Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?

1…217219221222223

Comments

  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    edited October 2013
    A couple of days ago I heard a tape of an ipcc official talking about the latest report. He said this in a rather heavy accent and with a straight face:

    "The warming over the last few years would have been much greater if not for the cooling".

    Does anyone understand this ?

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,141
    It means "I need my 6 figure salary!"
  • carnaughtcarnaught Member Posts: 3,497
    ROTFLMAO
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    When you start to think about the 1000s of over paid diplomat types with all the hangers on from every podunk country on the globe, it is mind boggling. And their sole purpose is to extort money from the USA and the other more affluent countries.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,141
    edited October 2013
    Just visit NYC and see the UN crowd. It really is stupefying.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I wonder how many millions they spent on the IPCC GW report that is nothing but spin to keep the myth alive. I suppose if my job depended on keeping the scam going I would be a self preservationist. Then again I turned down some opportunities to get into politics long ago. I did not think you could be an honest citizen and a politician. Kind of like being an honest Attorney is an oxymoron.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,141
    And where those millions came from.

    Even if someone is honest before they get into politics, once they are into it, that will stop. And now even more that we are eyebrows-deep into the lobbyist culture. Money talks.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    A good friend in CA became a state legislator. I could not believe the transition in his life. That has stuck with me. It is a corrupt system and you play be the rules or get the boot.
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    edited October 2013
    The LA Times, that great bastion of freedom and fairness, has made a editorial decision and banned any letters that disagree with the global warming cult. It appears that they will no longer tolerate non-believers.

    They are also patting themselves on the back and encouraging other newspapers to follow their lead. A new low in journalism.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Can't say that I read any letters to the editors, but I do skim comments.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Well if you believe scientists, they say 95% of all living creatures are now extinct. That means they did not adapt and died. Man did not cause the ice age that killed a lot of species. Man did not cause the medieval warming period. If man is the cause of CC or GW, I don't see any good solutions. Especially in 15 years. I personally think it is the Warmers trying to save their scam when most of the people are questioning their so call consensus. The people have a very low opinion of the Federal government. And they are the driving force behind the so-called GW. I find it interesting the tropics had the coldest winter on record and this group of geography students come up with a theory to try and get on the GW gravy train. Why should we believe the report. When climate scientists cannot predict the weather for next week. And these kids want US to believe in 2048 Los Angeles will be in deep trouble. We got a LOT worse problems in the World than some GW theory of mass destruction.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited October 2013
    Actually I picked that one to show that readers were commenting along the same vein as you. Don't see the censorship.

    Worse problems? Ah, perhaps you mean the 3 Fukushima reactors melting down. They have some weather coming their way "next week". Hopefully it'll weaken considerably before it turns to the northeast. (wunderground.com)
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    LA Times is banning editorial comments that are not in line with the Warmist agenda. Not those that comment.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/09/la-times-global-warming-climate-change_- n_4072867.html
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Ha, funny, and you found that on HuffPo too. Who shut down comments a while back, NY Times?
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Both Print papers are on their way out. We get so many calls wanting to sell us the local paper. I tell them getting the news two day after the fact is not my idea of up to date. Hope they all quit wasting paper along with the catalog companies. That would be a plus for the environment. Just don't try to take my Toilet paper.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I am tired of CFL bulbs burning out early, popping and leaving an environmental mess in my home. So I have started buying LEDs. They have come a long way since I tried a $25 one about a year ago and took it back to Costco. The buy American voices were telling me we would dominate the LED bulb market creating 1000s of new jobs. Well LEDs are here and work great, but all I could find are made in China. I have replaced about 20 so far at $5 a piece. They come on instantly and are much brighter than the CFLs and incandescent bulbs they replaced. Now we see China with innovation in lighting that goes beyond just copying someone else's idea or patent.

    A group of Chinese scientists at Shanghai’s Fudan University have a bright idea: A lightbulb that produces its own Wi-Fi signal. According to Xinhua, the technology is called Li-Fi, and the prototype actually works better than the average connection in China.

    As many as four computers placed near a Li-Fi bulb can connect to the net, using light frequencies rather than the usual radio waves. The bulb is embedded with a microchip that produces a signal, yielding rates as fast as 150 mbps—far faster than typical connection speeds in China, and about three times faster than the speed I’m getting right now. (Seriously, I just did a speed test.)

    http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2013/10/chinese-scientists-invent-lightbulbs-that-emit-- wi-fi/
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I'll have to switch, although none of my CFLs have died. Would be really curious to learn if the ones I installed in Anchorage in the 90s are still going.

    You'll note (from the article comments) that the Li-Fi idea came from England.
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    edited October 2013
    I think they know they are doomed, so they are upping the rhetoric. Printing outright lies, trying to change history, censorship, etc.

    When you hit rock bottom a rational company would stop digging and start climbing out of the hole, but not these bozos. They are breaking out the jack hammers to hasten their own demise. Good riddance I say.

    From his post, I am not sure if our host has figured out the difference between editorials and comments on editorials. I am sure that comments they don't agree with will be the next to go.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited October 2013
    I don't think newspapers are doomed - they just aren't getting printed so much anymore. Edmunds went online in 1994 and quit printing paper guides in '06. I was thinking print got dropped even earlier.

    And you know the rules of the road here about posting off-topic religious comments - I understand you were just reminded of that by Kirstie the other day in the Stocks discussion before you tried it in here.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    What is amazing is the fact the source light has been used for decades in fiber optic cables. I wonder if it will be dangerous for our health like Florescent light can be for many.

    I have had at least 6 CFL bulbs burn up, a few in rather scary circumstances. Always when you turn them on. A couple just quit working. I am putting the LEDs in the most used places until the price comes down more. I bought the limit from Costco with the MFG rebate. It is amazing how much brighter they are than the CFL bulbs with the same rating of 40 watts. They claim these only use 8 watts. We have over 50 can lights in our home. Plus lights in every fan unit. These are FEIT G25 3 to a pack. $13.99 plus tax after rebate. They really light up the bathrooms with 6-8 in each. Just doing my bit. ;-)

    http://www.ecolumens.com/ledglg258wdi.html?gclid=CMOQyonUpboCFeJDMgodF0UAjA
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited October 2013
    This house came with a couple of boxes of incandescents, including a couple of cool old big honking 200 watt Mazda bulbs.

    Should screw those in and watch the electric meter wheel blur.

    I do have some battery powered motion detector leds for the stairs.
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    MIT climate scientist, and former lead author of U.N. IPCC had the following to say about the report:

    "The latest IPCC report has truly sunk to the level of hilarious incoherence. It is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate change agenda going".

    Looks like the debate is over after all !! ;)

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited October 2013
    Dr. Lindzer may have impressive credentials but somehow I don't think his comments are going to end the debate. ;)

    It's interesting to read about the politics down in Australia as they enter another fire season early. (Reuters). PM Abbott is getting lots of flack while there's less talk about the bush fuel load and new housing in the "risky" areas. Last month was the hottest September ever recorded in Australia.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    This is what bothers me. The $Trillions spent on GW could be doing some actual good for the World. Instead of filling the pockets of the elitist swine in the UN. Worst part is they expect our bankrupt government to foot most of the bills.

    The world invested almost a billion dollars a day in limiting global warming last year, but the total figure – $359 billion – was slightly down on last year, and barely half the $700 billion per year that the World Economic Forum has said is needed to tackle climate change.

    But the total funding pot fell $5 billion from 2012, and remains just a tiny fraction of the $5 trillion that the International Energy Agency estimates is required by 2020 for clean energy projects alone, if rising temperatures are to be pegged at 2 degrees Celsius.

    http://www.thegwpf.org/world-spending-1-billion-day-tackle-global-warming/
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    As always, follow the money.

    Especially those who are "using" their own money.

    Silencing the sceptics (lloyds.com)
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Very likely and 95% sure are not the same.

    “It is very likely that the number of cold days and nights has decreased and the number of warm days and nights has increased on the global scale.”

    So what is Lloyd's insuring against GW? What Lloyd's climate authorities anywhere close to the credentials of Lindzen? I think the Warmers are grasping at anything to sell their snakeoil.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited October 2013
    If anyone "follows the money" it's Lloyds, although (per Wiki) it's no longer "rich individuals" involved but corporations and insurers. From my link:

    "In 2007 the ClimateWise initiative was launched by the insurance industry to respond to the myriad risks and opportunities posed by climate change. Lloyd’s is a member along with brokers and insurance and reinsurance companies from across the globe.

    All members commit to action against six key principles that encompass how the industry can push forward climate awareness, shape public policy making and conduct their individual businesses more sustainably."

    ClimateWise supports the 5th IPCC report
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    More people with their hands out. They do nothing but pass on bad information and get paid for it. GW scammers are as corrupt as any part of our government. Why should we believe them? If they said GW is a problem we all need to save energy and try to mitigate it. I would believe them. That is NOT what happened. They went right for the middle class pocket book. CO2 Emissions, energy, it just makes me sick to see what they are doing to our country. You like it in the toilet like it is now. Great, that is what you are going to get. Nobody will want to build high energy manufacturing with our cost of electricity. Most natural resources are history. Smelting metals is not long for the USA. It is causing our huge disparity between the haves and have nots. This is the worst level of poverty in our history. I blame the GW ECO Nuts for a large part of the mess.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited October 2013
    Actually they (you are talking about Lloyds, right?) have to pay when stuff floods or burns or gets wiped out by storms. They insure against that stuff happening and if GW causes it to happen more often, it costs them money.

    This ain't nothing like the depression (per my mom, who was there) and my nephew smelting steel down in Alabama hasn't said anything about getting laid off. Look around tomorrow as you cruise and see just how rich the country is.
  • ClairesClaires Member Posts: 1,222
    edited October 2013
    if GW causes it to happen more often, it costs them money.

    That doesn't sound like a good business plan. Being in the risk management business, I imagine they plan to offset losses and make piles of money by "incorporating climate change into their investment strategies" and "creating new and innovative forms of insurance". If they're going to make money on either, they'd be wise to drive demand and sales for both hyping the IPCC report.

    MODERATOR

    Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    "creating new and innovative forms of insurance". If they're going to make money on either, they'd be wise to drive demand and sales for both hyping the IPCC report.

    That is precisely what the insurance companies are doing. Why is it so hard for people to see that the whole GW/CC is designed to extort money? I have no doubt the planet will get warmer and cooler. That bad weather will follow good weather. Been that way since it was created or just happened along.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited October 2013
    When they start paying out more, premium rates will rise and that'll mean less money for companies to hire and expand and more property owners will go bare and opt for bankruptcy if the worst happens. Either way, that means less opportunity for the insurance companies to make profits.

    Managing risk doesn't mean they want to stop selling policies. :-)

    My real point is that those with skin in the game (corporations, countries, the Pentagon) aren't ignoring the IPCC findings.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,141
    edited October 2013
    That and perhaps they've invested heavily in those who are committed to the game. In the long run, insurance companies are investment holders as much as anything. I'll believe there's a real issue when our low cost "partners" who have very wealthy leadership classes (who are given carte blanche to flit around the world like playboys with their blood money) are held to the same standards.

    It's kind of like someone such as 'ol Al crying about GW, while having holdings which depend on the story. And of course, not living a personal lifestyle that shows much concern.
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    Of course you are correct. Lloyd's sees this as a low hanging fruit opportunity. They make their money from selling insurance against catastrophes and then investing the premiums under very favorable conditions. They are certainly not likely to take a course that would discourage you from buying insurance.

    You could say that insurance companies thrive on fear of what might happen in the future:

    What will happen to your family if you get sick or die?
    What will happen if your car breaks down?
    What will happen if you have an accident?

    It is in their best interest to stir up as much fear and uncertainly of things that might happen, but seldom do.

    If Lloyds really believed that all these catastrophes were 95% certain to happen, they wouldn't touch these risks with a ten foot pole.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    If Lloyds really believed that all these catastrophes were 95% certain to happen, they wouldn't touch these risks with a ten foot pole.

    You can bet the insurance companies are more worried about storms along the coast costing them money than the ocean rising 6" over the next 100 years. Even if it rises 6 feet the homeowners and insurers will have plenty of time to build a wall or cancel the policy.
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    edited October 2013
    Yes, and actually NO insurance company will even write flood insurance in any area that is likely to flood. The only way you can insure flood is through the Fed. Flood program...and you and I have to chip in to help pay for that.

    That is why the insurance industry is helping with the scare tactics on climate change while clamoring to write climate change related coverage. They know that it is very unlikely they will be paying any claims.

    In this case you really can follow the money.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    "The governors of eight states including California and New York pledged Thursday to get 3.3 million zero-emission vehicles on roadways by 2025 in an effort to curb greenhouse gas pollution from transportation sources.

    The other states involved are Massachusetts, Maryland, Oregon, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Vermont. The eight states together represent about 23 percent of the U.S. auto market."

    8 states vow 3.3M zero-emission vehicles by 2025 (Anchorage Daily News)
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    Good for them. All the states involved are severely polluted and even a drop in the bucket like this proposed plan might help. Of course they will probably have to generate that electricity by burning fossil fuels.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    That is the biggest joke with EVs to save the planet. We are using more fossil fuel energy than ever and they want to add the inneficiency of EVs to the equation. What is the real cost of owning and running a Tesla from mfg to recycle?
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,141
    The real cost, or cost after subsidies and tax breaks? ;)
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    Keep in mind that even if you don't drive a hybrid or electric car....you helped pay for every one you see tooling down the road. Gives me a nice warm (very warm) feeling.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    The way I have it figured is the Tesla driver should be paying 13 cents per KWH on his electric charge to cover the average gas tax the rest of US are paying. At least in CA where most of the EVs are sold. That would raise the cost per KWH up to about 47 cents at tier 3 which an EV would get you up to. That would make the cost of driving a Tesla about 14 cents per mile. If you are driving a luxury car that gets 20 MPG you are paying about 20 cents per mile with PUG at $4.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I don't think Californians are smart enough to vote out the eco nuts that are destroying our state's economy. Abbott addresses exactly what is wrong with CA and the US.

    An interview with Australia Prime Minister Tony Abbott

    During your campaign you called for a repeal of the carbon tax imposed by the Labor Party. Why are you against this tax?

    The carbon tax is bad for the economy and it doesn’t do any good for the environment. Despite a carbon tax of $37 a ton by 2020, Australia’s domestic emissions were going up, not down. The carbon tax was basically socialism masquerading as environmentalism, and that’s why it’s going to get abolished.

    It will be abolished this year?

    As soon as possible. If the Labor Party wants to give the people of Australia a Christmas present, they will vote to abolish the carbon tax. It was damaging the economy without helping the environment. It was a stupid tax. A misconceived tax.

    You said in your victory speech that Australia is once again open for business. Does that mean you believe that the previous government was unfriendly to businesses?

    I said Australia is under new management and is once again open for business. The previous government would often say the right thing but it would invariably do the wrong thing when it came to business. There was an explosion in red tape and green tape. There was a whole thicket of new restrictions in the labor market. There were big new taxes. It was a government which thought that there was no problem that more public servants, higher taxes and further regulation couldn’t fix.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lally-weymouth-an-interview-with-australi- a-prime-minister-tony-abbott/2013/10/24/f718e9ea-3cc7-11e3-b6a9-da62c264f40e_sto- ry.html
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    We can only hope that we will follow their lead and that common sense will also prevail here.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • texasestexases Member Posts: 10,707
    edited October 2013
    Mostly from better economy REGULAR and HYBRID (not EV) cars, and the explosion of natural gas production replacing coal. These states are pouring money down the drain. For the majority of the US a regular hybrid has equal or LOWER CO2 production than an EV.

    And tax money supporting hydrogen cars? What complete nonsense!

    p.s. - Do Tesla's 'Supercharger' stations work with other cars? If not, nice that our tax dollars are paying for rich folk to drive around...
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,327
    I have seen many congressmen show their stupidity, but it is usually over trivial matters. The guys behind this deal are not stupid, so you can bet that someone is hoping to make some big money on this one.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • carnaughtcarnaught Member Posts: 3,497
    ".......so you can bet that someone is hoping to make some big money on this one."

    Makes one wonder if folks like Soros and Gore are involved.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    p.s. - Do Tesla's 'Supercharger' stations work with other cars? If not, nice that our tax dollars are paying for rich folk to drive around...

    The EV network promises to enable Model S and Model X owners to charge 150 miles of range in 30 minutes. What about your Roadster? Sorry, you aren’t invited to this charging party. Have a Tesla and a LEAF? You’ll have to be satisfied with separate but equal charging facilities as the Tesla proprietary charging connector restricts access to Tesla shoppers only. Is this class warfare or do we parallel the computer industry where connectors come and go with the seasons?
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited November 2013
    "The reduction in the rate of increase took place even as the global economy grew. This could signal that countries are using more green energy, which allows them to grow economically without similarly increasing their CO2 emissions."

    Emissions going up, but more slowly (csmonitor.com)
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    600,000 bats killed at wind energy facilities in 2012, study says

    http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-600000-bats-killed-at-wind-e- nergy-facilities-in-2012-study-says-20131108,0,1587861.story?track=rss#axzz2kB76- c66d
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles