"In many cases, the Kennedy's come to mind, it is the very people in government screaming the loudest for alternatives that block progress in that direction."
right on. It's the Kennedy's blocking a windfarm in their backyard while "promoting" high energy taxes, Gore's consuming many times of the energy than an average america while telling the americans to conserve; it is Rangle's imposing taxes on everybody else while evading taxes themselves. It is UAW insisting Cadillac taxes on other people's healthcare plan but theirs, etc.
we have a corrupt political system where politicians are bought by special interests to dive up your money and my money for their friends.
The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen , Norway . Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.
I'm sorry, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922 as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post.
I get it. You really want vehicles here to fit the criteria mandated by the EU. Throw in a tax of about 50% on gasoline and about 40% on diesel (after you factor in the energy content and CO2 emissions) and I'm sure we will get lots of vehicles that get 30 mpg or better. Sounds great to me.
Once the EU takes over you can complain about the folks in Brussels that are puppets of the special interest lobbies. (like the oil companies, the car companies, the drug firms, environmentalists, farmers, old farts/AARP, and so on and so on).
I did the conversion. It is rated 42.2 MPG in the UK. That comes out to 35.14 US MPG. Making the Land Cruiser a very economical vehicle to drive by European standards.
I get it. You really want vehicles here to fit the criteria mandated by the EU.
It would save the consumers and the automakers $billions if the EU and EPA could come up with some kind of standards for emissions. Then tell CARB to stuff it.
I did the conversion. It is rated 42.2 MPG in the UK. That comes out to 35.14 US MPG. Making the Land Cruiser a very economical vehicle to drive by European standards
Ok, good work. Then my only gripe is where are you going to park it?
The Arctic Oscillation stories the last couple of days have been interesting (even if it's just "weather" and not "global warming"). (NPR),
I did the conversion. It is rated 42.2 MPG in the UK. That comes out to 35.14 US MPG. Making the Land Cruiser a very economical vehicle to drive by European standards.
The Toyota UK site shows the Land Cruiser LC3 with the 3.0 D-4D engine as giving 34.87 mpg Imperial on the EU Combined Cycle. i.e. an approximation of "overall" economy. By my rough math that turns out circa 29mpg USA. 42.2mpg might well be the equivalent to a "highway" figure for EU. EU official figures can be up to 8% optimistic vs real-world and the manufacturers grudgingly admit it but, in their defence, point out that they have to run the standard EU sequence tests even though they are flawed.
Sorry to be picky.
Just done a 250 mile round-trip in my '06 Volvo S60 D5. Probably 80% 70mph+ cruising, (with a little cut & thrust),, 10% urban and 10% city. Trip computer shows me 42.8mpg (Imperial), for the trip but that's generally optimistic so I'd guesstimate around 40mpg based on past history. I'm not unhappy with that for a 185bhp diesel mated to a 6-spd "Geartronic" auto 'box and excellent comfort etc.
the warmers are disgusting only in the sense that their love for the polar bears go so far so that the warmers can continue to maintain their life style of excesses.
starve the warmers for a month and they would gladly kill a bear cub for meat, however cut she is.
I would have happily written Gore a check if he practices at least 1% of what he preaches.
Don't you find it a little troubling that at least this part of the IPCC science is based on a single person's vague words? If this was admitted to a report, what does it say about the general qualifications to make it as an IPCC fact?
You do know this looks like a "science team" and I do use that term loosely, that has a goal to prove global warming - that is ready to embrace any sort of proof, no matter how loosely proven or supported.
I have no belief in you're prior posting that the Arctic is 10F warmer this year, despite the Arctic air patterns having changed. I do not trust that the measurements were done in the same places, at the same time of day, with the same instruments, or that the data wasn't otherwise wrongly comparing different months.
I think climatologists are quickly losing their credibility with the general public, besides people like us who are slightly better educated on the topic.
Well, the geographer who was unhappy with the 2035 prediction also said in the article:
"Cogley said: "The reality, that the glaciers are wasting away, is bad enough. But they are not wasting away at the rate suggested by this speculative remark and the IPCC report."
Cogley seems to one of those good guys who reports on what he thinks the science to date actually says, not what the media cherry picks and runs with. Er, like this tidbit:
"Glaciers are often described as "sensitive indicators of climatic change". This cliché misses an important point: glaciers are also independent indicators of climatic change. Mass-balance measurements assume nothing about the temperature at weather stations, so glaciers give us a better-rounded and more secure picture of how the natural world is coping with the changes being forced upon it."
Danny Glover is always on the leading edge of stupidity. He should stick to scripts written by people with an IQ above 90. The warmers were making similar claims that GW caused earthquakes in Australia a couple years ago. Probably causes warts and ingrown toenails as well. :sick:
Climate change is real no doubt about that. Blaming it on humans is a scam. Even IF humans are a cause. Who wants to be first to sacrifice themselves for the planet. Maybe jump into an active volcano to satisfy the gods. Throwing Danny Glover and Al Gore into a volcano would be a good start. Both have very large carbon footprints.
I believe the glaciers covered where I'm sitting about 20,000 years ago. So the advance and retreat of glaciers is a known, semi-understood natural cycle. Nature is constantly in change.
Another fact (geological) - the Himalayan mountains were formed by the Indian subcontinent pushing into Asia. The Himalayan mountains are still increasing in height, even though erosion would typically lower mountains each year. Being an engineer but not a full-blown research scientist, I do know that India pushing northwards such to raise the Himalayas is quite a bit of energy involved, and energy usually involves heat; and then you'd probably have a very seismically active area. I might guess that this could influence the glaciers?
I see no case made to even remotely link man to Himalayan glaciers retreating, NOR any case to consider other reasons of why the glaciers could be changing.
Himalyan or other glaciers melting is nothing more than a cheap fact thrown into the MMGW "proof" to convince the uneducated, majority. If there are glaciers that are growing in other areas the IPCC ignores or tries to hide that data - relegating it to local weather anomalies. :mad:
"Eminent Domain" is only for confiscating private property. Most of the blocking of alternative projects is on Federal and State owned lands. Sadly it is many times the same people that are in favor of alternative energy and now HS Rail that scream the loudest when it is in their area.
It is the same old story. Do as I say, not as I do. The people pushing the AGW the most aggressively are some of the biggest offenders. Flying around in your Gulf Stream telling audiences in China and India they have to cut their carbon output is ludicrous.
R & T editors were there and asked about shift to electric/hybrid cars and buyers pocketbooks. They showed a chart that said over 99% of cars and trucks on road today in US were ICE powered only. They showed a prediction that over 91% would be ICE powered in 2015.
So it seems that in a decade from now, non ICE will still be a niche market. I bet that New Orleans will still be levee protected too.
My daily driver just got me to work and back for two weeks on 15 gallons, about $3.75 per day and $75 a month.
At somewhere between 1/2 to 1% of my income for fuel to get to work, why take on a $600 payment per month in the pursuit of a hybrid car versus other ways to save a fraction of one percent of my income that don't require a $25k purchase?
Some of those days were single digit morning starts. How is a Prius on morning warmups from 7 degrees? My car was down 1.5 mpg from summer. 19.9 vs 21.4 mpg.
I wondered that (hybrid on a cold winter day) too, as Toyota is supposed to come out with a cheaper Prius-line.
How much is the power and range of an EV or hybrid reduced when it is 0F to -10F in the morning, and I need heat/defrost in the car, the headlights, the wipers, and probably the radio on. Does the engine on a Prius have to run the whole time? Is an EV cut to half it's fair-weather range?
How long would an EV F-350 be able to plow a foot of snow? :P
"They showed a chart that said over 99% of cars and trucks on road today in US were ICE powered only. They showed a prediction that over 91% would be ICE powered in 2015. "
from <1% now to 9% in 5 years representing a super-high growth rate, in a largely declining market. Any automaker would die for that.
"So it seems that in a decade from now, non ICE will still be a niche market. "
one thing the warmers are absolutely right on: the carbon economy is dying. Sooner or later, we have got to move on to the next energy source. the scarcity of carbon-based fuels will be such that it becomes non-competitive.
when and what the next solution is, I have no idea.
But a car company not exploring that option is no different from the big3 investing all their future on $20/b oil.
Auto makers still suffer from a bad case of w.h.y.d.f.m.l..... (what have you done for me lately). Love that violent crude oil and lack of technological development.
I met a "real" environmentalist once again - they're quite common. I gave him a few bucks and he scurried away. I tried to recall what the weather channel had in store for him and in was good news, a warming trend for a few days.
He grabs trash (aluminum was a big find for a while) and as consumers go... He's really efficient. He tries to fit in but it's kind of tough because his lack of use of infrastructure makes him somewhat odiforous. When you bring up Global Warming he just mutters something completely off-topic which ticks off a lot of people and makes them.... scurry away (NIMBY liberals oddly enough). If you mention Danny Glover or Paris Hilton he thinks there is a piece of clothing or a hotel dumpster with fine leftover food in the offering.
He's a homeless person. No frac jets or Hollywood in his future, just a shopping cart with bags and cardboard. The paparazzi and Al Gore seem.... indifferent.
The good news is he at least has the brains to realize that earthquakes have nothing to do with...... Talking heads, world summits and cameras.
Don't go mistaking "real environmentalists" with the talking head Hollywood types, or the Greenpeace freakniks, or AlGore and his ilk.
The people who are really making a difference are the people who live their lives the right way and try to be good stewards of the planet, without going overboard and being ridiculously fanatic about it.
There are far many millions more of those than there are the "do as I say, not as I do" types.
There are far many millions more of those than there are the "do as I say, not as I do" types.
Very true. But who cares or listens to them, besides us characters on a few sensible web sites? You getting solar panels on your home, to help ease the pain, is not newsworthy or as exciting, as hearing Danny Glover make a total fool of himself on TV.
And one of these days when you find out that your separating your trash and most of your recycle end up in the same landfill. What will you think then?
So unless you’re diligent about sorting all your plastics, then “recycling” that yogurt container may be doing more harm than simply throwing it away.
But not all plastic can be recycled, and only about 6.8 percent of the total plastic used in the U.S. actually goes that route—although the rate is higher with bottles: 37 percent for soft drink and 28 percent for milk and water bottles.
Plastics are chemically categorized by numbers, which are displayed inside the chasing-arrow icon on many plastic containers. The two most common types are plastic #1 (polyethylene terephthalate, or PETE), which is used mainly in soda and water bottles, and #2 (high-density polyethylene, or HDPE), used in things like detergent bottles and milk jugs. Unfortunately, while plastics marked #1 or #2 are generally considered to be recyclable, not all containers with those numbers actually are.
Our green bin is for garden waste. Brown is for pure trash and garbage. Blue recycle. We are not supposed to mix leaves etc with the trash. We quit using a blue container when we watched the trash people dump it in with the trash. They make a separate run for the garden waste. That is the best recycle material, as it creates methane that is used to generate electricity at the landfill. Most I put on my compost pile and just send them branches and weeds.
The Warmers just will not give up. They should tell their story to someone that believes them. I sure do not and the millions of fish in Florida killed by cold temps are more graphic proof that the AGW manipulators are still at it.
Cold inflicted major toll on fish in Florida A deep freeze in the shallow waters of Florida Bay and Everglades took a heavy toll on snook and other native fish.
Everywhere he steered his skiff last week, Pete Frezza saw dead fish.
From Ponce de Leon Bay on the Southwest Coast down across Florida Bay to Lower Matecumbe in the Florida Keys -- day after day, dead fish. Floating in the marina at Flamingo in Everglades National Park alone he counted more than 400 snook and 400 tarpon.
``I was so shook up, I couldn't sleep,'' said Frezza, an ecologist for Audubon of Florida and an expert flats fisherman. ``Millions and millions of pilchards, threadfin herring, mullet. Ladyfish took it really bad. Whitewater Bay is just a graveyard.''
Fish in every part of the state were hammered by this month's record-setting cold snap. The toll in South Florida, a haven for warm-water species, was particularly extensive, too large to even venture a guess at numbers.
Gary, like I said before many times: if you want to "trade" local weather stories about cold snaps and heat waves, we can do that.
But that's just "localized weather" and not "Global Climate."
Peru Amazonian regions going through heat wave 20 January 2010 LivinginPeru.com Isabel Guerra
While several Andean regions in Peru are being hit by unusually strong rains, the jungle is actually suffering the effects of a heat wave, reports Peru21.
According to Senamhi (Peru's Meteorological Service) some towns in San Martin and Ucayali regions are registering maximum temperatures up to 43°C (109.4°F).
Raúl Aranda Contreras, from Senamhi, told Perú.21 that this could be a consequence of global warming, since the usual maximum average temperatures for this time of the year do not surpass 36°C (96.8°F)
“Climate variations are being registered all around the world, but in this case, the maximum temperatures have significantly increased by two and three centigrade degrees,” Aranda pointed out.
Regional authorithies asked the population not to start fires on the fields, since that could cause a forest fire which would be very difficult to control.
OR:
Power use surges as heatwave continues STAFF REPORTER January 19, 2010
Power consumption in Perth surged past 3800 megawatts today, as the city baked in the third straight day of plus-40 degree temperatures.
Peak consumption was 3818MW, below yesterday's record of 3942MW, but easily clear of any previous record, Western Power spokeswoman Marisa Chapman said.
The mercury touched 40.8 degrees in the city today.
The cuts - brought about as usage surged to record levels during two successive 40-degree days on Sunday and Monday - occurred yesterday and continued during the night.
Another Western Power spokeswoman said about 100 affected customers in Woodbridge, West Perth and Belmont had power restored this morning, but 31 households in Mount Claremont were still without power.
The Mount Claremont residents have been without power since 7pm yesterday. They were expected to have power restored about 5pm today once underground cable work was completed.
She was unable to confirm other suburbs which were still experiencing power cuts, but WAtoday has confirmed Bayswater residents were without power for up to four hours early this morning.
The surge was largely due to air-conditioners as the city baked under a second successive day of 40-degree plus temperatures.
The minimum temperature last night was about 27 degrees.
Ahh Jeeze whaddaya expect to hear from these Quislings...??? They gotta keep the propaganda going you know. Remember, "the debate is over"....yaddeyadda. There's a special seat in Dante's 9th circle of Hell for these A**wholes (sic intended). It's all about the $$ as we all know. Remember, since the Big O started his internet czar BS, a veritable motherlode of dissenting opinions mysteriously disappeared from the net: "The Other Side of the Global Warming Debate". Over one hundred rebuttals by credentialed scientists covering dozens of topics that the IPCC said were gospel. Bottom line is this warming/cooling is a natural cycle. How do you explain the cycles of same when man was a Cro-Magnon and nary an automobile nor any kinde of internal combustion engine existed??
Ha ha ha ha ha .... that's a good one. The head of the NCDC, who's reporting this, is a Thomas R. Karl. I then saw his name come up along with the IPCC. You know the guys who had 1) the Himalayan glaciers completely melted by 2035 in their reports and 2) this string of e-mails on their data benot agreeing to the models, lack of warming, and insufficient data on clouds and evaporation http://www.testmy.net/forum/off-topic-discussion/omg-no-global-warming-what-lol/- - 15/
Sorry, there is so much money, power greed, and mistakes involved here for me to trust any of these bums. I would need to hear how all the data been collected for many years, see the unadjusted data, and then have scientists prove to me they know the warming is MM and not mostly natural before I'll believe anything they say.
Either that or the ocean's going to have to start rising some noticeable amount, which it hasn't by my measurements at the beach over 40 years, or I'm not going to see snow anytime between Nov - Apr to believe their is much warming.
Remember scientists in the Middle-Ages had proof that the world was flat and the sun orbited the Earf! and if you disagreed you were locked up in a tower. Read the history of Copernicus. Copernicus’s heliocentric system was considered implausible by the vast majority of his contemporaries, and by most astronomers and natural philosophers until the middle of the seventeenth century.
Yeah, are we just supposed to take their word for it? Not me. Figures don't lie...but liars sure do figure.
I would bet that someone who wanted the 2000s to be the coolest on record could take the same raw data and make it happen by using their own weighting, correcting, and oops factors. You are dealing with so much data and such small differences that it would not take much.
It is kind of like Road and Track comparisons where any BMW is involved. They throw in the (Got to have it) factor and it always gives BMW the win.
Just because some of those AlGore butt-kissers were "stretching the truth" to try and get their money does not mean that every "warmest THIS or warmest THAT" story that comes out is bogus.
The GW deniers might want to believe that, and they probably will, because it makes their argument better.
But just because it makes your argument better and you WANT to believe it does not make it true. ( See Bush, G.W. and WMD ) The warming IS happening.
does not mean that every "warmest THIS or warmest THAT" story that comes out is bogus.
More than likely. When it is many of the same people being paid to push the agenda. Dead fish killed by extreme cold, as verified by many sources is evidence that is harder to refute, than a temperature gauge in a questionable region. The article is talking about less than ONE DEGREE warmer. So how little would you have to fudge the raw data to get what you wanted? And that is exactly what the Climategate fiasco is all about. Making the data say what the UN bunch along with those paid to promote AGW want. So you can believe it is getting warmer if you like. Those people covered in snow and record cold are not buying the myth. We are enjoying a little rain for a change. If this is GW we can sure use it. Keep driving those BIG SUVs.
The timetable to reach a global deal to tackle climate change lay in tatters on Wednesday after the UN waived the first deadline of the process laid out at last month’s fractious Copenhagen summit.
Nations agreed then to declare their emissions reduction targets by the end of this month. Developed countries would state their intended cuts by 2020: developing countries would outline how they would curb emissions growth.
But Yvo de Boer, the UN’s senior climate change official, admitted that the deadline had in effect been shelved.
“By [the end of] January, countries will have the opportunity to . . . indicate if they want to be associated with the accord,” he said. “[Governments could] indicate by the deadline, or they can also indicate later.”
“You could describe it as a soft deadline,” Mr de Boer said. “There is nothing deadly about it. If [countries] fail to meet it, they can still associate with the Copenhagen accord after.”
Countries pushing for a new legally binding treaty on climate change will be disappointed, as The waiving of the deadline sets a bad precedent for efforts to finalise a deal this year. The next scheduled meeting is not until late May, in Germany, with another in late November, in Mexico but many officials say more will be needed.
India, China, Brazil and South Africa, who meet this weekend, are likely to insist on deep cuts from developed nations but offer few concessions of their own.
The result of Tuesday’s Massachusetts senatorial election, which took away Barack Obama’s super-majority in the Senate, is likely to push climate change further down the US agenda. It was the latest in a series of setbacks that have caused efforts to push a cap-and-trade bill through the Senate to grind to a halt, making it harder for the White House to participate meaningfully in global climate negotiations.
In the overall picture, a 1 degree average increase is a huge jump. It means that many places had to be considerably over their averages to jump the overall average up.
Gary says, "Those people covered in snow and record cold are not buying the myth. We are enjoying a little rain for a change."
And those people you keep ignoring, the ones with the heat waves? What of them? Are they "buying" anything?
How much of that is El Nino ...something which I am sure predates manmade pollution.
We've been much warmer than normal for weeks here...but about a month ago had a good stretch of well below normal temps. I bet we'll be below normal at some period next month too. That's how this pattern works.
You have touched on the bottom line. The Warmers do not take normal changes into account. And they act like the Sun is not involved. How many reports talk about the very low sunspot activity. Any report that does not fit the AGW agenda is dismissed by those pushing the same. If we lived in a World where science was separated from politics I would be more inclined to believe some of the information from those claiming man is a major cause of CC. However the truth is the Scientists were brought in by politicians to prove the theory, not find the truth. It is sad that science is so corrupted we cannot believe any of them. At least from what I am seeing every scientist is on take from some group with an agenda. Starting with the UN, Federal agencies and the Universities. Toss in the Oil companies and you have a real recipe for deception.
Gary says, "It is cheaper to cool your home than heat it."
Not in Arizona, and any other dry desert location. My winter electric bills are far lower than my summer bills. Same in central Texas, and in Southern California, all the places I have lived. Maybe that only applies to the "Winter Belt" states.
Gary says, "More of the World is experiencing record cold than record heat."
Is that just intuition, or do you know that to be true for a fact? And who told you? Can you trust enough weather reports to say that with certainty? You don't trust the reports about heat waves, but you trust the ones about cold snaps?
You don't trust the reports about heat waves, but you trust the ones about cold snaps?
Only when I do not see a hidden agenda. When a weatherman in Houston says this is the worst snowstorm in our records. I have a tendency to believe him. If he claimed it was part of a bigger picture that man is causing it to snow, I would be skeptical. When weather people all around the globe are reporting extreme cold and snow I question a report that says we are warmer overall. Especially when it comes from people that are avowed warmers.
You are not alone in believing everything the government tells you. I have always wanted more than a little proof on controversial issues.
Why do these guys all wait until they are caught to admit their errors:
UN climate chief admits mistake on Himalayan glaciers warning
The UN’s top climate change body has issued an unprecedented apology over its flawed prediction that Himalayan glaciers were likely to disappear by 2035.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said yesterday that the prediction in its landmark 2007 report was “poorly substantiated” and resulted from a lapse in standards. “In drafting the paragraph in question the clear and well-established standards of evidence, required by the IPCC procedures, were not applied properly,” the panel said. “The chair, vice-chair and co-chairs of the IPCC regret the poor application of IPCC procedures in this instance.”
PS It costs me about 1/3rd as much to cool my home compared to heating it in the winter here in San Diego. I did get an Obama wood stove insert and have cut back on propane. We have plenty of down trees in our neighborhood to burn. So the only cost is my time and labor splitting wood. Going through about a wheelbarrow load a day keeping warm in this record cold. :shades:
You don't REALLY think I am (insert derogatory term of your choice here) enough to believe "everything the guvmint tells me" do you?
I spent 6 years as a Marine. I know how full of bullcrap the guvmint is.
But - if you assume that "everything" is wrong with the guvmint and all guvmint agencies, then you are just as much a (insert derogatory term of your choice here) as the person who might believe everything the guvmint says.
I don't see weather reporting agencies as liars. They, more than just about any guvmint agency, can be easily called out for lies. I mean, even people with IQs of 75 can find out what yesterday's temperature was. So it's not like the weather agencies are reporting "some sort of secret data that only THEY possess."
The weather reporting agencies are probably legit in most cases. It is the data given for studies that is in question. Though many reporting stations have been found that are not giving an honest picture of the weather in the area. Climategate is all about taking legitimate data and making it say what the scientist wants it to say.
There are not many places in the country that require AC. Phoenix and surrounding area happens to be one of them. So why was Phoenix built there? Why wasn't it left desert and the city built somewhere else? And if it's so hot there, why do so many businesses and people relocate there?
Is it too hot or too cold in this country. Let's see body temperature is 98.6F. If you shutoff the heat in the northern half of this country - no oil, natural gas, wood, or coal, what percentage of the people would die during the winter? Now let's see if you shutoff the AC in the country, yes you would have some miserable people, and maybe a few here and there with health problems would succumb; but overall the cold is much more of a problem than the heat.
kernick says, "There are not many places in the country that require AC."
Maybe East of the Mississippi that is true, and North of the Mason Dixon line. But Most southern states use it, and the southwest for sure, and all of Texas.
And no, it's not too hot or too cold except in the extreme areas. Pretty moderate.
But we don't want more drought, and more heat waves, nor do we want extreme cold to move farther south.
Somewhere a happy medium. Too bad we can't export San Diego weather or Hawaii weather to the whole country.
As for Phoenix - so many people and business move here for the awesomeness of the 5 months which do NOT require A/C. The benefits of 300 days of sun and 75 degree weather much of the Fall and Winter and early Spring outweigh the negative effects of the 118 degree days.
Take a Christmas trip to a Phoenix resort and you'll want to live here too.
Yes I've stayed in Chandler for a week or so a few times in the winter. My co-workers and I thought it was great to go swimming in Jan. while all the AZ natives thought it was crazy.
But my question about heat and AC was "require" not "use". There's a difference. By require I mean do you die without it. In the areas you mention - East of the Mississippi and north of the Mason Dixon line heat is required, not an inconvenience or just that you'll be miserable. I'm talking required - frozen dead. There are very few spots on the Earth that you could not live w/o AC - such as Death Valley. AC has only been prevalent for the last few decades, and people have lived w/o AC in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, India, and the mining towns of AZ in years past w/o AC.
Comments
Did you check to see if those are Imperial miles per gallon?
right on. It's the Kennedy's blocking a windfarm in their backyard while "promoting" high energy taxes, Gore's consuming many times of the energy than an average america while telling the americans to conserve; it is Rangle's imposing taxes on everybody else while evading taxes themselves. It is UAW insisting Cadillac taxes on other people's healthcare plan but theirs, etc.
we have a corrupt political system where politicians are bought by special interests to dive up your money and my money for their friends.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.
Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.
I'm sorry, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922 as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post.
Once the EU takes over you can complain about the folks in Brussels that are puppets of the special interest lobbies. (like the oil companies, the car companies, the drug firms, environmentalists, farmers, old farts/AARP, and so on and so on).
Here you go, your next vehicle. It gets 30 MPG.
http://www.mahindrana.com/
“Too many people spend money, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like.” adaptation of a Will Smith quote
my old BMW 330 had about 200 horses, and it drove as strong as my G37 (>300 horses).
and I drove some 325 too (less than 200hp) and they were not that much difference from the 330 for daily driving.
I think 200 easily accessible hp is all you need 99% of the time. Most people would have no clue how to handle more than that anyway.
It would save the consumers and the automakers $billions if the EU and EPA could come up with some kind of standards for emissions. Then tell CARB to stuff it.
Ok, good work. Then my only gripe is where are you going to park it?
The Arctic Oscillation stories the last couple of days have been interesting (even if it's just "weather" and not "global warming"). (NPR),
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
The Toyota UK site shows the Land Cruiser LC3 with the 3.0 D-4D engine as giving 34.87 mpg Imperial on the EU Combined Cycle. i.e. an approximation of "overall" economy. By my rough math that turns out circa 29mpg USA. 42.2mpg might well be the equivalent to a "highway" figure for EU. EU official figures can be up to 8% optimistic vs real-world and the manufacturers grudgingly admit it but, in their defence, point out that they have to run the standard EU sequence tests even though they are flawed.
Sorry to be picky.
Just done a 250 mile round-trip in my '06 Volvo S60 D5. Probably 80% 70mph+ cruising, (with a little cut & thrust),, 10% urban and 10% city. Trip computer shows me 42.8mpg (Imperial), for the trip but that's generally optimistic so I'd guesstimate around 40mpg based on past history. I'm not unhappy with that for a 185bhp diesel mated to a 6-spd "Geartronic" auto 'box and excellent comfort etc.
Global Warming (questionable).... Sustainable Clean Energy (the real worry)
Seriously.......
p.s. I was wondering who was going to be the first idiot that blamed the Haiti Earthquake on Global Warming and it was (opening the envelope)...
HOLLYWOOD! Did you really think it would be anybody else?
starve the warmers for a month and they would gladly kill a bear cub for meat, however cut she is.
I would have happily written Gore a check if he practices at least 1% of what he preaches.
World misled over Himalayan glacier meltdown (Times Online)
You do know this looks like a "science team" and I do use that term loosely, that has a goal to prove global warming - that is ready to embrace any sort of proof, no matter how loosely proven or supported.
I have no belief in you're prior posting that the Arctic is 10F warmer this year, despite the Arctic air patterns having changed. I do not trust that the measurements were done in the same places, at the same time of day, with the same instruments, or that the data wasn't otherwise wrongly comparing different months.
I think climatologists are quickly losing their credibility with the general public, besides people like us who are slightly better educated on the topic.
"Cogley said: "The reality, that the glaciers are wasting away, is bad enough. But they are not wasting away at the rate suggested by this speculative remark and the IPCC report."
Cogley seems to one of those good guys who reports on what he thinks the science to date actually says, not what the media cherry picks and runs with. Er, like this tidbit:
"Glaciers are often described as "sensitive indicators of climatic change". This cliché misses an important point: glaciers are also independent indicators of climatic change. Mass-balance measurements assume nothing about the temperature at weather stations, so glaciers give us a better-rounded and more secure picture of how the natural world is coping with the changes being forced upon it."
Glaciers in the balance (environmentalresearchweb.org)
Another interesting read of his (and it's readable)
Earth to Exxon: “Be a Mammal, not a Dinosaur”
Climate change is real no doubt about that. Blaming it on humans is a scam. Even IF humans are a cause. Who wants to be first to sacrifice themselves for the planet. Maybe jump into an active volcano to satisfy the gods. Throwing Danny Glover and Al Gore into a volcano would be a good start. Both have very large carbon footprints.
Being an "environmentalist" but then not allowing progress in alternative energy is one of the stupidest things ever, also.
Another fact (geological) - the Himalayan mountains were formed by the Indian subcontinent pushing into Asia. The Himalayan mountains are still increasing in height, even though erosion would typically lower mountains each year. Being an engineer but not a full-blown research scientist, I do know that India pushing northwards such to raise the Himalayas is quite a bit of energy involved, and energy usually involves heat; and then you'd probably have a very seismically active area. I might guess that this could influence the glaciers?
I see no case made to even remotely link man to Himalayan glaciers retreating, NOR any case to consider other reasons of why the glaciers could be changing.
Himalyan or other glaciers melting is nothing more than a cheap fact thrown into the MMGW "proof" to convince the uneducated, majority. If there are glaciers that are growing in other areas the IPCC ignores or tries to hide that data - relegating it to local weather anomalies. :mad:
It is the same old story. Do as I say, not as I do. The people pushing the AGW the most aggressively are some of the biggest offenders. Flying around in your Gulf Stream telling audiences in China and India they have to cut their carbon output is ludicrous.
just think about greenpeace's opposition to co2 emission and their stupid resistance to nuclear energy that happens to emit very little co2.
those people are not capable of thinking rationally and over anything longer than 12 hours.
They showed a chart that said over 99% of cars and trucks on road today in US were ICE powered only.
They showed a prediction that over 91% would be ICE powered in 2015.
So it seems that in a decade from now, non ICE will still be a niche market. I bet that New Orleans will still be levee protected too.
My daily driver just got me to work and back for two weeks on 15 gallons, about $3.75 per day and $75 a month.
At somewhere between 1/2 to 1% of my income for fuel to get to work, why take on a $600 payment per month in the pursuit of a hybrid car versus other ways to save a fraction of one percent of my income that don't require a $25k purchase?
Some of those days were single digit morning starts. How is a Prius on morning warmups from 7 degrees? My car was down 1.5 mpg from summer. 19.9 vs 21.4 mpg.
How much is the power and range of an EV or hybrid reduced when it is 0F to -10F in the morning, and I need heat/defrost in the car, the headlights, the wipers, and probably the radio on. Does the engine on a Prius have to run the whole time? Is an EV cut to half it's fair-weather range?
How long would an EV F-350 be able to plow a foot of snow? :P
from <1% now to 9% in 5 years representing a super-high growth rate, in a largely declining market. Any automaker would die for that.
"So it seems that in a decade from now, non ICE will still be a niche market. "
one thing the warmers are absolutely right on: the carbon economy is dying. Sooner or later, we have got to move on to the next energy source. the scarcity of carbon-based fuels will be such that it becomes non-competitive.
when and what the next solution is, I have no idea.
But a car company not exploring that option is no different from the big3 investing all their future on $20/b oil.
It sure looks like the oceans covered much of the continents in years past.
http://www.bbm.me.uk/portsdown/PH_065_Palaeo.htm
Auto makers still suffer from a bad case of w.h.y.d.f.m.l..... (what have you done for me lately). Love that violent crude oil and lack of technological development.
I met a "real" environmentalist once again - they're quite common. I gave him a few bucks and he scurried away. I tried to recall what the weather channel had in store for him and in was good news, a warming trend for a few days.
He grabs trash (aluminum was a big find for a while) and as consumers go... He's really efficient. He tries to fit in but it's kind of tough because his lack of use of infrastructure makes him somewhat odiforous. When you bring up Global Warming he just mutters something completely off-topic which ticks off a lot of people and makes them.... scurry away (NIMBY liberals oddly enough). If you mention Danny Glover or Paris Hilton he thinks there is a piece of clothing or a hotel dumpster with fine leftover food in the offering.
He's a homeless person. No frac jets or Hollywood in his future, just a shopping cart with bags and cardboard. The paparazzi and Al Gore seem.... indifferent.
The good news is he at least has the brains to realize that earthquakes have nothing to do with...... Talking heads, world summits and cameras.
The people who are really making a difference are the people who live their lives the right way and try to be good stewards of the planet, without going overboard and being ridiculously fanatic about it.
There are far many millions more of those than there are the "do as I say, not as I do" types.
Very true. But who cares or listens to them, besides us characters on a few sensible web sites? You getting solar panels on your home, to help ease the pain, is not newsworthy or as exciting, as hearing Danny Glover make a total fool of himself on TV.
And one of these days when you find out that your separating your trash and most of your recycle end up in the same landfill. What will you think then?
So unless you’re diligent about sorting all your plastics, then “recycling” that yogurt container may be doing more harm than simply throwing it away.
But not all plastic can be recycled, and only about 6.8 percent of the total plastic used in the U.S. actually goes that route—although the rate is higher with bottles: 37 percent for soft drink and 28 percent for milk and water bottles.
Plastics are chemically categorized by numbers, which are displayed inside the chasing-arrow icon on many plastic containers. The two most common types are plastic #1 (polyethylene terephthalate, or PETE), which is used mainly in soda and water bottles, and #2 (high-density polyethylene, or HDPE), used in things like detergent bottles and milk jugs. Unfortunately, while plastics marked #1 or #2 are generally considered to be recyclable, not all containers with those numbers actually are.
http://discovermagazine.com/2009/jul-aug/06-when-recycling-is-bad-for-the-enviro- nment
What happens to it at the recycle center is not my business. My part is done when it hits the bottom of whatever bin it goes into.
Whatever the City of Phoenix recycles is what gets recycled.
2000s Warmest Decade on Record
Cold inflicted major toll on fish in Florida
A deep freeze in the shallow waters of Florida Bay and Everglades took a heavy toll on snook and other native fish.
Everywhere he steered his skiff last week, Pete Frezza saw dead fish.
From Ponce de Leon Bay on the Southwest Coast down across Florida Bay to Lower Matecumbe in the Florida Keys -- day after day, dead fish. Floating in the marina at Flamingo in Everglades National Park alone he counted more than 400 snook and 400 tarpon.
``I was so shook up, I couldn't sleep,'' said Frezza, an ecologist for Audubon of Florida and an expert flats fisherman. ``Millions and millions of pilchards, threadfin herring, mullet. Ladyfish took it really bad. Whitewater Bay is just a graveyard.''
Fish in every part of the state were hammered by this month's record-setting cold snap. The toll in South Florida, a haven for warm-water species, was particularly extensive, too large to even venture a guess at numbers.
http://www.miamiherald.com/573/story/1432724.html
I'm not going to stop driving my SUV until it gets at least as warm as Hawaii year round in San Diego. It has a good ways to go.
But that's just "localized weather" and not "Global Climate."
Peru Amazonian regions going through heat wave
20 January 2010
LivinginPeru.com
Isabel Guerra
While several Andean regions in Peru are being hit by unusually strong rains, the jungle is actually suffering the effects of a heat wave, reports Peru21.
According to Senamhi (Peru's Meteorological Service) some towns in San Martin and Ucayali regions are registering maximum temperatures up to 43°C (109.4°F).
Raúl Aranda Contreras, from Senamhi, told Perú.21 that this could be a consequence of global warming, since the usual maximum average temperatures for this time of the year do not surpass 36°C (96.8°F)
“Climate variations are being registered all around the world, but in this case, the maximum temperatures have significantly increased by two and three centigrade degrees,” Aranda pointed out.
Regional authorithies asked the population not to start fires on the fields, since that could cause a forest fire which would be very difficult to control.
OR:
Power use surges as heatwave continues
STAFF REPORTER
January 19, 2010
Power consumption in Perth surged past 3800 megawatts today, as the city baked in the third straight day of plus-40 degree temperatures.
Peak consumption was 3818MW, below yesterday's record of 3942MW, but easily clear of any previous record, Western Power spokeswoman Marisa Chapman said.
The mercury touched 40.8 degrees in the city today.
The cuts - brought about as usage surged to record levels during two successive 40-degree days on Sunday and Monday - occurred yesterday and continued during the night.
Another Western Power spokeswoman said about 100 affected customers in Woodbridge, West Perth and Belmont had power restored this morning, but 31 households in Mount Claremont were still without power.
The Mount Claremont residents have been without power since 7pm yesterday. They were expected to have power restored about 5pm today once underground cable work was completed.
She was unable to confirm other suburbs which were still experiencing power cuts, but WAtoday has confirmed Bayswater residents were without power for up to four hours early this morning.
The surge was largely due to air-conditioners as the city baked under a second successive day of 40-degree plus temperatures.
The minimum temperature last night was about 27 degrees.
There's a special seat in Dante's 9th circle of Hell for these A**wholes (sic intended).
It's all about the $$ as we all know.
Remember, since the Big O started his internet czar BS, a veritable motherlode of dissenting opinions mysteriously disappeared from the net: "The Other Side of the Global Warming Debate". Over one hundred rebuttals by credentialed scientists covering dozens of topics that the IPCC said were gospel.
Bottom line is this warming/cooling is a natural cycle. How do you explain the cycles of same when man was a Cro-Magnon and nary an automobile nor any kinde of internal combustion engine existed??
Sorry, there is so much money, power greed, and mistakes involved here for me to trust any of these bums. I would need to hear how all the data been collected for many years, see the unadjusted data, and then have scientists prove to me they know the warming is MM and not mostly natural before I'll believe anything they say.
Either that or the ocean's going to have to start rising some noticeable amount, which it hasn't by my measurements at the beach over 40 years, or I'm not going to see snow anytime between Nov - Apr to believe their is much warming.
Remember scientists in the Middle-Ages had proof that the world was flat and the sun orbited the Earf! and if you disagreed you were locked up in a tower. Read the history of Copernicus. Copernicus’s heliocentric system was considered implausible by the vast majority of his contemporaries, and by most astronomers and natural philosophers until the middle of the seventeenth century.
Huh? Imagine that - the majority of scientists had their head up ... I bet that could happen today?
http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/96feb/copernicus.html
I would bet that someone who wanted the 2000s to be the coolest on record could take the same raw data and make it happen by using their own weighting, correcting, and oops factors. You are dealing with so much data and such small differences that it would not take much.
It is kind of like Road and Track comparisons where any BMW is involved. They throw in the (Got to have it) factor and it always gives BMW the win.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Just because some of those AlGore butt-kissers were "stretching the truth" to try and get their money does not mean that every "warmest THIS or warmest THAT" story that comes out is bogus.
The GW deniers might want to believe that, and they probably will, because it makes their argument better.
But just because it makes your argument better and you WANT to believe it does not make it true. ( See Bush, G.W. and WMD )
The warming IS happening.
The Cause? Still up for debate.
More than likely. When it is many of the same people being paid to push the agenda. Dead fish killed by extreme cold, as verified by many sources is evidence that is harder to refute, than a temperature gauge in a questionable region. The article is talking about less than ONE DEGREE warmer. So how little would you have to fudge the raw data to get what you wanted? And that is exactly what the Climategate fiasco is all about. Making the data say what the UN bunch along with those paid to promote AGW want. So you can believe it is getting warmer if you like. Those people covered in snow and record cold are not buying the myth. We are enjoying a little rain for a change. If this is GW we can sure use it. Keep driving those BIG SUVs.
The timetable to reach a global deal to tackle climate change lay in tatters on Wednesday after the UN waived the first deadline of the process laid out at last month’s fractious Copenhagen summit.
Nations agreed then to declare their emissions reduction targets by the end of this month. Developed countries would state their intended cuts by 2020: developing countries would outline how they would curb emissions growth.
But Yvo de Boer, the UN’s senior climate change official, admitted that the deadline had in effect been shelved.
“By [the end of] January, countries will have the opportunity to . . . indicate if they want to be associated with the accord,” he said. “[Governments could] indicate by the deadline, or they can also indicate later.”
“You could describe it as a soft deadline,” Mr de Boer said. “There is nothing deadly about it. If [countries] fail to meet it, they can still associate with the Copenhagen accord after.”
Countries pushing for a new legally binding treaty on climate change will be disappointed, as The waiving of the deadline sets a bad precedent for efforts to finalise a deal this year. The next scheduled meeting is not until late May, in Germany, with another in late November, in Mexico but many officials say more will be needed.
India, China, Brazil and South Africa, who meet this weekend, are likely to insist on deep cuts from developed nations but offer few concessions of their own.
The result of Tuesday’s Massachusetts senatorial election, which took away Barack Obama’s super-majority in the Senate, is likely to push climate change further down the US agenda. It was the latest in a series of setbacks that have caused efforts to push a cap-and-trade bill through the Senate to grind to a halt, making it harder for the White House to participate meaningfully in global climate negotiations.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/87479ee2-0600-11df-8c97-00144feabdc0.html
Gary says, "Those people covered in snow and record cold are not buying the myth. We are enjoying a little rain for a change."
And those people you keep ignoring, the ones with the heat waves? What of them? Are they "buying" anything?
We've been much warmer than normal for weeks here...but about a month ago had a good stretch of well below normal temps. I bet we'll be below normal at some period next month too. That's how this pattern works.
It is cheaper to cool your home than heat it. More of the World is experiencing record cold than record heat.
Not in Arizona, and any other dry desert location.
My winter electric bills are far lower than my summer bills.
Same in central Texas, and in Southern California, all the places I have lived.
Maybe that only applies to the "Winter Belt" states.
Gary says, "More of the World is experiencing record cold than record heat."
Is that just intuition, or do you know that to be true for a fact?
And who told you?
Can you trust enough weather reports to say that with certainty?
You don't trust the reports about heat waves, but you trust the ones about cold snaps?
Only when I do not see a hidden agenda. When a weatherman in Houston says this is the worst snowstorm in our records. I have a tendency to believe him. If he claimed it was part of a bigger picture that man is causing it to snow, I would be skeptical. When weather people all around the globe are reporting extreme cold and snow I question a report that says we are warmer overall. Especially when it comes from people that are avowed warmers.
You are not alone in believing everything the government tells you. I have always wanted more than a little proof on controversial issues.
Why do these guys all wait until they are caught to admit their errors:
UN climate chief admits mistake on Himalayan glaciers warning
The UN’s top climate change body has issued an unprecedented apology over its flawed prediction that Himalayan glaciers were likely to disappear by 2035.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said yesterday that the prediction in its landmark 2007 report was “poorly substantiated” and resulted from a lapse in standards. “In drafting the paragraph in question the clear and well-established standards of evidence, required by the IPCC procedures, were not applied properly,” the panel said. “The chair, vice-chair and co-chairs of the IPCC regret the poor application of IPCC procedures in this instance.”
PS
It costs me about 1/3rd as much to cool my home compared to heating it in the winter here in San Diego. I did get an Obama wood stove insert and have cut back on propane. We have plenty of down trees in our neighborhood to burn. So the only cost is my time and labor splitting wood. Going through about a wheelbarrow load a day keeping warm in this record cold. :shades:
You don't REALLY think I am (insert derogatory term of your choice here) enough to believe "everything the guvmint tells me" do you?
I spent 6 years as a Marine. I know how full of bullcrap the guvmint is.
But - if you assume that "everything" is wrong with the guvmint and all guvmint agencies, then you are just as much a (insert derogatory term of your choice here) as the person who might believe everything the guvmint says.
I don't see weather reporting agencies as liars. They, more than just about any guvmint agency, can be easily called out for lies. I mean, even people with IQs of 75 can find out what yesterday's temperature was. So it's not like the weather agencies are reporting "some sort of secret data that only THEY possess."
And if it's so hot there, why do so many businesses and people relocate there?
Is it too hot or too cold in this country. Let's see body temperature is 98.6F. If you shutoff the heat in the northern half of this country - no oil, natural gas, wood, or coal, what percentage of the people would die during the winter? Now let's see if you shutoff the AC in the country, yes you would have some miserable people, and maybe a few here and there with health problems would succumb; but overall the cold is much more of a problem than the heat.
Maybe East of the Mississippi that is true, and North of the Mason Dixon line. But Most southern states use it, and the southwest for sure, and all of Texas.
And no, it's not too hot or too cold except in the extreme areas. Pretty moderate.
But we don't want more drought, and more heat waves, nor do we want extreme cold to move farther south.
Somewhere a happy medium. Too bad we can't export San Diego weather or Hawaii weather to the whole country.
As for Phoenix - so many people and business move here for the awesomeness of the 5 months which do NOT require A/C. The benefits of 300 days of sun and 75 degree weather much of the Fall and Winter and early Spring outweigh the negative effects of the 118 degree days.
Take a Christmas trip to a Phoenix resort and you'll want to live here too.
But my question about heat and AC was "require" not "use". There's a difference. By require I mean do you die without it. In the areas you mention - East of the Mississippi and north of the Mason Dixon line heat is required, not an inconvenience or just that you'll be miserable. I'm talking required - frozen dead. There are very few spots on the Earth that you could not live w/o AC - such as Death Valley. AC has only been prevalent for the last few decades, and people have lived w/o AC in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, India, and the mining towns of AZ in years past w/o AC.