Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?

1102103105107108223

Comments

  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    If you put that on your home here you probably could not even buy insurance, or if offered you could not afford it. We are expecting big storms tonight.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    As a follow-up to my previous post thread with Gary, here is good news for the clean energy/get off oil folks.

    This Prez is doing what he said ( for once at least, not often yet ) in regard to energy initiatives:

    link title

    Obama commits $1.2. billion in energy R&D

    Seeking to boost the U.S. clean-energy industry, President Obama on Monday announced $1.2 billion for science research at national labs and a proposal to extend a business tax credit for investments in research and development.

    At an event at the White House, Obama told researchers and green-technology business people that their work was vital to revitalizing the U.S. economy and cutting the country's dependence on foreign oil. About 120 researchers, lab directors, and CEOs from energy technology companies attended the event.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    It is an eyesore whether you think so or not. And the installer must have been drunk. The panels are not evenly aligned. I hope the guy did not pay him for that sloppy job. Still costs about $30,000 for a 3.0KW system. That will not run both my Rheem 10 SEER compressors at the same time. My biggest bill last summer was $161 last July. Averages just under $100 per month. About $70 most of the non heat/AC months. It is not likely I will live long enough to justify Solar. The interest on $30k is more than I paid last year for electricity. And it is not even a write-off unless you mortgage your home to pay for it.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    More CORPORATE WELFARE payoffs

    No money in there for the homeowner to install energy saving devices or solar panels?

    http://www.oksolar.com/n_cart/product_details.asp?ProductID=021718&cat=Solar%20S- - ystems&subcat=Solar%20Home%20Grid%20Tie
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    .

    "Well, there you go again"

    Ronnie Ray-Gun Back in the Day, and Larry Singleton to Gary again.

    There you go quoting the "worst case scenario" to make your point.

    How's this:

    With the new 2009 federal tax credit, which allows a 30% system credit for solar systems, combined with state tax credit and utility credits, I can get a 4 KW system in AZ installed for $5599 after the credit, and that would provide about 95% of my total usage.

    Must be lotsa overchargin for solar going on in Cali.

    P.S. Now, of course, the WEAKNESS in these programs is that I have to "front" the cash for the project, and the tax credits come back to me next year. So I would have to come up with $12-15K at the outset.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    With the new 2009 federal tax credit, which allows a 30% system credit for solar systems

    Better check the IRS fine print. That Federal Tax Credit has a cap of $4000. That would be about 10% of a 4KW system in CA. A 4KW system installed in San Diego will be about $39,000. If you borrow as they suggest on a Home equity loan at 7% you will never pay it off and get ahead. Check out the calculator for Solar. They do not take into consideration the Federal Tax cap. Believe me if it would be a money saver I would be for it.

    calculator

    http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f5695.pdf
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    It appears that the concenses is that neither automobiles NOR humans are causing "global warming" nor "climate change"... thus the discussin has moved on to federal tax credits on solar cells.

    It is good to see we have concensus 8-)
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    We need to kill off half the population. According to leading Green adviser in UK.

    JONATHON PORRITT, one of Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society.

    Porritt’s call will come at this week’s annual conference of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT), of which he is patron.

    The trust will release research suggesting UK population must be cut to 30m if the country wants to feed itself sustainably.

    Porritt said: “Population growth, plus economic growth, is putting the world under terrible pressure.

    “Each person in Britain has far more impact on the environment than those in developing countries so cutting our population is one way to reduce that impact.”

    Many experts believe that, since Europeans and Americans have such a lopsided impact on the environment, the world would benefit more from reducing their populations than by making cuts in developing countries.


    So do we draw straws or have a giant lottery? Every other person is a WINNER. This is the kind of mentality the the GLOBAL WARMING WONKS breed. I know where I would start but that would probably not be considered politically correct. So how do you get rid of half your population?
  • carmichael1carmichael1 Member Posts: 1
    I was reading the comments and most were about solor or wind energy. I have been a Mechanic for 35 years and the amazing thing about the automobile is that it only uses about 35 to 40% of the fuel being burned, thus using the excess to cool the pistons and just travel out of the engine to the atmosphere. I thus beleive that this could be avoided. There are people who have made gas vaporizers for engines that utilize more fuel, but this would defeat the ifrastructure of the Oil/Auto industry. I am getting side tracked a bit. If we use commen reasoning, for every automobile or truck out there, the engine tempurature itself runs around 230 degrees, thus each car is a heater, just with the engine temperature, add the over 600 degree exhaust, and now we have some heat generated anywhere a car is moving. These are temperatures without combining the so called green house gasses that exhaust it creating. So using this thought, for every human born on the earth, there is also another 98 degree heater walking the earth, for every piece of black top, there is another source of heat that even when the sun goes down the highways stay warm for the earth, thus causing global warming. Now lets combine the number of animals that generate heat, and start multiplying these commen heating elements and determine at which point we say we have to stop reproducing to slow down the global warming. Now I sound like a nut case. My point is that yes Autos cause heat to be generated and I am sure that the more cars we have on the earth the more heat that will be generated, as will every human and animal that is moving on the earth. I love the automobile, I love being able to go where I want, when I want. I would like to see a Rail system like Europe. If you buy a rail pass you can get on any train going to any town through Europe. This would eliminate the need for driving for a lot of people including myself. So affordable mass transit isn't something that the United States worries about. So unless every person on earth decides that they are not going to use automobiles, burn oil for heat, use any products that are generated from Oil, then we need to push for more efficient use of the oil products. Oil is what built this country and everything that relies on it to work.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    You got OLD info-mation mi amigo !!!

    The new credit passed with Obama's latest bailout was UNCAPPED !!!:

    On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed a stimulus bill (The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) that made some significant changes to the energy efficiency tax credits. The highlights are:

    * The tax credits that were previously effective for 2009, have been extended to 2010 as well.
    * The tax credit has been raised from 10% to 30%.
    * The tax credits that were for a specific dollar amount (ex $300 for a CAC), have been converted to 30% of the cost.
    * The maximum credit has been raised from $500 to $1500 for the two years (2009-2010). However, some improvements such as geothermal heat pumps, solar water heaters, and solar panels are not subject to the $1,500 maximum.


    Take that, solar doubters.............:)
  • ClairesClaires Member Posts: 1,219

    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

  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    I think the obvious consensus on this forum has been "NO"

    Might as well close it.
  • oldfarmer50oldfarmer50 Member Posts: 24,406
    "...at which point we say we have to stop reproducing to slow down the global warming...Now I sound like a nut case..."

    No nuttier than the adviser to the British PM who stated that the UK had to reduce it's population from 61 million to 30 million as fast as possible so as not to hurt the planet too much. He went on to say that population should be reduced in "western" countries first because we do the most harm to the environment.

    I wonder if they will shoot the SUV owners first and save the Prius owners for later.

    This is the point I have be trying to make all along. If you think that the enviro-wackos won't get you because you try to have a small carbon footprint, think again. These folks think you are a virus on this planet and their ultimate goal is to get rid of you.

    Don't believe me? Think what you would have said a few years ago if someone told you that the government would be taxing CO2. :cry:

    2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Don't believe me? Think what you would have said a few years ago if someone told you that the government would be taxing CO2.

    There are people that post on this thread that did not believe their government would try to tax carbon. Well our President has made it one of his top priorities. He knows full well it will hit the poor and middle class the hardest. He has groups that he is beholden to.

    All on a theory pushed by a few highly compensated scientists and rag tag politicians.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    This can have nothing but a negative impact on the USA. I hope all that have drank the Al Gore Koolaid will be happy with their brave new world order.

    A United Nations document on "climate change" that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

    Those and other results are blandly discussed in a discretely worded United Nations "information note" on potential consequences of the measures that industrialized countries will likely have to take to implement the Copenhagen Accord, the successor to the Kyoto Treaty, after it is negotiated and signed by December 2009. The Obama administration has said it supports the treaty process if, in the words of a U.S. State Department spokesman, it can come up with an "effective framework" for dealing with global warming.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Truly it is a "vapor" tax. It is really idiotic to nonsensical. That is why it is EXTREMELY dangerous. Freedoms are being confiscated right in plain sight. What are folks going to do when they tax oxygen and one can no longer pay? Will we have 15-20 min C02 total exposures in VATS? Then cart away the bodies if you don't survive? :confuse:
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    Truly it is a "vapor" tax. It is really idiotic to nonsensical.

    Our leaders just cannot be that naive or stupid. I think they know exactly what they are doing---dismantling our country. I just don't know why.

    Almost the first of April. Heavy snow here in KC. Global warming indeed !!

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Well truly all of this is going according to plans!! So in that sense the leaders are neither naive nor stupid. Detroit is an example of the countries cities' being gutted, and successfully, I might add. They might even be ahead of the power curve in the total scheme of things. :sick:
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    What are folks going to do when they tax oxygen

    That's an interesting point - right now it seems that we subsidize the automakers to dump CO into the air we breathe, so our oxygen is already being taxed in a way. Next we'll get taxed to clean it up.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Indeed from a C02 supplu perspective that is very short sighted. IF and for my .02 cents a VERY big if, why no C02 consuming powered machines/processes etc??????

    The process of algae growth and bio diesel production is C02 consumption and oxygen PRODUCTION !!!!??? This is not even to mention algae is a food source, etc etc. Why no "Kennedy" man on the moon in less than a decade siren call? (aka) 23% of the passenger vehicle fleet bio diesel machines out by.....

    My take.... it is almost TOTAL BS!!!
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    SAN FRANCISCO — It sounds like such a simple thing to do: buy some new light bulbs, screw them in, save the planet.

    But a lot of people these days are finding the new compact fluorescent bulbs anything but simple. Consumers who are trying them say they sometimes fail to work, or wear out early. At best, people discover that using the bulbs requires learning a long list of dos and don’ts.

    Take the case of Karen Zuercher and her husband, in San Francisco. Inspired by watching the movie “An Inconvenient Truth,” they decided to swap out nearly every incandescent bulb in their home for energy-saving compact fluorescents. Instead of having a satisfying green moment, however, they wound up coping with a mess.

    “Here’s my sad collection of bulbs that didn’t work,” Ms. Zuercher said the other day as she pulled a cardboard box containing defunct bulbs from her laundry shelf.

    One of the 16 Feit Electric bulbs the Zuerchers bought at Costco did not work at all, they said, and three others died within hours. The bulbs were supposed to burn for 10,000 hours, meaning they should have lasted for years in normal use. “It’s irritating,” Ms. Zuercher said.

    Irritation seems to be rising as more consumers try compact fluorescent bulbs, which now occupy 11 percent of the nation’s eligible sockets, with 330 million bulbs sold every year. Consumers are posting vociferous complaints on the Internet after trying the bulbs and finding them lacking.

    Compact fluorescents once cost as much as $30 apiece. Now they go for as little as $1 — still more than regular bulbs, but each compact fluorescent is supposed to last 10 times longer, save as much as $5.40 a bulb each year in electricity, and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide from burning coal in power plants.

    Much of the credit for that sharp cost decline goes to the Energy Department. The agency asked manufacturers in 1998 to create cheaper models and then helped find large-volume buyers, like universities and utilities, to buy them. That jump-started a mass market and eventually led to sales of discounted bulbs at retailers like Costco, Wal-Mart Stores and Home Depot.


    I keep the receipt with the spares. When one fails I put it in the original package and return it to the place I bought it. I have had many fail after 6 months or less. Several went pop and burnt out first time they were turned on. With 56 lights in the house mostly recessed it does save on electricity using CFLs. Most were bought when SDG&E was having specials.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    That is what will be needed to get rid of chemical fertilizer.

    The grasslands of America, before Columbus, supported about 60 million huge bison and 100 million small antelope. Today, America's grasslands feed about 100 million medium-sized cattle.

    What if U.S. lands had to support ten times that many cattle? What kind of destruction would that wreak on our soils, our streams, and our wildlands?

    Greenpeace, the Sierra Club and other U.S. environmental groups have long demanded that America shift to organic farming, giving up "man-made chemicals" that they say harm wildlife. The New York Times and Hollywood stars enthusiastically endorse organic food. Congress and government regulators are forcing U.S. farmers in the organic direction by restricting safety-proven pesticides, fertilizers, and farming systems.

    Unfortunately, our city-wise society may not have thought this countryside question all the way through.

    Nitrogen is the key chemical in farming. If we don't replace the nitrogen crop plants take from our soils as they grow, our fields will become barren, as they did during the Dust Bowl days of the 1930s. (That's when the nitrogen, built up in Great Plains soils by eons of bison manure, began to run out.)

    To keep their soils fertile, today's American farmers apply about 11 million tons of "chemical" nitrogen per year. This is pure nitrogen, taken literally from the air (which is 78 percent N) through an industrial process. Worldwide, high-yield farmers apply about 80 million tons of chemical N per year.

    But the first and foremost rule of organic is "no chemical fertilizer." The organic movement was founded in the 1930s on the precept that chemical fertilizer poisons the soil. Organic farmers are allowed to use only organic nitrogen, mainly from cattle manure and "green manure crops" like rye and clover.


    The Rest of the Story

    More dueling environmentalist, proposing we spend a lot of money. Other people's Money.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I don't like black vehicles for the very reasons CARB gave in their presentation on banning dark colored cars. I don't like government deciding what color car I should drive. It seems their clandestine plan hit a roadblock before getting off the ground.

    When word got out that CARB couldn’t find a reflective version of deep black paint that suited its needs, auto enthusiast blogs and conservative commentators smelled another “kooky California” story — or “out-of-control government” expose, take your pick — and jumped in with relish.

    The fact that black is the second most popular color among car owners in the U.S. — behind white — helped stoke the outrage. The Truth About Cars, a blog that brings a smart sensibility to its automotive commentary, opined that “regulating car color comes across as nothing more than an exercise in bureaucratic power for its own sake.”

    CARB ultimately decided to ditch the paint scheme and move ahead with just the reflective glass mandate (which is not window tinting, by the way; it’s a reflective clear coat).

    So, did the bureaucrats really intend to ban black cars, only to be foiled by an outraged citizenry? That’s hard to say. Young notes that it’s not unusual for CARB to get an earful over its proposed regs, and in this case, “it wasn’t exactly opposition” that killed the paint initiative. “It was an appraisal that the technology was not yet mature enough to deliver what we hoped to achieve.”

    Moreover, the CARB PowerPoint presentation that got everyone’s fan belt in a twist never actually recommends that black cars be banned. It merely — “sinisterly,” Rush might say — notes that “jet black remains an issue.”

    Still, the timing is interesting. Although the workshop at which the paint plan was discussed was held on March 12, the decision to drop the idea wasn’t made until this week, according to Young — the very same week, sinisterly enough, that Limbaugh referred to the CARB rule makers as tyrants.

    Coincidence? We report, you decide.


    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/uptospeed/2009/03/black-car-ban.html
  • avalon02whavalon02wh Member Posts: 785
    http://solveclimate.com/blog/20090327/congressional-hearings-amateurs-invited-co- nfuse-climate-science

    It is interesting how this is playing out.

    "... such as Sen. James Inhofe and Reps. Joe Barton and John Shimkus (see video) have ensured that climate change deniers without credentials in climate science testify alongside respected scientists."

    Now why would they do that? :confuse: Where are the millions of scientists that claim there is no relationship between human activities and climate change?
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Member Posts: 4,085
    Wats next.... the manditory sale of black cars in the northern states which get below-zero temps.?
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    You know as well as I do that site is nothing but a ploy for the MM GW CULT. There are as many legitimate scientists questioning MM GW as those that are being paid to say it is a done deal.

    I want to see scientific evidence presented by legitimate scientists. Ones not on the government teat. It is well documented that a denier will be ostracized from some universities that are controlled by state and federal government grants. I have posted several scientists with credentials that make Hansen look like a freshman in college. Show me a REAL scientist that is totally believing the hype put out by the likes of Al Gore and the joke of the WORLD the UN IPCC. .

    PS
    If you have not noticed I have NO respect for Al Gore, James Hansen or the United Nations. I consider them all con artists and flim flam men.
  • euphoniumeuphonium Member Posts: 3,425
    You're not alone of your last paragraph. :)
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Obama snubs Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek - POTUS cancels dinner plans to eat with Michell.

    Topolanek, who holds the rotating EU presidency, described U.S. fiscal spending as a "road to hell" and is also a noted global warming doubter.

    Or maybe POTUS is just jet-lagged.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    This funny how it works eh? I guess you can only dine with folks of the "same GW religion"? I guess breaking bread with an GW infidel would not be "holy communion".

    It would be interesting to know if the Czech's are on the US dole like the other GW cists nations. Even N Korea who notoriously "LEAVE the lightsOFF @ night" if dark satellite monitoring data are to be believed is beating the nuclear drums.(aka- need more money).

    I am still waiting for the (now) Vice President Joe Biden's prophetic concept ( before 6 mo BO's, world stage acid tests) to happen.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I think Obama snubs world leaders of all persuasions. He did not make friends with his treatment of Gordon Brown, a GW koolaid drinker. BO has a lot to learn about civility.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    I would tend to agree, However it is HIS political capital to use as he sees fit. Indeed it might have not only NOT cost him anything, he might have added to the kitty!? If Bush had done the same, the press would have probably lambasted him on the front page. BO does it, it might get a two sentence note- next to the local Roto Rooter advertisements.

    I am thinking he might want to arrange a pow wow with the President of Iran. :lemon: Hmmmmmmmmmm.....
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    "Austria is using the electric cars as part of a program to determine the energy and climate impacts of smart electrical metering and the impact of electric vehicle charging on the country's power grid."

    Think Says Its City EVs Now in Service in Austrian Electric Car Test Program

    image
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    "The Ford and Honda hybrids due out this month are among dozens planned for the coming years as automakers try to meet new fuel-efficiency standards and please politicians overseeing the industry's multibillion-dollar bailout.

    And why are the auto companies kowtowing? Because the president is in cahoots with environmentalists who stay awake nights trying to figure out how to get us back to the good, old days when a gallon of gas cost more than $4.

    Ah, but the evil-doers in Washington, D.C. (and their cronies in Sacramento) can't fool steely-eyed consumers when it comes to hybrids.

    "Nobody's buying 'em," Limbaugh said. "Nobody wants them! The manufacturers are making them in droves to satisfy Obama! Sorry for yelling. Nobody wants them!"

    Rush Limbaugh Tells All (And Then Some) in the Green Car Conspiracy

    Some counterpoints are listed in the Green Car Advisor article.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    The real sounds of silence, are the fact even the environmentalists' aren't buying the VERY hybrids they claimed was going to "save the environment" .

    As you mentioned the GW & BO folks want the good ole days BACK when gas was INXS of 4 per gal; I waxed nostalgic when taking public transportation was .05 cents per way: .10 cents per round trip :)
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The green crowd drives them forever - give them another 6 or 8 years when they finally dump their decade old cars. :shades:
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Actually I not only know and am totally ok with that, I am currious as to the 10,15,20 year costs of those batteries. In addition I hope to go 500,000 to 1,000,000 miles on a TDI. !! The real reference was to the low relative numbers and more importantly, percentages of (for lack of a better word ) half hearted to kool-aid drinking GW cists. ;) As almost immeasurable % wise as the Prius population is, percentage wise, a whole lot of THOSE folks do not believe enough to put (THEIR money where THEIR "mouth is." When you factor out the "status and celebrity types" Prius flat could be doing FAR better.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Lots of people think the green community speaks with one voice, but they are as conflicted a group within their ranks as any other group.

    Take nukes - most greens don't like 'em but there's a significant faction that thinks nuke energy is a cleaner solution than anything else out there.

    So, using gasoline to generate electric power to store in batteries doesn't necessarily appeal to a green person. Going to a plug-in vehicle where you shift the pollution to a coal fired electric generator hundreds of miles across the country has its own set of problems.

    I think my minivan could go to 200,000 but my wife is tired of it after a decade. Maybe we'll go test a Prius, but there are lots of other suitable rides out there that are thousands cheaper that appeal to our frugal nature. And since we do drive them forever the battery life is a concern. Shoot, I complain if the scheduled maintenance requires a $400 timing belt in 105k (the van's engine is non-interference, so I'm ignoring that maintenance recommendation :) )
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    April 1, 2009: The sunspot cycle is behaving a little like the stock market. Just when you think it has hit bottom, it goes even lower.

    2008 was a bear. There were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year's 366 days (73%). To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go all the way back to 1913, which had 311 spotless days: plot. Prompted by these numbers, some observers suggested that the solar cycle had hit bottom in 2008.

    Maybe not. Sunspot counts for 2009 have dropped even lower. As of March 31st, there were no sunspots on 78 of the year's 90 days (87%).

    It adds up to one inescapable conclusion: "We're experiencing a very deep solar minimum," says solar physicist Dean Pesnell of the Goddard Space Flight Center.

    "This is the quietest sun we've seen in almost a century," agrees sunspot expert David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center.


    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum.htm

    It was a record cold winter in many parts of the world. It is still seasonably cold here in So CA.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    "Lots of people think the green community speaks with one voice, but they are as conflicted a group within their ranks as any other group. "

    I would hardly call them a "disenfranchised" lot , or if you prefer groups, especially when they have been so successful in driving up the cost of anything you care to mention, but specifically automobiles. The amount of useless and stupifying codified regulations as a result is simply mind boggling.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Quiet before the storm?
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Name a reg and I'll point to you way more than one "disenfranchised" group of folks who weighed in on the issue.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    That's my line !!! But you made my point !!
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,709
    you're not like that group in 'Independence Day' in downtown Los Angeles who was looking up at the huge mother ship of the aliens saying..."eew, it is so beautiful." Then sudden destruction of that large skyscraper occurs.

    Are you linking increased sunspot activity with the "end of the world?" GW an "end of times" phenomenon, of a sort?

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Bad times for Cali in the future? Likely

    Warming to burn down Cali in next few decades

    As California warms in coming decades, farmers will have less water, the state could lose more than a million acres of cropland and forest fire rates will soar, according to a broad-ranging state report released Wednesday.

    The document, which officials called the "the ultimate picture to date" of global warming's likely effect on California, consists of 37 research papers that examine an array of issues including water supply, air pollution and property losses.

    Without actions to limit greenhouse gas emissions, "severe and costly climate impacts are possible and likely across California," warned state environmental protection secretary Linda Adams.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Gee they make it sound as if they just discovered global warming is the cause. In fact CA's natural state is a state wide fire EVERY 5 years and has been for literally milleniums !!! iI that is not a history fiction, I do not know what is.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    the state could lose more than a million acres of cropland

    I'd bet that would be more than offset by the increase in arable land, and longer growing season in the Northern Plains and into Canada.

    Many GW studies are "glass 1/2 empty studies". Anyone with basic knowledge knows that the bio-density and bio-diversity are highest in the warmer regions of the Earth. The tropical rainforests are the richest in life. Life thrives better in warm tropical environments.

    CA is not the place to live if you can't accept change, and the dangers of nature. especially when you're sitting on a known time-bomb series of faults. I find it just as frustrating that people develop along the San Andreas and in SF, just as they develop again in New Orleans.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The arctic gets the news but the tropics may get hit harder:

    "The more dramatic impact could actually be in the moist tropics, despite modeling that indicates temperatures there will warm just 2 or 3 degrees by 2100 compared with 6 degrees or more at higher latitudes, Tewksbury said. That is because organisms in the tropics normally do not experience much temperature variation because there is very little seasonality, so even small temperature shifts can have a much larger impact than similar shifts in regions with more seasonal climates."

    Tropics to bear brunt of global warming (ScienceBlog)
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I find it just as frustrating that people develop along the San Andreas and in SF, just as they develop again in New Orleans.

    That is something that should be taught by parents. Don't build in a wash or flood plain. Building on a known fault is not very bright either. Or in Hawaii in the path of a volcano flow. Though many times you gamble that you will not be the one that is nailed. I think of this GW business the same way. You got a house on the beach. You are more likely to get wiped out by a storm or tidal wave than rising oceans caused by GW.

    Cap and trade will do nothing but put a bigger tax burden on the over taxed middle class.
  • avalon02whavalon02wh Member Posts: 785
    How about posting the names again.

    And,
    Natural mechanism for medieval warming discovered
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16892-natural-mechanism-for-medieval-warmi- ng-discovered.html

    http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11648/dn11648-2_726.jpg

    This answers your question from a few posts ago.
  • avalon02whavalon02wh Member Posts: 785
    "In addition I hope to go 500,000 to 1,000,000 miles on a TDI. "

    Must be windy sitting ON the roof. ;) Seriously, you have major obsession with reaching 1,000,000 miles. The sun will likely turn into a red giant way before you get there and then we will have some serious global warming.
This discussion has been closed.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.