Green New Deal

[basquebromance]

whether climate change is mostly man-made or natural is less important than the rate of change and if it is dangerous. the rate of global warming over the past 150 years is 1.8 degrees F per 100 years. this is not alarming and appears to be slowing down in recent decades. so a climate catastrophe is not headed our way any time in the next 500 million years!

 

[Flopper]

AOC is only the latest in a long line of politicians to use climate change as an excuse for world government and global control of production, distribution and exchange of goods, aka socialism. the global warming scare has been tied to socialism since it was concieved in the late 80s by Maurice Strong.

global warming is not a scientific issue, my friends, it is a political one!

It is both. If we ignore the scientific issue, the political issue becomes irrelevant.

 

[basquebromance]

the green big deal uses a propaganda technique called Appeal to Fear. it advances the notion that the US must initiate a massive and urgent state-run program. it would supposedly improve the lot of the poor and the middle class. in truth, the green big deal is a complete waste of human and natural resources

 

[dblack]

I prefer a four day workweek..

I prefer to work on the weekends.

 

[Flopper]

whether climate change is mostly man-made or natural is less important than the rate of change and if it is dangerous. the rate of global warming over the past 150 years is 1.8 degrees F per 100 years. this is not alarming and appears to be slowing down in recent decades. so a climate catastrophe is not headed our way any time in the next 500 million years!

When you consider that 2/3 of that 150 year temperature rise has occurred since 1975 and the rate is increasing that is certainly a cause for concern.
World of Change: Global Temperatures

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

whether climate change is mostly man-made or natural is less important than the rate of change and if it is dangerous. the rate of global warming over the past 150 years is 1.8 degrees F per 100 years. this is not alarming and appears to be slowing down in recent decades. so a climate catastrophe is not headed our way any time in the next 500 million years!

When you consider that 2/3 of that 150 year temperature rise has occurred since 1975 and the rate is increasing that is certainly a cause for concern.
World of Change: Global Temperatures

So you're saying the trillions of dollars we invested since 1975 only made things worse? Maybe it's time to get rid of all those Green improvements.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If you want to see some snowflakes melt, get a load of this article. Several counties in my state have been plagued with E-Check, a system the feds forced us to participate in that's cost us millions of dollars, yet made no improvements.,

For you libs here, it's loaded with your favorite stuff like "what about the children" nonsense, so you should enjoy it too.

Ohio legislators push to elimate E-Checks

 

[easyt65]

AOC made history...

The quickest, greatest, most embarrassing flop by a newly elected politician...

 

[basquebromance]

the eventual ultimate energy source will be nuclear fusion with electricity and hydrogen as secondary products. electricity will also be a hydrogen generator while hydrogen will be an electricity generator. it will take major capital investment in research to make nuclear fusion and hydrogen fuel cells the end game.

 

[basquebromance]

"why should the government have a big role in driving and making required investments? why not just incentivize the private sector through tax subsidies"

the level of investment required will be massive. even if all the billionaires and companies came together and were willing to pour all the resources at their disposal, the aggregate value would not be enough

the $1 trillion over 10 years plan for investment has been criticized by climate experts as wholly inadequate. 1 trillion dollars is the entire market cap of Amazon, the biggest company in the history of the world.

 

[Flopper]

whether climate change is mostly man-made or natural is less important than the rate of change and if it is dangerous. the rate of global warming over the past 150 years is 1.8 degrees F per 100 years. this is not alarming and appears to be slowing down in recent decades. so a climate catastrophe is not headed our way any time in the next 500 million years!

When you consider that 2/3 of that 150 year temperature rise has occurred since 1975 and the rate is increasing that is certainly a cause for concern.
World of Change: Global Temperatures

So you're saying the trillions of dollars we invested since 1975 only made things worse? Maybe it's time to get rid of all those Green improvements.

Since global co2 emissions increased from approximately 20 to 35 billion metric tons despite our efforts during the time period, it is logic to assume that not enough was done. Nothing specifically was done global until after 1992 to reduce greenhouse gases. Most of the efforts did not start until after 2005.

 

[Thinker101]

whether climate change is mostly man-made or natural is less important than the rate of change and if it is dangerous. the rate of global warming over the past 150 years is 1.8 degrees F per 100 years. this is not alarming and appears to be slowing down in recent decades. so a climate catastrophe is not headed our way any time in the next 500 million years!

When you consider that 2/3 of that 150 year temperature rise has occurred since 1975 and the rate is increasing that is certainly a cause for concern.
World of Change: Global Temperatures

So you're saying the trillions of dollars we invested since 1975 only made things worse? Maybe it's time to get rid of all those Green improvements.

Since global co2 emissions increased from approximately 20 to 35 billion metric tons despite our efforts during the time period, it is logic to assume that not enough was done. Nothing specifically was done global until after 1992 to reduce greenhouse gases. Most of the efforts did not start until after 2005.

Wait, aren't you the same guy that said "greenhouse gases are extremely important to our survival"?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

whether climate change is mostly man-made or natural is less important than the rate of change and if it is dangerous. the rate of global warming over the past 150 years is 1.8 degrees F per 100 years. this is not alarming and appears to be slowing down in recent decades. so a climate catastrophe is not headed our way any time in the next 500 million years!

When you consider that 2/3 of that 150 year temperature rise has occurred since 1975 and the rate is increasing that is certainly a cause for concern.
World of Change: Global Temperatures

So you're saying the trillions of dollars we invested since 1975 only made things worse? Maybe it's time to get rid of all those Green improvements.

Since global co2 emissions increased from approximately 20 to 35 billion metric tons despite our efforts during the time period, it is logic to assume that not enough was done. Nothing specifically was done global until after 1992 to reduce greenhouse gases. Most of the efforts did not start until after 2005.

Then something must be wrong with my memory, because I recall differently.

When I was a kid they forced gasoline manufacturers to remove lead from gasoline. Afterwards they increased the quality of blends specifically for the environment. Back then we had five or six blends. Today I think there's something like 45.

When my father designed and built our house in the mid 60's, we had an incinerator in our laundry room. We burned any garbage that was burnable. The feds came along and outlawed them. Eventually my father had to remove and discard it.

All steel cars were removed in the early 80's for CAFE standards. We went from beautiful interiors to all cheap plastic. Even my tractor is made from fiberglass.

Remember the fluorocarbon hysteria years ago? We had to get rid of those in all our spray can products.

The list goes on and on. But you can't tell me we only started making improvements a few years ago. I'm too old to buy that.

 

[Flopper]

"why should the government have a big role in driving and making required investments? why not just incentivize the private sector through tax subsidies"

the level of investment required will be massive. even if all the billionaires and companies came together and were willing to pour all the resources at their disposal, the aggregate value would not be enough

the $1 trillion over 10 years plan for investment has been criticized by climate experts as wholly inadequate. 1 trillion dollars is the entire market cap of Amazon, the biggest company in the history of the world.

Because the problem is global, the US can't do it alone. We need to assume a position of global leadership. We wield enormous economic, political, and military power in the world and we could us that power to bring about worldwide reductions in global emission. However, the president has chosen a path that will lead to increases in US emissions and his policies encourages other nations to do same.

 

[Flopper]

whether climate change is mostly man-made or natural is less important than the rate of change and if it is dangerous. the rate of global warming over the past 150 years is 1.8 degrees F per 100 years. this is not alarming and appears to be slowing down in recent decades. so a climate catastrophe is not headed our way any time in the next 500 million years!

When you consider that 2/3 of that 150 year temperature rise has occurred since 1975 and the rate is increasing that is certainly a cause for concern.
World of Change: Global Temperatures

So you're saying the trillions of dollars we invested since 1975 only made things worse? Maybe it's time to get rid of all those Green improvements.

Since global co2 emissions increased from approximately 20 to 35 billion metric tons despite our efforts during the time period, it is logic to assume that not enough was done. Nothing specifically was done global until after 1992 to reduce greenhouse gases. Most of the efforts did not start until after 2005.

Then something must be wrong with my memory, because I recall differently.

When I was a kid they forced gasoline manufacturers to remove lead from gasoline. Afterwards they increased the quality of blends specifically for the environment. Back then we had five or six blends. Today I think there's something like 45.

When my father designed and built our house in the mid 60's, we had an incinerator in our laundry room. We burned any garbage that was burnable. The feds came along and outlawed them. Eventually my father had to remove and discard it.

All steel cars were removed in the early 80's for CAFE standards. We went from beautiful interiors to all cheap plastic. Even my tractor is made from fiberglass.

Remember the fluorocarbon hysteria years ago? We had to get rid of those in all our spray can products.

The list goes on and on. But you can't tell me we only started making improvements a few years ago. I'm too old to buy that.

The purpose had nothing to do with climate change. We were reducing air pollution which mean removing sulfur oxides, particulates, lead, and volatile organic compounds which was a serious health threat. Most federal restrictions then didn't even mention CO2 or Methane.

We first started measuring CO2 and all other gases in the atmosphere in 1958 but it had nothing to do with climate change.

A short history of Climate Change (And no, it didn't start Al Gore)

• In 1972, The First UN environment conference, in Stockholm did not mention climate change on the agenda.
• In 1975 US scientist Wallace Broecker puts the term "global warming" into the public domain in the title of a scientific paper which was one of the first published papers noting the global temperature.
• In 1987, the Montreal Protocol agreed, restricting chemicals that damage the ozone layer. Although not established with climate change in mind, it has had a greater impact on greenhouse gas emissions than the Kyoto Protocol.
• In 1988, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) formed to collate and assess evidence on climate change.
• In 1989, UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, possessor of a chemistry degree - warns in a speech to the UN that "We are seeing a vast increase in the amount of carbon dioxide reaching the atmosphere... The result is that change in future is likely to be more fundamental and more widespread than anything we have known hitherto." She calls for a global treaty on climate change.
• In 1990, IPCC produces First Assessment Report. It concludes that temperatures have risen by 0.3-0.6C over the last century, that humanity's emissions are adding to the atmosphere's natural complement of greenhouse gases, and that the addition would be expected to result in warming.
• In 1992, At the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, governments agree the United Framework Convention on Climate Change. Its key objective is "stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system". Developed countries agree to return their emissions to 1990 levels.
• In 1995, IPCC Second Assessment Report concludes that the balance of evidence suggests "a discernible human influence" on the Earth's climate. This has been called the first definitive statement that humans are responsible for climate change.
• In 1997, Kyoto Protocol agreed. Developed nations pledge to reduce emissions by an average of 5% by the period 2008-12, with wide variations on targets for individual countries. US Senate immediately declares it will not ratify the treaty.
• In 1998, Publication of the controversial "hockey stick" graph indicating that modern-day temperature rise in the northern hemisphere is unusual compared with the last 1,000 years. The work would later be the subject of two inquiries instigated by the US Congress
• In 2001, President George W Bush removes the US from the Kyoto process.
• In 2001, IPCC Third Assessment Report finds "new and stronger evidence" that humanity's emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause of the warming seen in the second half of the 20th Century.
• In 2005, The Kyoto Protocol becomes international law for those countries still inside it.
• In 2005, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair selects climate change as a priority for his terms as chair of the G8 and president of the EU.
• In 2006, The Stern Review concludes that climate change could damage global GDP by up to 20% if left unchecked - but curbing it would cost about 1% of global GDP.
• In 2006, Carbon emissions from fossil fuel burning and industry reach eight billion tonnes per year.
• In 2007, The IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report concludes it is more than 90% likely that humanity's emissions of greenhouse gases are responsible for modern-day climate change.
• In 2007, The IPCC and former US vice-president Al Gore receive the Nobel Peace Prize "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change".
• In 2007, At UN negotiations in Bali, governments agree the two-year "Bali roadmap" aimed at hammering out a new global treaty by the end of 2009.
• In 2008, Half a century after beginning observations at Mauna Loa, the Keeling project shows that CO2 concentrations have risen from 315 parts per million (ppm) in 1958 to 380ppm in 2008.
• In 2008, Two months before taking office, incoming US president Barack Obama pledges to "engage vigorously" with the rest of the world on climate change.
• In 2009, China overtakes the US as the world's biggest greenhouse gas emitter - although the US remains well ahead on a per-capita basis.
• In 2009, - Computer hackers download a huge tranche of emails from a server at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit and release some on the internet, leading to the "ClimateGate" affair.
• In 2009, 192 governments convene for the UN climate summit in Copenhagen with expectations of a new global agreement high; but they leave only with a controversial political declaration, the Copenhagen Accord.
• In 2010, Developed countries begin contributing to a $30bn, three-year deal on "Fast Start Finance" to help them "green" their economies and adapt to climate impacts.
• In 2010, A series of reviews into "ClimateGate" and the IPCC ask for more openness, but clear scientists of malpractice.
• In 2010, The UN summit in Mexico does not collapse, as had been feared, but ends with agreements on a number of issues.
• In 2011, A new analysis of the Earth's temperature record by scientists concerned over the "ClimateGate" allegations proves the planet's land surface really has warmed over the last century.
• In 2011, Data shows concentrations of greenhouse gases are rising faster than in previous years.
• In 2012, Arctic sea ice reaches a minimum extent of 3.41 million sq km (1.32 million sq mi), a record for the lowest summer cover since satellite measurements began in 1979.
• In 2013, The Mauna Loa Observatory on Hawaii reports that the daily mean concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has surpassed 400 parts per million (ppm) for the first time since measurements began in 1958.
• In 2013, The first part of the IPCC's fifth assessment report says scientists are 95% certain that humans are the "dominant cause" of global warming since the 1950s.

A brief history of climate change

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

whether climate change is mostly man-made or natural is less important than the rate of change and if it is dangerous. the rate of global warming over the past 150 years is 1.8 degrees F per 100 years. this is not alarming and appears to be slowing down in recent decades. so a climate catastrophe is not headed our way any time in the next 500 million years!

When you consider that 2/3 of that 150 year temperature rise has occurred since 1975 and the rate is increasing that is certainly a cause for concern.
World of Change: Global Temperatures

So you're saying the trillions of dollars we invested since 1975 only made things worse? Maybe it's time to get rid of all those Green improvements.

Since global co2 emissions increased from approximately 20 to 35 billion metric tons despite our efforts during the time period, it is logic to assume that not enough was done. Nothing specifically was done global until after 1992 to reduce greenhouse gases. Most of the efforts did not start until after 2005.

Then something must be wrong with my memory, because I recall differently.

When I was a kid they forced gasoline manufacturers to remove lead from gasoline. Afterwards they increased the quality of blends specifically for the environment. Back then we had five or six blends. Today I think there's something like 45.

When my father designed and built our house in the mid 60's, we had an incinerator in our laundry room. We burned any garbage that was burnable. The feds came along and outlawed them. Eventually my father had to remove and discard it.

All steel cars were removed in the early 80's for CAFE standards. We went from beautiful interiors to all cheap plastic. Even my tractor is made from fiberglass.

Remember the fluorocarbon hysteria years ago? We had to get rid of those in all our spray can products.

The list goes on and on. But you can't tell me we only started making improvements a few years ago. I'm too old to buy that.

The purpose had nothing to do with climate change. We were reducing air pollution which mean removing sulfur oxides, particulates, lead, and volatile organic compounds which was a serious health threat. Most federal restrictions then didn't even mention CO2 or Methane.

We first started measuring CO2 and all other gases in the atmosphere in 1958 but it had nothing to do with climate change.

A short history of Climate Change (And no, it didn't start Al Gore)

• In 1972, The First UN environment conference, in Stockholm did not mention climate change on the agenda.
• In 1975 US scientist Wallace Broecker puts the term "global warming" into the public domain in the title of a scientific paper which was one of the first published papers noting the global temperature.
• In 1987, the Montreal Protocol agreed, restricting chemicals that damage the ozone layer. Although not established with climate change in mind, it has had a greater impact on greenhouse gas emissions than the Kyoto Protocol.
• In 1988, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) formed to collate and assess evidence on climate change.
• In 1989, UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, possessor of a chemistry degree - warns in a speech to the UN that "We are seeing a vast increase in the amount of carbon dioxide reaching the atmosphere... The result is that change in future is likely to be more fundamental and more widespread than anything we have known hitherto." She calls for a global treaty on climate change.
• In 1990, IPCC produces First Assessment Report. It concludes that temperatures have risen by 0.3-0.6C over the last century, that humanity's emissions are adding to the atmosphere's natural complement of greenhouse gases, and that the addition would be expected to result in warming.
• In 1992, At the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, governments agree the United Framework Convention on Climate Change. Its key objective is "stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system". Developed countries agree to return their emissions to 1990 levels.
• In 1995, IPCC Second Assessment Report concludes that the balance of evidence suggests "a discernible human influence" on the Earth's climate. This has been called the first definitive statement that humans are responsible for climate change.
• In 1997, Kyoto Protocol agreed. Developed nations pledge to reduce emissions by an average of 5% by the period 2008-12, with wide variations on targets for individual countries. US Senate immediately declares it will not ratify the treaty.
• In 1998, Publication of the controversial "hockey stick" graph indicating that modern-day temperature rise in the northern hemisphere is unusual compared with the last 1,000 years. The work would later be the subject of two inquiries instigated by the US Congress
• In 2001, President George W Bush removes the US from the Kyoto process.
• In 2001, IPCC Third Assessment Report finds "new and stronger evidence" that humanity's emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause of the warming seen in the second half of the 20th Century.
• In 2005, The Kyoto Protocol becomes international law for those countries still inside it.
• In 2005, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair selects climate change as a priority for his terms as chair of the G8 and president of the EU.
• In 2006, The Stern Review concludes that climate change could damage global GDP by up to 20% if left unchecked - but curbing it would cost about 1% of global GDP.
• In 2006, Carbon emissions from fossil fuel burning and industry reach eight billion tonnes per year.
• In 2007, The IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report concludes it is more than 90% likely that humanity's emissions of greenhouse gases are responsible for modern-day climate change.
• In 2007, The IPCC and former US vice-president Al Gore receive the Nobel Peace Prize "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change".
• In 2007, At UN negotiations in Bali, governments agree the two-year "Bali roadmap" aimed at hammering out a new global treaty by the end of 2009.
• In 2008, Half a century after beginning observations at Mauna Loa, the Keeling project shows that CO2 concentrations have risen from 315 parts per million (ppm) in 1958 to 380ppm in 2008.
• In 2008, Two months before taking office, incoming US president Barack Obama pledges to "engage vigorously" with the rest of the world on climate change.
• In 2009, China overtakes the US as the world's biggest greenhouse gas emitter - although the US remains well ahead on a per-capita basis.
• In 2009, - Computer hackers download a huge tranche of emails from a server at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit and release some on the internet, leading to the "ClimateGate" affair.
• In 2009, 192 governments convene for the UN climate summit in Copenhagen with expectations of a new global agreement high; but they leave only with a controversial political declaration, the Copenhagen Accord.
• In 2010, Developed countries begin contributing to a $30bn, three-year deal on "Fast Start Finance" to help them "green" their economies and adapt to climate impacts.
• In 2010, A series of reviews into "ClimateGate" and the IPCC ask for more openness, but clear scientists of malpractice.
• In 2010, The UN summit in Mexico does not collapse, as had been feared, but ends with agreements on a number of issues.
• In 2011, A new analysis of the Earth's temperature record by scientists concerned over the "ClimateGate" allegations proves the planet's land surface really has warmed over the last century.
• In 2011, Data shows concentrations of greenhouse gases are rising faster than in previous years.
• In 2012, Arctic sea ice reaches a minimum extent of 3.41 million sq km (1.32 million sq mi), a record for the lowest summer cover since satellite measurements began in 1979.
• In 2013, The Mauna Loa Observatory on Hawaii reports that the daily mean concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has surpassed 400 parts per million (ppm) for the first time since measurements began in 1958.
• In 2013, The first part of the IPCC's fifth assessment report says scientists are 95% certain that humans are the "dominant cause" of global warming since the 1950s.

A brief history of climate change

Like there's a difference simply because you on the left changed terminology?

 

[Lesh]

Then something must be wrong with my memory, because I recall differently.

When I was a kid they forced gasoline manufacturers to remove lead from gasoline. Afterwards they increased the quality of blends specifically for the environment. Back then we had five or six blends. Today I think there's something like 45.

When my father designed and built our house in the mid 60's, we had an incinerator in our laundry room. We burned any garbage that was burnable. The feds came along and outlawed them. Eventually my father had to remove and discard it.

All steel cars were removed in the early 80's for CAFE standards. We went from beautiful interiors to all cheap plastic. Even my tractor is made from fiberglass.

Remember the fluorocarbon hysteria years ago? We had to get rid of those in all our spray can products.

The list goes on and on. But you can't tell me we only started making improvements a few years ago. I'm too old to buy that.

Something IS wrong with your memory...or your brain.

He was talking about mitigating CO2. You're talking about everything BUT that. Do you actually think CO2 and fluorocarbons are the same thing?

 

[Flopper]

whether climate change is mostly man-made or natural is less important than the rate of change and if it is dangerous. the rate of global warming over the past 150 years is 1.8 degrees F per 100 years. this is not alarming and appears to be slowing down in recent decades. so a climate catastrophe is not headed our way any time in the next 500 million years!

When you consider that 2/3 of that 150 year temperature rise has occurred since 1975 and the rate is increasing that is certainly a cause for concern.
World of Change: Global Temperatures

So you're saying the trillions of dollars we invested since 1975 only made things worse? Maybe it's time to get rid of all those Green improvements.

Since global co2 emissions increased from approximately 20 to 35 billion metric tons despite our efforts during the time period, it is logic to assume that not enough was done. Nothing specifically was done global until after 1992 to reduce greenhouse gases. Most of the efforts did not start until after 2005.

Wait, aren't you the same guy that said "greenhouse gases are extremely important to our survival"?

Yep. Those little greenhouse molecules certainly are needed. Too little greenhouse gases, and there is no difference in temperature between the upper and lower atmospheres which drops the temperature of the earth and eliminates weather changes, precipitation, and most life on earth. Too much and temperatures rises, along with precipitation, and increasingly violent weather with the same results.

 

[Flopper]

I went to a party in my grandsons 4th grade classroom a few weeks ago. Kids being kids were horsing around a punch bowl and somehow about 2 gallons of punch found it's way to the floor. The teacher ran over and said who did this. It was Johnny, no it was Paul, no it just happened. The teacher said, regardless of who did it get some mops and get this mess cleaned up.

And so it is with climate change. Regardless of whether the Chinese, US, UK, or whoever is producing the most greenhouse gases or whether it caused by fossil fuels or donkey farts, we are going have to control the level of greenhouse gases. How it's done and who does it is far less important than getting it done.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Then something must be wrong with my memory, because I recall differently.

When I was a kid they forced gasoline manufacturers to remove lead from gasoline. Afterwards they increased the quality of blends specifically for the environment. Back then we had five or six blends. Today I think there's something like 45.

When my father designed and built our house in the mid 60's, we had an incinerator in our laundry room. We burned any garbage that was burnable. The feds came along and outlawed them. Eventually my father had to remove and discard it.

All steel cars were removed in the early 80's for CAFE standards. We went from beautiful interiors to all cheap plastic. Even my tractor is made from fiberglass.

Remember the fluorocarbon hysteria years ago? We had to get rid of those in all our spray can products.

The list goes on and on. But you can't tell me we only started making improvements a few years ago. I'm too old to buy that.

Something IS wrong with your memory...or your brain.

He was talking about mitigating CO2. You're talking about everything BUT that. Do you actually think CO2 and fluorocarbons are the same thing?

You mean it's not all considered going Green? What difference does it make? Any move towards going green costs us money and plenty of it. If not personal, more money our job creators have to spend.