Chevron and Climate change

[onecut39]

Fossil fuels are the future of the energy sector for the foreseeable future. So-called "renewable energy" is a joke.

Your assessment is based on personal preferences not economic or technological realities.

Wrongo. Every honest economic assessment of so-called "green energy" shows that it doesn't even come close to fossil fuels when it comes to the cost of providing a given unit of energy.

If it wasn't for massive government subsidies, green energy wouldn't even appear on the radar screen.

If you factor in the health and environmental costs of fossil fuels green looks a lot less expensive

 

[bripat9643]

Your assessment is based on personal preferences not economic or technological realities.

Wrongo. Every honest economic assessment of so-called "green energy" shows that it doesn't even come close to fossil fuels when it comes to the cost of providing a given unit of energy.

If it wasn't for massive government subsidies, green energy wouldn't even appear on the radar screen.

If you factor in the health and environmental costs of fossil fuels green looks a lot less expensive

Wrong again. The environmental and health costs of fossil fuels are almost entirely fictional. I have no problem breathing the air where I live.

 

[Mr. H.]

Chevron, Mobil, and BP are the largest non-government investors in renewable/alternative energy technologies.

According to some you just must be a fool to believe what you just posted.

As we all know, only government programs reliably develop anything of use in the market.

Like AMTRAK.

The energy companies have been spouting this crap for years. Where are all the green products and technologies they have developed?

Unlike Obama's dumping our tax dollars on top of failing enterprises, these companies invest from the bottom up.

Emerging Energy | Global Issues | Chevron

Improving Energy & Alternative Energy Sources | ExxonMobil

Biofuels projects - BP Biofuels

 

[onecut39]

Oh well . this subject becomes mute until w get catastrophic results. Those results will be coming, perhaps slowly and we might be better of if they came more quickly.

One of the arguments put forth is. "So what, climate has been changing forever." There is truth in that but I really don't want the US heartland to mutate into the Great American Desert just because a few selfish folks don't want a bit of inconvenience or expense. The stakes here are very high.

You look for food shortages, famine if you will, especially where it is fairly rare. Places that are supposed to be really fertile. They will get worse and worse and there will come a time when they can no longer be denied.

The problem is that at this stage we will not be able to stop it.

So keep track of the drought, flood and storm statistics. Screw temperature, that doesn't mean snot. It will only take a few degrees C to get this going and that in itself will raise no warnings.

Enjoy!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Oh well . this subject becomes mute until w get catastrophic results. Those results will be coming, perhaps slowly and we might be better of if they came more quickly.

One of the arguments put forth is. "So what, climate has been changing forever." There is truth in that but I really don't want the US heartland to mutate into the Great American Desert just because a few selfish folks don't want a bit of inconvenience or expense. The stakes here are very high.

You look for food shortages, famine if you will, especially where it is fairly rare. Places that are supposed to be really fertile. They will get worse and worse and there will come a time when they can no longer be denied.

The problem is that at this stage we will not be able to stop it.

So keep track of the drought, flood and storm statistics. Screw temperature, that doesn't mean snot. It will only take a few degrees C to get this going and that in itself will raise no warnings.

Enjoy!

Show us how this works in a lab where you control for all variables save for an additional wisp (200PPM) of CO2 or STFU

 

[flacaltenn]

Oh well . this subject becomes mute until w get catastrophic results. Those results will be coming, perhaps slowly and we might be better of if they came more quickly.

One of the arguments put forth is. "So what, climate has been changing forever." There is truth in that but I really don't want the US heartland to mutate into the Great American Desert just because a few selfish folks don't want a bit of inconvenience or expense. The stakes here are very high.

You look for food shortages, famine if you will, especially where it is fairly rare. Places that are supposed to be really fertile. They will get worse and worse and there will come a time when they can no longer be denied.

The problem is that at this stage we will not be able to stop it.

So keep track of the drought, flood and storm statistics. Screw temperature, that doesn't mean snot. It will only take a few degrees C to get this going and that in itself will raise no warnings.

Enjoy!

That's the spirit.. You want to cheer on Global Warming so that end comes quickly. I want Obama to have 4 more years so the Dem Party ends quickly.. We're Alike !!!

Just remember -- a lot of us are NOT arguing about the warming. We're arguing that the current prescription ($Trills to mitigate CO2) is wrong-headed and a questionable diagnosis. NOT that it hasn't been warming. And that the huge list of eco-left DEMANDS have more to do with politics than science -- Like their list of "alternatives".

There just may be a revelation that we live on a flimsy wreck of a planet that is hostile to life. In which case -- it will all be Reagan's fault.. It was perfectly habitable before he came along and told us that trees cause pollution.

 

[Trakar]

Fossil fuels are the future of the energy sector for the foreseeable future. So-called "renewable energy" is a joke.

Your assessment is based on personal preferences not economic or technological realities.

You've never visited the EIA website?

Quite often, nothing there that necessitates fossil fuels as the only viable energy source for the foreseeable future, and nothing that compellingly support that renewable energy is a "joke."

31% of the electrical energy produced in our nation comes from non-fossil- fuel sources. With a broad based push to increase our nuclear power base load it could be providing 50% of our electrical in 15 years. In the same span, renewables could be doubled, we could completely eliminate coal and oil and allow gas to pick up the slack until we can entirely eliminate that remaining bit of gas by 2050

 

[Trakar]

Support how? You want a computer model? tree ring?

If you have compelling models or proxy studies to present, that would certainly help, but any verified and compelling evidences would be a big step toward presenting such support.

...and unless the Egyptians had cars, it was AGW that changed the climate.

Neolithic Subpluvial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to your link the subpluvial ended almost 6000 years ago, and Giza was built-up around 3800 years ago. The green Sahara had been gone for about 2000 years before the the Egyptian god-kings began decorating the Giza plateau.

 

[Trakar]

Oh well . this subject becomes mute until w get catastrophic results. Those results will be coming, perhaps slowly and we might be better of if they came more quickly.

One of the arguments put forth is. "So what, climate has been changing forever." There is truth in that but I really don't want the US heartland to mutate into the Great American Desert just because a few selfish folks don't want a bit of inconvenience or expense. The stakes here are very high.

You look for food shortages, famine if you will, especially where it is fairly rare. Places that are supposed to be really fertile. They will get worse and worse and there will come a time when they can no longer be denied.

The problem is that at this stage we will not be able to stop it.

So keep track of the drought, flood and storm statistics. Screw temperature, that doesn't mean snot. It will only take a few degrees C to get this going and that in itself will raise no warnings.

Enjoy!

Show us how this works in a lab where you control for all variables save for an additional wisp (200PPM) of CO2 or STFU

Been done, and yet you still roll out the disproven trope.

I've given you multiple experiements that are duplicates of the ones done in High Schools and undergrad college classes every semester.

Here's one for jr High level students maybe it will help you to see more clearly.

BBC News - Science Explained: Greenhouse effect in a bottle

 

[Mr. H.]

Your assessment is based on personal preferences not economic or technological realities.

You've never visited the EIA website?

Quite often, nothing there that necessitates fossil fuels as the only viable energy source for the foreseeable future, and nothing that compellingly support that renewable energy is a "joke."

31% of the electrical energy produced in our nation comes from non-fossil- fuel sources. With a broad based push to increase our nuclear power base load it could be providing 50% of our electrical in 15 years. In the same span, renewables could be doubled, we could completely eliminate coal and oil and allow gas to pick up the slack until we can entirely eliminate that remaining bit of gas by 2050

LOL. Well, I'm done this thread. You are so full of unmitigated shit it ain't even funny.

I'll bow out while you continue to masturbate yourself. Good luck.

 

[Trakar]

You've never visited the EIA website?

Quite often, nothing there that necessitates fossil fuels as the only viable energy source for the foreseeable future, and nothing that compellingly support that renewable energy is a "joke."

31% of the electrical energy produced in our nation comes from non-fossil- fuel sources. With a broad based push to increase our nuclear power base load it could be providing 50% of our electrical in 15 years. In the same span, renewables could be doubled, we could completely eliminate coal and oil and allow gas to pick up the slack until we can entirely eliminate that remaining bit of gas by 2050

LOL. Well, I'm done this thread. You are so full of unmitigated shit it ain't even funny.

I'll bow out while you continue to masturbate yourself. Good luck.

No one forced you to discuss the issue in the first place, it is noted, however, that you leave in a huff because your issue was addressed and answered in a reasoned fashion, but with an answer your own ideology compells you to reject rather than contemplate or respond to in a likewise, reasonable manner. Ado.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If you have compelling models or proxy studies to present, that would certainly help, but any verified and compelling evidences would be a big step toward presenting such support.

Neolithic Subpluvial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to your link the subpluvial ended almost 6000 years ago, and Giza was built-up around 3800 years ago. The green Sahara had been gone for about 2000 years before the the Egyptian god-kings began decorating the Giza plateau.

There are a lot of question about when and how Giza was built. There's not a chance that Giza was desert at the time of the construction.

The larger point is that climates change, not a fucking thing you can do about it

 

[Trakar]

Neolithic Subpluvial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to your link the subpluvial ended almost 6000 years ago, and Giza was built-up around 3800 years ago. The green Sahara had been gone for about 2000 years before the the Egyptian god-kings began decorating the Giza plateau.

There are a lot of question about when and how Giza was built. There's not a chance that Giza was desert at the time of the construction.

The larger point is that climates change, not a fucking thing you can do about it

We can quit forcing the changes that are detrimental to our civilization and our species. I'm arguing that we should stop changing the climate, not that we should continue changing it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Oh well . this subject becomes mute until w get catastrophic results. Those results will be coming, perhaps slowly and we might be better of if they came more quickly.

One of the arguments put forth is. "So what, climate has been changing forever." There is truth in that but I really don't want the US heartland to mutate into the Great American Desert just because a few selfish folks don't want a bit of inconvenience or expense. The stakes here are very high.

You look for food shortages, famine if you will, especially where it is fairly rare. Places that are supposed to be really fertile. They will get worse and worse and there will come a time when they can no longer be denied.

The problem is that at this stage we will not be able to stop it.

So keep track of the drought, flood and storm statistics. Screw temperature, that doesn't mean snot. It will only take a few degrees C to get this going and that in itself will raise no warnings.

Enjoy!

Show us how this works in a lab where you control for all variables save for an additional wisp (200PPM) of CO2 or STFU

Been done, and yet you still roll out the disproven trope.

I've given you multiple experiements that are duplicates of the ones done in High Schools and undergrad college classes every semester.

Here's one for jr High level students maybe it will help you to see more clearly.

BBC News - Science Explained: Greenhouse effect in a bottle

But you postulate a 200PPM increase in CO2 causes the change.

What do you think PPM stands for?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

According to your link the subpluvial ended almost 6000 years ago, and Giza was built-up around 3800 years ago. The green Sahara had been gone for about 2000 years before the the Egyptian god-kings began decorating the Giza plateau.

There are a lot of question about when and how Giza was built. There's not a chance that Giza was desert at the time of the construction.

The larger point is that climates change, not a fucking thing you can do about it

We can quit forcing the changes that are detrimental to our civilization and our species. I'm arguing that we should stop changing the climate, not that we should continue changing it.

Um, right, when you can change the orbit of Earth by hopping up and down on it, I'll believe that we are forcing changes on it

 

[whitehall]

After listening to the incoherent rhetoric of the Obama administration for three years it's understandable that greenies confuse P.R. with reality. Of course an oil company is determined to "work internationally and with federal, state and local levels to contribute to climate change policy discussions". What else do you expect them to do? Too bad the Barry Hussein administration won't contribute to discussions regarding the US dependence on fossil fuel as it's primary source of energy.

 

[Trakar]

Show us how this works in a lab where you control for all variables save for an additional wisp (200PPM) of CO2 or STFU

Been done, and yet you still roll out the disproven trope.

I've given you multiple experiements that are duplicates of the ones done in High Schools and undergrad college classes every semester.

Here's one for jr High level students maybe it will help you to see more clearly.

BBC News - Science Explained: Greenhouse effect in a bottle

But you postulate a 200PPM increase in CO2 causes the change.

What do you think PPM stands for?

200 parts per million, what does it mean in your reality?

and yes, I gave you (more than a month ago) the details of how to run the experiment for delta200ppm yourself. What were your results?

 

[Trakar]

There are a lot of question about when and how Giza was built. There's not a chance that Giza was desert at the time of the construction.

The larger point is that climates change, not a fucking thing you can do about it

We can quit forcing the changes that are detrimental to our civilization and our species. I'm arguing that we should stop changing the climate, not that we should continue changing it.

Um, right, when you can change the orbit of Earth by hopping up and down on it, I'll believe that we are forcing changes on it

And I don't doubt that you would believe such, mores the pity.

 

[Trakar]

After listening to the incoherent rhetoric of the Obama administration for three years it's understandable that greenies confuse P.R. with reality. Of course an oil company is determined to "work internationally and with federal, state and local levels to contribute to climate change policy discussions". What else do you expect them to do? Too bad the Barry Hussein administration won't contribute to discussions regarding the US dependence on fossil fuel as it's primary source of energy.

Spoken as the political ideologue you are. The only thing I see Barry as, is as a waste of time and money, both of which are in all too short supply these days. But I don't filter my science throught the prism of politics, I'll leave that to the science denial cadre.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Been done, and yet you still roll out the disproven trope.

I've given you multiple experiements that are duplicates of the ones done in High Schools and undergrad college classes every semester.

Here's one for jr High level students maybe it will help you to see more clearly.

BBC News - Science Explained: Greenhouse effect in a bottle

But you postulate a 200PPM increase in CO2 causes the change.

What do you think PPM stands for?

200 parts per million, what does it mean in your reality?

and yes, I gave you (more than a month ago) the details of how to run the experiment for delta200ppm yourself. What were your results?

200PPM is about a rounding error and will not raise temperature in a controlled environment.

Every one of these AGW experiments uses pressure to get an increase in temperature, that is they keep pumping in CO2 to the control bottle (making it 400,000 PPM, not 200), and increasing the pressure

I didn't see what she did in the "experiment" they cut away

And I won't lie like Phil Jones or Michael Mann and tell you I did the experiment and got the following results.

You're the Warmer, you do the lab work.