snow , snow and more snow.

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: franco b On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 2:28 pm

How can an informed decision be made when the pseudo scientists reporting temperature change are incapable of reading a thermometer accurately and reporting same? They are not unbiased as their income depends on stirring up a panic.

Co2 is a very minor greenhouse gas in effecting temperature change.

Climate in the past before the industrial revolution has been warmer than now.

Those tooting the global warming theory horn the loudest and blaming C02 are totally opposed to reducing production of this gas by utilizing nuclear power. They only wish to enrich themselves by taxing it which is no solution at all. Their motives are certainly suspect. The continued existence of our Dept. of Energy which does nothing to lessen our dependence on oil while spending billions is more evidence of suspect aims.

To confuse things further, the recent snow storms are just as likely the preamble to a coming ice age which requires more atmospheric moisture to form.

I think everyone would agree it would be a swell idea to burn less oil. How to go about it can only be hurt by the hysterical ravings of phony academics and politicians on the take.

Chaos theory has shown that it is impossible to predict climate very far into the future. Arrogant bluster is just that.
franco b
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: V ermont Castings 2310, Franco Belge 262
Baseburners & Antiques: Glenwood Modern Oak 114
Coal Size/Type: nut and pea

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: freetown fred On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:40 pm

My brother in law(sorry Alan) is a minute particle physicist,for 20 yrs he & his group have been monitoring the leakage of,whatever would leak????,from under the ocean communication cables(remember,I farm & am not real savey on alot of tech. terms) between Europe & the U.S.--come on,20 yrs,maybe what is going on is just going on--I doubt if my brother in law would concede to that--his theory has somebody in govt. by the butt & they pay him an outlandish salary--or should I say,WE---last I heard we were still able to communicate w/ other countries--back in the 60's people were saying,weather wise--Maine would be like Florida & vicey-versey-I'm really not sure,wasen't then & I'm not now--YES there are things that need to be done to rectify alot of environmental issues in this country--people are trying!!But,every time something comes along with a good idea,such as coal,nuclear(something just happened at 3 mile island--the media was all over it---nothing about all the yrs there hasen't been a problem---stuff happens---& it's usually human error,etc--the Al Gores & his attention seeking cronies find fault w/ it.Some people just enjoy flopping their gums together- :idea: -the best we can do as individuals,is to keep our own back yards in order & share those things w/ people we have acces too--like our individual neighbors--that number grows pretty quickly
freetown fred
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: HITZER 50-93
Coal Size/Type: BLASCHAK Nut/Stove mix

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: Kevin H On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:52 pm

franco b wrote:Co2 is a very minor greenhouse gas in effecting temperature change.


Based on what??

franco b wrote:Climate in the past before the industrial revolution has been warmer than now.


Never. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2000_ ... arison.png

franco b wrote:Those tooting the global warming theory horn the loudest and blaming C02 are totally opposed to reducing production of this gas by utilizing nuclear power. They only wish to enrich themselves by taxing it which is no solution at all. Their motives are certainly suspect. The continued existence of our Dept. of Energy which does nothing to lessen our dependence on oil while spending billions is more evidence of suspect aims.


There are 2 major problems with Nuclear. 1 is, as it turns out it's FAR more expensive to set up than other alternatives, and the other is that no state in the union wants the radioactive waste they produce. Since the advent of nuclear power in the United States, existing plants have been storing this waste, indefinately. A plan was put in place to store it permanantly in a mountainside in the Arizona desert, but Arizona balked.
As far as I know, if these 2 problems can be reconciled, there's nothing standing in anyones way of setting up all the nuclear they want. The argument is that other alternatives, including increased efficiency/reduced consumption, are far cheaper and more feasible to put in place. There is also the now minuscule risk of a nuclear meltdown (a long shot with today's technology), but that's not even what the issue is. The cost, and byproducts are what's standing in the way of Nuclear.

franco b wrote:To confuse things further, the recent snow storms are just as likely the preamble to a coming ice age which requires more atmospheric moisture to form.

I think everyone would agree it would be a swell idea to burn less oil. How to go about it can only be hurt by the hysterical ravings of phony academics and politicians on the take.

Chaos theory has shown that it is impossible to predict climate very far into the future. Arrogant bluster is just that.


I think you're right that everyone agrees burning less oil is a good idea, not only for environmental but geo-political reasons as well. It's not good for us to be dependent upon such a radical and unstable section of the world; Neither is putting more on the global market which in turn would only lower the cost and thus eliminate the incentive to conserve. But I digress... The discussion is, as usual, just how important is it to us to curb this consumption problem? Many think very important, others seem to think not so important, not rising to the level of inconveniencing ourselves. I happen to think it's priority one, but that's just my opinion.
Kevin H
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska


Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: freetown fred On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:04 pm

WHOOPS :oops: I'm out of my league :roll:
freetown fred
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: HITZER 50-93
Coal Size/Type: BLASCHAK Nut/Stove mix

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: Hambden Bob On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:37 pm

Kevin H,this isn't a courtroom and you aren't an attorney. This is a coal board that covers politics and social issues that inter-mingle with the burning of Al Gore's worst nightmare-coal. You have stuck your head in the proverbial lion's mouth. You chose to spike up a conversation by interjecting an opposing viewpoint. You have attempted to proliferate your side's argument by using some time-tested ploys. I must surmise that you are either a liberal,or a troll(arguing for an eternity for the sake of eternal argument). While your presentations carrying respect toward all on the board are to be commended,you are still on a carbon burning website. The hypocrisy is unsettling. Being economically viable is not an issue for debate. Your people are attempting to kill my people through attrition,job loss,mass economic upheaval and disruption and the destruction of the American Family and the Sovereign Nation they live in. There will be no more discussion with you....You are my enemy...I must protect my People and my Nation from you. Das vedanya,Comrade
Hambden Bob
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Harman 1998 Magnum Stoker
Coal Size/Type: Rice-A-Roni !

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: Kevin H On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:43 pm

Hambden Bob wrote:Kevin H,this isn't a courtroom and you aren't an attorney. This is a coal board that covers politics and social issues that inter-mingle with the burning of Al Gore's worst nightmare-coal. You have stuck your head in the proverbial lion's mouth. You chose to spike up a conversation by interjecting an opposing viewpoint. You have attempted to proliferate your side's argument by using some time-tested ploys. I must surmise that you are either a liberal,or a troll(arguing for an eternity for the sake of eternal argument). While your presentations carrying respect toward all on the board are to be commended,you are still on a carbon burning website. The hypocrisy is unsettling. Being economically viable is not an issue for debate. Your people are attempting to kill my people through attrition,job loss,mass economic upheaval and disruption and the destruction of the American Family and the Sovereign Nation they live in. There will be no more discussion with you....You are my enemy...I must protect my People and my Nation from you. Das vedanya,Comrade


Does this man speak for all of you? Ay or nay. 3 Ay's and I'm gone from the discussion.
While there are aspects I'd like to delve into... in this comment... I won't bother if that's the way we all feel.
Kevin H
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: SMITTY On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:55 pm

Ay! I agree 100%.

I'm done.
SMITTY
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Patriot Coal - custom built by Jim Dorsey
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mark III (not currently in use)
Coal Size/Type: Rice / Blaschak anthracite
Other Heating: Oil fired Burnham boiler

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: samhill On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 6:15 pm

Sure doesn`t speak for me. There are always at the very least two sides to every discussion, if not there would be no need for discussion or ideas at all. Also it would be nice to be able to have a discussion where everyone remains civil, after all we all have at least one thing in common, with open civil discussion just maybe we could find many more.
samhill
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: keystoker 160
Hand Fed Coal Stove: hitzer 75 in garage
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker/hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: koker 160/ hitzer 75

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: franco b On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:01 pm

Kevin H wrote:
franco b wrote:Co2 is a very minor greenhouse gas in effecting temperature change.


Based on what?? Water vapor is by far the greatest contributor.

franco b wrote:Climate in the past before the industrial revolution has been warmer than now.
The chart shows as the latest year 2004 which was abnormally warm. the chart is also suspect in showing that steep rise at the end. It is crafted to emphasize a small change as large. Do you really think they can measure less than one half degree from hundreds of years ago? They can't even measure yesterdays temperature accurately. Wikipedia is also on the global warming bandwagon. The death of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago is also attributed to warming as a final cause which needed thousands of years after the meteor impact.

Never. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2000_ ... arison.png

franco b wrote:Those tooting the global warming theory horn the loudest and blaming C02 are totally opposed to reducing production of this gas by utilizing nuclear power. They only wish to enrich themselves by taxing it which is no solution at all. Their motives are certainly suspect. The continued existence of our Dept. of Energy which does nothing to lessen our dependence on oil while spending billions is more evidence of suspect aims.


There are 2 major problems with Nuclear. 1 is, as it turns out it's FAR more expensive to set up than other alternatives, and the other is that no state in the union wants the radioactive waste they produce. Since the advent of nuclear power in the United States, existing plants have been storing this waste, indefinately. A plan was put in place to store it permanantly in a mountainside in the Arizona desert, but Arizona balked.
As far as I know, if these 2 problems can be reconciled, there's nothing standing in anyones way of setting up all the nuclear they want. The argument is that other alternatives, including increased efficiency/reduced consumption, are far cheaper and more feasible to put in place. There is also the now minuscule risk of a nuclear meltdown (a long shot with today's technology), but that's not even what the issue is. The cost, and byproducts are what's standing in the way of Nuclear.

If the reduction off C02 is so critical then cost will be a lot less than destroying the economy. By products can be stored on site as is now done. When the plant is no longer useful; shield it and cap it off. We can spare 20 acres or so per plant.

franco b wrote:To confuse things further, the recent snow storms are just as likely the preamble to a coming ice age which requires more atmospheric moisture to form.

I think everyone would agree it would be a swell idea to burn less oil. How to go about it can only be hurt by the hysterical ravings of phony academics and politicians on the take.

Chaos theory has shown that it is impossible to predict climate very far into the future. Arrogant bluster is just that.


I think you're right that everyone agrees burning less oil is a good idea, not only for environmental but geo-political reasons as well. It's not good for us to be dependent upon such a radical and unstable section of the world; Neither is putting more on the global market which in turn would only lower the cost and thus eliminate the incentive to conserve. But I digress... The discussion is, as usual, just how important is it to us to curb this consumption problem? Many think very important, others seem to think not so important, not rising to the level of inconveniencing ourselves. I happen to think it's priority one, but that's just my opinion.


You think it is priority one but you either agree with the insane proposals now made or have no idea how to proceed. Wishing does no good.

If I were the king of the world I would pass two laws; limit engine size and make it law that people who make things have to use them.
franco b
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: V ermont Castings 2310, Franco Belge 262
Baseburners & Antiques: Glenwood Modern Oak 114
Coal Size/Type: nut and pea

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: Duengeon master On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:11 pm

A wise man once said, "A liberal environmentalist is like a watermelon; green on the outside and red on the inside."
Duengeon master
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harmon Mark III
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite pea and nut mix. Bituminous lump

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: Kevin H On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:45 pm

Hey Franco,
Can't continue quoting everything, it's getting a bit long. Lets see...

If you say water vapor is a greater contributor to the "Greenhouse effect" I'll have to take your word for it. Based on available information I think you undermine the effect of CO2; I put a certain degree of trust in the consensus of scientists. However if you're correct and water vapor is the bigger contributor, that's not great news for us: It suggests the problem will be more perpetual than if it were greenhouse gases alone; Water vapor=higher temperatures=more water vapor=higher temperatures.

As far as temperatures go, my understanding is that every summer has been hotter than the one before for at least a decade or so. I'm sure you can find a more in depth study if you look around, but here's something... http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_are_summe ... ing_hotter that suggests that it's not just greenhouse gases but that the sun is getting hotter as well, although it attributes 3.6 degrees in the next 100 years to greenhouse gases and only a fraction of a degree to the solar phenomenon.

As far as what I suggest... Your 2 suggestions go a long, long d@mn way. If your asking about my opinion on cap and trade, I think it's brilliant. It's a free-market solution, which always works better than an attempt at direct control. It will create a whole new industry in the creation of firms specializing in CO2 consumption (certain types of algae reefs, for example) for the purpose of selling credits, as well as give companies initiative to become more efficient. FYI, not to get political when we're having such a friendly discussion, but this is not the liberal-communist-socialist policy it's being framed as. In fact it's a republican policy from years ago, used to curtail acid rain, and at that time it was wildly successful.

Hamden, I am not your enemy, and this is no less my country than it is yours. The principle problems we are having are by-in-large unrelated to individuals burning coal to heat their residence, a practice that has existed almost as long as man has walked upright. The problem is giant cars where they're not needed, and even more so, giant cargo ships burning millions of gallons of diesel on their way from china, back and forth, bringing us all that fine merchandise they produce, then having it trucked through 3,000 miles of wilderness to your local Wal-Mart in a truck that gets 7 miles a gallon.

Another huge shortfall is massive waste in electrical generation and distribution. Wasn't a smart grid to improve efficiency part of the stimulus?? Where is it? Something like 90% of domestic coal is used for electrical generation in this country, so even a small increase in efficiency should undoubtedly reduce greenhouse gases significantly, and lower the price of coal and your electric bill to boot, not?
Kevin H
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: franco b On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:53 pm

The very fact that global warming theory is a left right issue should say something. Why does the left always favor repression as a solution? The dead numbing hand of big government that kills incentive and opportunity while draining the life blood of the country. Why not instead unleash the forces of creativity, perhaps by offering multimillion dollar prizes for ideas to be revue d by scientific committees and grants made for development. That's how the British Admiralty got the chronometer. It took the poor man twenty years to collect, but there are people who will work their hearts out, given the opportunity. The problem of energy is too big for government to solve except as cheerleader.

I don't know if global warming is a hoax or not, but I am sure there are a lot of hoaxers trying to cash in on it.

Scientific truth is not something you can vote on.
franco b
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: V ermont Castings 2310, Franco Belge 262
Baseburners & Antiques: Glenwood Modern Oak 114
Coal Size/Type: nut and pea

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: freetown fred On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:21 pm

I tried to stay out.Seems nuclear came up after my post--understand this--I know for a fact that alternative means of energy are a must---not all nuclear not all clean coal,not all natural gas,etc,etc..If anyone in this discussion thinks that we are all not concerned w/ the safety issues involved in any of these fields of alternative energy,I think you are selling the people in this forum real short---Quotes & fowards are pretty much one mans opinion,researched or not--Interpretation is the key---if you & I read the same thing--chances are we'll come up w/ a different interpretation
freetown fred
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: HITZER 50-93
Coal Size/Type: BLASCHAK Nut/Stove mix

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: franco b On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:23 pm

More things to think on.

When 911 occurred you may remember that all commercial aircraft were grounded. It was discovered that energy from the Sun received on Earth was measurably increased. It was concluded that the reduction in pollution from no air traffic was the cause. So if we reduce pollution do we increase global warming?

A necessary condition for an ice age is global warming to increase water vapor which then precipitates in the polar regions as snow. The snow reflects heat from the Sun and less melts each summer and the glaciers advance. Will we have an ice age in 100 years?

There is also the theory that the Gulf Stream will reverse, making Britain an ice cube.

My point is that we don't know; small changes in computer models show vastly different outcomes.

We do know however, that cheap clean energy is needed to maintain our way of life. That is where the focus should be.
franco b
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: V ermont Castings 2310, Franco Belge 262
Baseburners & Antiques: Glenwood Modern Oak 114
Coal Size/Type: nut and pea

Re: snow , snow and more snow.

PostBy: Kevin H On: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:56 pm

Franco, unfortunately any reform whatsoever could be interpreted as repression. If we knew for an absolute fact beyond the shadow of a doubt that our ability to inhabit this earth would be shattered in 10 years if we didn't slow consumption... Should it become a law then? Your two initial suggestions had you been king of the world could be seen as oppression. Why should anyone be forced to limit the size of their engine, and in a "Free" country, shouldn't someone be able to produce then destroy anything they want?

I think the current administration had tried to do a number of things that would curtail waste without significant economic impact. Most analysts from both parties touted Cash for Clunkers as a *HUGE* success. Now they're trying to pass subsidies for people to better weatherproof their houses, being coined "Cash for Caulkers" (I hate these catch phrases by the way) and the republicans are framing it as a joke, a waste. I think cap and trade and investment in smart-grid technology are brilliant solutions that would make a huge impact, but the republicans are fully against both. I don't know why, they seem to be against anything the democrats support; Even cap and trade which is not only a free-market policy, but was a republican policy initially! I refuse to tailspin out of control on this, but they really are presenting themselves as the party of "no" on this issue; The only solution is to drill, drill, drill, which in my mind would have devastating consequences.

I think that the free market already allows for innovation. Whatever the next big thing is that reduces emmissions significantly will probably also save people a lot of money, because it's probably low emission because it's extremely efficient. Whoever comes up with that thing, whatever it is... He ain't ever gonna have to worry about rent again, thats for sure. But the problem is it's not happening fast enough. Emissions aside, the cost of energy is just up, up, up, and those who provide it don't care because it's commodity. They'll just raise and lower the price to market clearing level, hell with the consumer. There comes a point when the government has to say "No, you can't do that anymore." It's the responsibility of We, the People, to determine when that time comes.

And of course I'd be a fool to disagree when you say there are sharlitans trying to cash in on this. Many people become very wealthy by exploiting people's fears. Every war, public health crisis, national tragedy, global epidemic in history has produced profiteers who shamelessly take people's fears to the bank. I don't think Al Gore is one of these people. He made his documentary and cashed in big in both dollars and rapport, but some of you seem to think he's continually milking this for all its worth. I just don't see it. I really think he believes what he's saying and cares about the planet's future. It's up to the scientists to determine it's significance, and most of them seem to agree with him.
Kevin H
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska