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.
Trump claims he "inherited a massive budget deficit from the Democrats".
But all it has done under him is GROW and get LARGER.
IF he really wants to DO something, reduce the deficit, and I don't mean by building a wall.
( Note: I am neither pro Trump nor anti-Trump)
Just saying....
OK, you want the deficit to be lower? Great, we all do...However....Mandatory spending (which is dominated by Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid) is already 70 percent of federal spending and is expected to account for larger and larger proportions of the federal budget.
The problem is simple. Those in Congress want to STAY in Congress. Pork barrel politics still keep on going and growing. They want their positions and prestige to continue.
Injecting reflective aerosols into the stratosphere, mimicking the volcanic eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991; the reflective aerosols spewed into the atmosphere from Mt. Pinatubo cooled the Earth for about 1 Degree F for 3 years in a row by reflecting a portion of solar energy arriving from our sun back into outer space.
Brightening the marine cloud layer by dispersing pulverized sea salt into the clouds, thereby reflecting even more solar energy back into outer space.
Note: polymath Nathan Myhrvold (a liberal, btw) approached Nancy Pelosi's office over a decade ago with simple geoengineering projects that would reverse global warming. Pelosi's staff told him they didn't want to solve global warming; they wanted to tax carbon. Taxing carbon provides a long-term steady stream of revenue to the federal government, whereas solving global warming does not.
I don't doubt that more atmospheric CO2 tends to warm the climate however the current CO2 cocentration is 407.4 ppmV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous
*note the CO2 level on the top right pannel* 1700ppmV
You can browse various other periods and find that CO2 levels for the most part were above 1000ppmV for most of the history of life on Earth and the planet was warmer.This is actually one of the coldest periods in Earth history. There was no shortage of life it thrived. The idea that higher CO2 level will lead to the planet becoming an uninhabitable wasteland is just scare tactics and hysteria.
We need both to solve AGW -- we need a global green energy infrastructure to replace our reliance on fossil fuels AND a reduction in atmospheric CO2 if we hope to get temperatures back to natural levels.
I'm not a fan of any sort of shadowing or particulate matter in the air to reduce solar irradiance at ground level. That reduces solar panel effectiveness. The best solution will involve carbon capture and sequestration.
We need both to solve AGW -- we need a global green energy infrastructure to replace our reliance on fossil fuels AND a reduction in atmospheric CO2 if we hope to get temperatures back to natural levels.
We need both to solve AGW -- we need a global green energy infrastructure to replace our reliance on fossil fuels AND a reduction in atmospheric CO2 if we hope to get temperatures back to natural levels.
I'm not a fan of any sort of shadowing or particulate matter in the air to reduce solar irradiance at ground level. That reduces solar panel effectiveness. The best solution will involve carbon capture and sequestration.
How are you going to impose your grand plans on China and India?
Injecting reflective aerosols into the stratosphere, mimicking the volcanic eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991; the reflective aerosols spewed into the atmosphere from Mt. Pinatubo cooled the Earth for about 1 Degree F for 3 years in a row by reflecting a portion of solar energy arriving from our sun back into outer space.
Brightening the marine cloud layer by dispersing pulverized sea salt into the clouds, thereby reflecting even more solar energy back into outer space.
Note: polymath Nathan Myhrvold (a liberal, btw) approached Nancy Pelosi's office over a decade ago with simple geoengineering projects that would reverse global warming. Pelosi's staff told him they didn't want to solve global warming; they wanted to tax carbon. Taxing carbon provides a long-term steady stream of revenue to the federal government, whereas solving global warming does not.
So add more chemicals to the air ala litter the atmosphere more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchemist80
I don't doubt that more atmospheric CO2 tends to warm the climate however the current CO2 cocentration is 407.4 ppmV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous
*note the CO2 level on the top right pannel* 1700ppmV
You can browse various other periods and find that CO2 levels for the most part were above 1000ppmV for most of the history of life on Earth and the planet was warmer.This is actually one of the coldest periods in Earth history. There was no shortage of life it thrived. The idea that higher CO2 level will lead to the planet becoming an uninhabitable wasteland is just scare tactics and hysteria.
One does not really need specific stats or even compare with historical data to realize we should leaving as little footprint as possible, and just being more efficient/renewable. Even if our efforts will only affect planetary trends over eons in a small way. Its better for our health, and just make our planet nicer place to live on.
Antarctica was once a lush jungle. Do we really need to speed up a return of that? Our atmosphere was once more anaerobic than now. Maybe we can revert back to that too.
We need both to solve AGW -- we need a global green energy infrastructure to replace our reliance on fossil fuels AND a reduction in atmospheric CO2 if we hope to get temperatures back to natural levels.
I'm not a fan of any sort of shadowing or particulate matter in the air to reduce solar irradiance at ground level. That reduces solar panel effectiveness. The best solution will involve carbon capture and sequestration.
At the end of the day, this is a problem best addressed through science & engineering. Our politicians, by and large, have little to zero background in science or engineering. Our politicians, by and large, are uniquely unqualified to opine on the matter, let alone legislate on the matter.
Just how dangerous is it to allow non-scientist, non-engineer politicians to create global warming policy? Well, let's look at the policy statement on Bernie's official website:
Quote:
As president, Bernie Sanders will launch the decade of the Green New Deal, a ten-year, nationwide mobilization centered around justice and equity...
Soooo social justice and equity will be the centerstone of his Green New Deal. Got it. That'll cool the planet.
Bernie's website continues:
Quote:
The United States has for over a century spewed carbon pollution emissions into the atmosphere in order to gain economic standing in the world. Therefore, we have an outsized obligation to help less industrialized nations meet their targets while improving quality of life.
That is, give China and developing countries a pass - as if they need our permission in the first place. China has been explicit that the USA's economic position is a result of a century of low energy costs; China asserts the US should be held to the highest standard for the next 100 years (hurting our economy) while China adheres to the standards the US followed in the 1900s (thereby helping their economy).
China has been waging Economic War on the USA since at least 1990. The USA has only recently awakened. China will use Global Warming as a strategy in its economic ware on the USA.
Got it.
Last edited by RationalExpectations; 12-31-2019 at 09:58 AM..
So add more chemicals to the air ala litter the atmosphere more.
You are not alone. Around here, there are many lit major housewives who are very afraid of dangerous chemicals in the atmosphere such as Hydrogen Hydroxide and Hydronium Hydroxide. They are particularly scared of atmospheric Hydric Acid harming their snowflake children if they were to walk to school; thus, they drive them to school in their Audi Q8s to ensure the kids are protected from Hydric Acid rainfall. And they never see the irony.
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.
