Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Fix that and virtually ALL of our problems go away.
(and we could still have beef and bacon on a regular basis)
However there is a wrench in the works... a very politically active group has consistently gone out of it's way
to prevent virtually every practical effort to limit (let alone reduce) the problematic population expansion.
Most of them also seem to deny climate change effects and damage even exists.
Yes, Trump and Republicans in addition to being man-made climate change deniers, have gutted programs to limit population growth both in the U.S. and globally.
CA lives in a world of their own. Their tax structure allows them to make all sort of vote buying social programs work but only because their climate is so nice that many are still willing to put up with it. And on that note, have you been to CA? In the areas that most people live the climate is moderate doing away with the need for most forms of heating and air conditioning, and they have pristine weather for solar and wind generated power. News flash, what works in CA will not work in many parts of our country, unless you don't mind telling people they can no longer heat or cool their homes.
One thing CA can't actually afford is water if they paid market rates for it, they are using up significant water reserves to force farming in arid desert lands.
I would love to see new nuclear power plants being built. Access to cheap energy is a huge driver in our economy. But the NIMBYs are out in full force despite the huge advances over the last 30 years, more specially with smaller plants that power individual cities.
Your questions are loaded kind of like asking "so when did you stop beating your wife?". No one wants to see large parts of the world go underwater but what you are suggesting won't help a single bit. There are other, much larger and prominent factors at play. And it will just kill off the US economy as other countries pick up the slack and generate more and more.
CA lives in a world of their own. Their tax structure allows them to make all sort of vote buying social programs work but only because their climate is so nice that many are still willing to put up with it. And on that note, have you been to CA? In the areas that most people live the climate is moderate doing away with the need for most forms of heating and air conditioning, and they have pristine weather for solar and wind generated power. News flash, what works in CA will not work in many parts of our country, unless you don't mind telling people they can no longer heat or cool their homes.
One thing CA can't actually afford is water if they paid market rates for it, they are using up significant water reserves to force farming in arid desert lands.
I would love to see new nuclear power plants being built. Access to cheap energy is a huge driver in our economy. But the NIMBYs are out in full force despite the huge advances over the last 30 years, more specially with smaller plants that power individual cities.
Your questions are loaded kind of like asking "so when did you stop beating your wife?". No one wants to see large parts of the world go underwater but what you are suggesting won't help a single bit. There are other, much larger and prominent factors at play. And it will just kill off the US economy as other countries pick up the slack and generate more and more.
Yes, I ask repeatedly if you just want to see North Carolina coastal areas and Florida inundated because it's fairly obvious that's disgustingly your preferred policy trade-off.
And contrary to your inferences, much of the rest of the world is trying desperately through policy initiatives to wean itself off of fossil fuels. We're the anomaly, under Trump and the Republicans actually promoting increased fossil fuel consumption, which apparently also is your preferred policy response to man-made climate change. Man-made climate change denier and obfuscators increasingly will be in the spotlight as our environment now continues to deteriorate at an accelerating rate.
Any informed person knows that fuel prices are much higher in Europe and Canada than here.
We get it. You have a "party on" philosophy and don't care much about the environmental burdens that we're placing on future generations, let alone even our children and grandchildren.
That's cool China is trying to push EV's. I already knew that. Unfortunately like I said above, it will do little to reduce rising greenhouse gasses. You are bailing water out of the Titanic with a thimble.
That's cool China is trying to push EV's. I already knew that. Unfortunately like I said above, it will do little to reduce rising greenhouse gasses. You are bailing water out of the Titanic with a thimble.
It's mind-boggling that you and other deniers and obfuscators belittle massive efforts to reduce fossil fuel use, and actually support politicians like Donald Trump who WANT TO EXPAND FOSSIL FUEL CONSUMPTION IN THE FACE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER.
Even 700 persons escaped the Titanic to live full lives. Anybody who examines objectively the increasing environmental destruction of the U.S., and of the oceans, and of the rest of the world, has to feel nothing but the utmost contempt for the "burn-the-lifeboats" mentality expressed by climate change deniers and obfuscators.
So I ask you again, are you willing to watch the accelerating inundation of coastal areas, and much of Florida, in the eastern U.S. over the next several decades and do NOTHING?
You dismiss (see post 32) California even as it pushes ahead to generate all of its electricity from alternative fuels, and discontinue fossil fuel generation, as if it's inconsequential. You don't think that the Southeast U.S. has sufficient sun to generate massive amounts of electricity?
Even as Wal-Mart's leaders seek to avert disaster, pushing corporate sustainability and the goal of sourcing 100 percent of its electricity from renewable sources, you apparently support the deniers and obfuscators currently in control of the federal government who champion increased fossil fuel burning.
The truth is that man-made climate change deniers and obfuscators such as yourself are hastening the onslaught of a catastrophe, and deserve the disdain of any person with an open mind appreciative of the brilliance and courage of American and global climate change scientists.
Collectively, we could make a big dent in the greenhouse gas problem. The problem is that time is running out, especially if we've triggered an irreversible thawing of tundra and deep ocean methane clathrates, both of which would release large amounts of methane into the environment, accelerating sea level rise far beyond the projections of most scientists (Harold Wanless, chairman of the University of Miami's geology department, may be an exception).
<<“The rate of sea level rise is currently doubling every seven years, and if it were to continue in this manner, Ponzi scheme style, we would have 205 feet of sea level rise by 2095,” he says. “And while I don’t think we are going to get that much water by the end of the century, I do think we have to take seriously the possibility that we could have something like 15 feet by then.”>>
The last page of this report shows the areas of North Carolina with just less than 1 meter (3.28 feet) of elevation. These 1729 square miles likely are doomed, especially if North Carolinians continue to put deniers and obfuscators in charge of their government.
My sad expectation is that within a few decades most Americans and most of the world will look upon the Donald Trumps and his fellow deniers and obfuscators with utter and complete contempt.
Somehow, you and other deniers and obfuscators can read (do you actually read the links to the science reports) through a thread such as this and still spill out your inanities.
Hurricane expert explains impact of warming oceans
Michael Mann, Director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, explains in this interview how ocean warming associated with man-made climate change increases both the intensity and moisture content of hurricanes.
<< You get an increase of roughly seven percent in the maximum wind speeds for each degree Fahrenheit warming of the ocean. Now, that seven percent increase in wind speed might sound modest, but the destructive potential of a storm goes as the third power of the wind speed. So, a seven percent increase in wind speed is a 21 percent increase in the destructive potential of the storm....
Yes, so for each half degree Celsius - that's the better part of one degree Fahrenheit - right there that's a 21 percent increase in the destructive potential of the storm. That means noticeably more damage, it also means for each half a degree Celsius, you have about four percent more moisture in the atmosphere, so you're going to increase the potential for those flooding rains
>>
Mann in the interview also explains his opinion of why the recently released U.N. climate change report was, once again, too conservative in assessing the dire consequences of man-made climate change and the urgent need to transition away from the consumption of fossil fuels.
Given ocean warming and hurricane intensification, scientists are mulling a Category 6 for measuring hurricanes.
Annual carbon dioxide emissions associated with fossil fuel burning now are over 3 1/2 times the level in 1960, and frighteningly, the impact on the environment largely is cumulative over several decades.
Florence and Harvey were both incredible rain makers because they both stalled along the coast. Steering currents are to blame for both of those rainmakers. The author for some reason failed to mention that.
Florence and Harvey were both incredible rain makers because they both stalled along the coast. Steering currents are to blame for both of those rainmakers. The author for some reason failed to mention that.
See post 1, which discusses how Florence was larger and carried more moisture due to both ocean and atmospheric warming as a result of man-made climate change.
Slow-moving hurricanes also may be the result of climate change.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hurricane expert explains impact of warming oceans
