris Agreement will be implemented. The U.S., which participated in talks despite the Trump administration’s intention to withdraw from the accord, faced criticismover working to delay clarity over the agreement’s financing (nonetheless, a top UN negotiator praised “good progress” from the talks).
While the Paris Agreement is not directly binding, globally there has been discussionof using trade agreements and tariffs to pressure countries that fail to keep up with their carbon-cutting commitments.
In February, the European Union (EU)declared that it will not sign new trade agreements with any country that refuses to get on board with the Paris Agreement.
“One of our main demands is that any country who signs a trade agreement with EU should implement the Paris Agreement on the ground,” France’s foreign affairs minister Jean-Baptiste Lemoyne told the French Parliament. “No Paris Agreement, no trade agreement.”
“They’re already shooting across the bow, saying look, you’ve got to implement the Paris climate agreement,” Dixon told DeSmog. “We could very well spend 10 years building an infrastructure to support fracking all over the region, crackers, ethane, plastics, everything, then have Europe say, ‘sorry, you can’t do that. You have to shut it down.’”
In other words, whether or not the U.S puts its signature on the climate pact’s dotted line, the pressure from trading partners to reduce greenhouse gas pollution — and the underlying concerns about the rapidly warming climate — could remain the same.
That said, while the U.S. is the only country to reject Paris on paper, it is far from the only country on track to miss its targets aimed at warding off catastrophic climate change. Only Morocco and The Gambia are projected to hit “Paris Agreement Compatible” targets, according to the Climate Action Tracker (whose rating tracker includes many major polluters but not all countries worldwide).
The EU itself currently earns a rating of “insufficient” from the group (China is ranked “highly insufficient,” while the U.S.> and four other nations earned the worst “critically insufficient” grade).

Closing Windows
The next several years will determine the future of petrochemical production for decades to come, crucial years when it comes to the fate of the climate, if industry gets its timing right — particularly in the Rust Belt.
“The window to make this all work is not forever,” Charles Schliebs of Stone Pier Capital Advisors told the NEP Northeast U.S. Petrochemical Construction conference in June. “It’s maybe two to five years.”
That means key decisions may be made while Donald Trump remains in office — though state and local regulators will also face important calls over permits and construction planning.
For some living near the center of the planned petrochemical expansion, the problem is readily apparent.
“We’re not going to be able to double down on fossil fuels,” Dixon said, “and comply with the Paris climate agreement.”

Follow the DeSmog investigative series, Fracking for Plastics, and get your questions answered with our Field Guide to the Petrochemical and Plastics Industry

UPDATED: This piece has been updated to include an additional statement from the American Chemistry Council.
The former Bethlehem Steel Plant in the Rust Belt city of Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, is now open to tourists. The decaying plant is a relic of an era when coal and steel, closely linked like shale gas and plastics, were dominant industries in the region. Credit: © 2018 Julie Dermansky
You know, living in hell is a lot more boring than I thought it would be.
The following 2 users Like Kaneda's post:
  • Alan V, Mark
Reply
#47

Climate Change
I'm glad I'm old.
  [Image: pirates.gif] Dog  
The following 1 user Likes Gawdzilla Sama's post:
  • SYZ
Reply
#48

Climate Change
(11-06-2018, 07:52 PM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: I'm old.

You got that right.
You know, living in hell is a lot more boring than I thought it would be.
Reply
#49

Climate Change
(11-06-2018, 07:20 PM)Kaneda Wrote: The EU itself currently earns a rating of “insufficient” from the group (China is ranked “highly insufficient,” while the U.S. and four other nations earned the worst “critically insufficient” grade).

"Since the US pulled out of the agreement, more than 2,700 leaders from states, cities, and businesses—representing 160 million Americans and $6.2 trillion of the US economy—have ramped up their efforts to curb climate change, sending a resounding message to our federal government and the rest of the world: We are still in. Together, these subnational actors are working to ensure that our country still meets its climate goals by reducing heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions, growing the renewable energy sector, and investing in new jobs and technologies."

https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/us...-agreement
The following 2 users Like Alan V's post:
  • GirlyMan, Mark
Reply
#50

Climate Change
Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) has been banned by the government where I live in the state of Victoria.
It's considered too high a risk as far as proppants escaping into both deep and shallow aquifers of a
largely agricultural locale are concerned, plus well casing failures causing leakage.

There was a massive, successful anti-fracking campaign within 100km of where I live around 5 years ago.

Fracking is an extremely water-intensive practice—a single shale gas frack uses 11-34 million litres of water.
Large volumes of toxic waste water are produced in fracking operations with 15% to 80% of this waste
returning to the surface and being stored in holding dams. This wastewater contains drilling and fracking
chemicals and other substances present in the source rocks. These contaminants include heavy metals,
radioactive materials, VOCs (volatile organic compounds) and high concentrations of mineral salts.

Communities living near US gas fields have reported serious health effects following the commencement
of fracking operations, including respiratory ailments, throat and eye irritations, and neurological disorders.
One of the main chemicals used in the fracking process is methane, and it's estimated that 4% of the gas
escapes into the atmosphere during extraction. Methane is 30 times stronger than carbon dioxide in terms
of heat-trapping, so the release of this gas is detrimental to the air quality surrounding fracking sites—and
of course adds to global warming.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 1 user Likes SYZ's post:
  • Alan V
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)