The Green New Deal's Bad Science

[Vrenn]

The replacement is based on political agenda, and partisan financial interests.
Not because they are more efficient, productive, economical, or environmentally competitive with coal when it is using scrubber/FGD tech.

Also appears you again fail on the science and tech part since you also haven't a clue on the SO2 aspect of my post.

I worked for Holley Sugar back when they used coal fired boilers. They made their own electricity as well. We are talking about a huge operation. When they were forced to go from coal to NG they got rid of their facility to feed the coal into the burners and replaced them with a much simpler burner system. I was already forced to serve in the Military at that point. In 1973, they were told to go back to coal since the cost of NG was too high. But there was a kicker. They had to install the new scubbers that costs a whole bunch, reduced the operating output of the boilers and decided to not go that route. Pretty much, the cost of the NG was prohibitive at this point. They shut the factory down instead. This killed the whole region that depended on the production of sugar all the way down to the farmers, truckers, trains and every other supporting business right down to the dish washers. When the Trains were sold to UP in 1974, the UP shut down the trains to that region. This killed the Hops creation for Coors Beer. The region has never really come back from this. The problem was and still is, the coal dust was so bad that it snowed black snow. And not all of that was done through the burners. Just transporting, handling and breaking the coal down for burning put a hell of a lot of coal dust (carbon) into the air. Just the handling of coal is dirty. The only reason that last coale fired plant is left on the Western Slope of Colorado in Craig has operated this long as it's not anywhere near a populated area. Scrubbers only takes care of some of the carbon output and it cost like hell to make and to use.

 

[Stryder50]

The replacement is based on political agenda, and partisan financial interests.
Not because they are more efficient, productive, economical, or environmentally competitive with coal when it is using scrubber/FGD tech.

The manufacture of wind turbines could qualify as a heavy industry but not solar panels. And if there's something innately evil and harmful about heavy industry, why are you not attacking the steel industry, the copper industry, the aluminum industry, automobile and truck manufacturers, construction of skyscrapers, dams, rockets, concrete, asphalt, wire, paper, and a dozen others?

Science tells us that we have to stop putting GHGs into the atmosphere. Period.

If it emits GHGs, it needs to be done away with.

I repeat, science tells us that we have to stop putting GHGs ito the atmosphere. Period.

Fusion plants will solve all of that. And wind turbines and solar panels will do just fine till then. And they'll both be good for home power solutions. Solar panels covering every roof and a wind turbine in every backyard.

You need to get rid of cats and cars if you want to save the wildlife


Which would include steel, copper, aluminum automobiles, trucks, skyscrapers, dams, rockets, concrete, asphalt, wire, paper and all the rest, including, of course, the fucking OIL industry. Get rid of all of them. And YOU can be the one trying to put us back into the stone age.

Water vapor is a GHG and has hundreds of times the volume of all manmade GHG combined.
We should eliminate the production and current supply of water vapor per your non-logic idiocy.
Get back top us when you personally generate zero GHG.
MORON!

 

[Crick]

Water vapor is a GHG and has hundreds of times the volume of all manmade GHG combined.
We should eliminate the production and current supply of water vapor per your non-logic idiocy.
Get back top us when you personally generate zero GHG.
MORON!

Water vapor is precipitable. It's level in the atmosphere is determined by the temperature and cannot be increased beyond that point. As temperature goes up, so will water vapor.

"Moron"

 

[ding]

Water vapor is precipitable. It's level in the atmosphere is determined by the temperature and cannot be increased beyond that point. As temperature goes up, so will water vapor.

"Moron"

And as water vapor increases so does cloud formation and precipitation. Overall water vapor is a net negative feedback. How else do you believe the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet with atmospheric CO2 above 600 ppm?

 

[ReinyDays]

Water vapor is precipitable. It's level in the atmosphere is determined by the temperature and cannot be increased beyond that point. As temperature goes up, so will water vapor.

"Moron"

Temperature and pressure ... dear Lord, pressure is far and away the over-dominate factor in precipitation ...

I can't believe you called someone else a moron ... that's fucking crazy ... you don't know how temperature is defined, would you please stop using that word, you're not using it correctly ... geez ...

 

[Dekster]

First step in cleaning it up is to set the date that it must be completely cleaned up. In this case, it's not Nat Gas so much but it's cars and planes along with coal fired electric plants.

Had we continued with the dirty motors in autos and trucks, you wouldn't see gray film over a few cities, you would see black clouds over MOST cities. We have been cleaning up cars and trucks for the last 70+ years. Remember when there was no PCV Valves on engines (it was a straight pipe from the crankcase that just dripped onto the roads and polluted the air. That was a start. And you have to start somewhere or it's never going to get done. It won't even partially get done.

Clean up all you want but it isn't gonna change that India, China, and South America are not going to say "Hey, let's continue to be poor, starve, have no electricity, and shit in a hole to save the planet!!!" We could do everything right and hit every benchmark, even exceed them, and CO2 levels will continue to rise.

 

[Stryder50]

Clean up all you want but it isn't gonna change that India, China, and South America are not going to say "Hey, let's continue to be poor, starve, have no electricity, and shit in a hole to save the planet!!!" We could do everything right and hit every benchmark, even exceed them, and CO2 levels will continue to rise.

CO2 levels will have to rise several times over the current amount before they become a significant factor in climate.

 

[Vrenn]

Clean up all you want but it isn't gonna change that India, China, and South America are not going to say "Hey, let's continue to be poor, starve, have no electricity, and shit in a hole to save the planet!!!" We could do everything right and hit every benchmark, even exceed them, and CO2 levels will continue to rise.

We could refuse the importing of the foods and merch along with it. The rest of the world depends on the US to buy their crap. If we were to start that it wouldn't be long before the European Block starts doing the same thing in order to trade with the US.

 

[Dekster]

We could refuse the importing of the foods and merch along with it. The rest of the world depends on the US to buy their crap. If we were to start that it wouldn't be long before the European Block starts doing the same thing in order to trade with the US.

Well considering how a persistent clog at the port of Los Angeles screwed up our economy, I am not sure they are as dependent on us as we are on them.

 

[Stryder50]

Water vapor is precipitable. It's level in the atmosphere is determined by the temperature and cannot be increased beyond that point. As temperature goes up, so will water vapor.

"Moron"

Apparently you don't understand how weather works in the polar regions.

Care to explain how Glacier Girl got covered in so much ice over the decades. ???
...
On 15 July 1942, due to poor weather and limited visibility, six P-38 fighters of 94th Fighter Squadron/1st FG and two B-17 bombers of a bombardment squadron were forced to return to Greenland en route to the British Isles during Operation Bolero and made emergency landings on the ice field. All the crew members were subsequently rescued, but Glacier Girl, along with the unit's five other fighters and the two B-17s, were eventually buried under 268 feet (82 m) of snow and ice that built up over the ensuing decades.
...

Glacier Girl - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Glacier Girl: The Back Story

How it got trapped in the ice, and how it got out

www.smithsonianmag.com

 

[Vrenn]

Well considering how a persistent clog at the port of Los Angeles screwed up our economy, I am not sure they are as dependent on us as we are on them.

Companies are leaving Asia by the droves. Most are headed for Mexico. We need to repair the damage that was done in the 80s by forcing companies back to the US.

 

[Dekster]

Companies are leaving Asia by the droves. Most are headed for Mexico. We need to repair the damage that was done in the 80s by forcing companies back to the US.

You can't force them back to the US, but many are planning on bringing more of their manufacturing home because of all the supply chain issues the last couple years plus the cost of shipping as fuel prices remain high.

 

[Stryder50]

How many times does something like this need to be shown for the science to register in brain cells?

OR ...

OR ...

 

[Stryder50]

Companies are leaving Asia by the droves. Most are headed for Mexico. We need to repair the damage that was done in the 80s by forcing companies back to the US.

That damage was done by consumers with their pocketbooks going for the less expensive products from China/Asia compared to those more expensive ones made in the USA.

 

[Vrenn]

You can't force them back to the US, but many are planning on bringing more of their manufacturing home because of all the supply chain issues the last couple years plus the cost of shipping as fuel prices remain high.

One of the things that should have been done and still needs to be done is give the companies that are national with over 70% of it's raw product made in USA. And then slam a 20% or better tariff on the imports and those that don't attempt at getting the 70% rating. I don't disagree with Rump on the tariffs needed I only disagree with him how he did it.

 

[Vrenn]

That damage was done by consumers with their pocketbooks going for the less expensive products from China/Asia compared to those more expensive ones made in the USA.

In the 80s, Walmart had reached over 90% imports on everything they were selling. Walmart used it's marketing share to destroy the US made stuff. They even disregarded Trademarks and copyrights. I know of a number of manufacturers that went out of business because Walmart introduced their Chinese Made products EXACTLY like the American ones.

The consumer never got the chance to make that decision.

 

[ReinyDays]

Companies are leaving Asia by the droves. Most are headed for Mexico. We need to repair the damage that was done in the 80s by forcing companies back to the US.

We don't enough labor as it is ... who's going to work for 85¢ an hour? ... if you build the factories this side of the border, then all workers will have to swim the Rio Grange ... Bubba didn't finish Middle School ...

 

[Crick]

How many times does something like this need to be shown for the science to register in brain cells?

OR ...

OR ...

What is your point? Are you rejecting the greenhouse effect or CO2 as a GHG?

 

[Vrenn]

We don't enough labor as it is ... who's going to work for 85¢ an hour? ... if you build the factories this side of the border, then all workers will have to swim the Rio Grange ... Bubba didn't finish Middle School ...

Let's take a look at China importing into the US. Due to shipping costs, the savings at retail in the US is about 20%. And this is when there are no restrictions like there is today at the ports. Yes, 20%. What happens if you place a 25% tariff on the item? And you give a series of tax breaks to the us factories.

 

[Crick]

Let's take a look at China importing into the US. Due to shipping costs, the savings at retail in the US is about 20%. And this is when there are no restrictions like there is today at the ports. Yes, 20%. What happens if you place a 25% tariff on the item? And you give a series of tax breaks to the us factories.

You will increase what people are paying for things, piss off consumers and be accused of protectionism.