but if you are going to not allow that you have to allow the construction of some sort of power supply to replace the fossil fueled power plants, you can't say get rid of them and then say that none of the substitutes can be built either, something has to give somewhere at least until that elusive "perfect" energy source can be found.
Yes that is my main problem with the environmentalist movement most of the time. That and the fact that everytime we as a nation enact an environmental law and reach a certain standard, that is not good enough. How many times have we passed laws to limit pollution, and when we reach that level, the cry goes out that that's too dirty. Look how clean the emissions from a new car are, and yet you have extremists saying that's too much.
Well as a chemical engineer, let me pass this along to you - there is no perfect chemical reaction or energy source such that you don't get something out of it that you'll probably consider a pollutant. The only way humanity can not pollute or otherwise change the Earth, is for the population to go into a coma. For even putting up solar panels or windmills will be a major environmental change. The only way not to change the environmental is not to do anything. Since we are physical beings that is definitely not a viable choice.
And if people will watch some of the science shows that are all over TV, you'll realize that we're not going to hurt the Earth. The Earth has been through far more than man can do to it, and life is far more resilient than most people understand.
Agreed, and once the "Greenies" fully acknowledge those facts, then we can get down to the business of discussing "degree". Said another way, I think most sane folks would agree that power derived from open-pit strip mining for high sulfur coal that is then burned without any remediation of the combustion byproducts is far worse for the environment than a windmill farm or a tidal electric generation complex.
Huh? what kind of nonsense is that? Of course the sun is the primary determinant of the temperature of any planet in this solar system. There is some radiation from other stars of course but that is trivial because of the distances involved.
The temperature of the vast majority of space is a few fractions above absolute zero = -459F. The sun through all its forms of radiant energy - UV, visible light, IR, gamma provides the energy to keep the Earth at an average of 59F. So the sun has provided the energy to keep the Earth 518F above what it otherwise would be today. Even though the Earth's core was and is molten today it wouldn't be today after 4 billion years, without the sun to keep it warm. That's similar to whether you keep a big-meatball under a warming lamp, or stuck it in a very, very cold freezer.
So with the sun being the only real energy source in the solar system, and providing that sort of energy to keep the Earth 518F warmer than it otherwise would be, I don't see how someone can possibly think the sun is not the MAIN factor in climate.
And for anyone confused about cloud cover - I thought that was fairly well understood. I mean everytime I hear about hurricane formation, it's well understood that the sun evaporates water from the ocean and this process starts the air swirling. Cloud formation and thus water in the air is a result of the sun's radiation evaporating water from the oceans, seas, and lakes. And the amount of water that can be held in the air - relative humidity - is based on temperature, which again goes back to the only significant energy source in the solar system - the Sun.
Another interesting tidbit that compliments what you've just written is that both Russian and American observations of Mars over the last several decades show that it too is experiencing a warming trend that mimics Earth's warming trend. Is that factoid definitive in and of itself that the Sun is the major cause of our climactic changes? No. Is it a compelling piece of the puzzle? I certainly think so.
Says the earth has actually cooled since 1998. That goes along with the ocean monitoring that claims NO rise in ocean temperatures since they started monitoring in 1998. If the earth has had a slight downturn in the temperature, logic would tell us that GHG has little to do with climate change. We have NOT produced less GHG over the last 10 years. In fact it has risen measurably. The talking heads would like to have it both ways. I don't see how they can....
The World Meteorological Organization's secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer.
This would mean global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory.
La Nina and El Nino are two great natural Pacific currents whose effects are so huge they resonate round the world.
El Nino warms the planet when it happens; La Nina cools it. This year, the Pacific is in the grip of a powerful La Nina.
So where does man and his puny contribution fit into this picture? IF El Nino or La Nina can turn in a year or two all that mankind contributes to the climate "What is Man"?
You can see that Al Gore with his $100 million scammed from GW is a piker. There is $BILLIONS$ at stake. It is similar to the oil for food that made several leaders of the UN very wealthy. I guess you can say that GW is the 21st century's "oil for food" rip-off.
"The World Bank's foray into climate change has gone down like a lead balloon," Friends of the Earth campaigner Tom Picken said at the end of a major climate change conference in the Thai capital.
"Many countries and civil society have expressed outrage at the World Bank's attempted hijacking of real efforts to fund climate change efforts," he said.
Before they agree to any sort of restrictions on emissions of the greenhouse gases fuelling global warming, poor countries want firm commitments of billions of dollars in aid from their rich counterparts.
Well evidently these types of things are legal, as you do not see many UN, World Bank, or even former vice- presidents called on the carpet, much less prosecuted. They sound like exclusive membership money clubs. Makes me wonder why the former administration guy Paul Wolfowitz (registered democrat) got ousted as President of the World Bank.
I agree with you, there is no perfect energy source (thus the ""'s around the perfect). I had people telling me that fossil fueled cars would be banned in a year or two, and people who drove them would be hated etc. The environmentalist seem to want nothing less than reverting us back to a pre-industrial state, which isn't going to happen. I think we have to do our best to reduce the pollution that humanity is producing (and to larsb that mean over the entire world, not just in the US), but I don't think we will be eliminating them altogether any time soon. As for GW I agree that the Sun is the main factor in the heating or cooling of the planet, there may (emphasis on the may) be some slight effect from humanity, but I doubt that this is as great as the scare tactics are making it out to be. In any case economic pressures will force us to reduce our energy use at the moment. Scott
..."Well as a chemical engineer, let me pass this along to you - there is no perfect chemical reaction or energy source such that you don't get something out of it that you'll probably consider a pollutant. The only way humanity can not pollute or otherwise change the Earth, is for the population to go into a coma. For even putting up solar panels or windmills will be a major environmental change. The only way not to change the environmental is not to do anything. Since we are physical beings that is definitely not a viable choice."...
Perhaps that is the real problem . Folks that either are innoculated with the "holy grail" narcotic or syndrome, walking around looking for "perfection"
Don't try to confuse the true believer kool-aid drinkers with the facts. They will call you a racist, sexist, homophobe bigot, or maybe even a Republican (Gasp!).
I personally like the prediction by CNN's owner Ted Turner (you know, Jane Fonda's ex). Good old Ted says that in 20 years the earth will be 8 degrees hotter, all the crops will be dead and the few humans who don't die will be cannibals.
I don't know about you but I'm going out in my SUV and make a list of my tastiest looking neighbors.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
I don't know about you but I'm going out in my SUV and make a list of my tastiest looking neighbors
Sounds like the futuristic movie, "Logan's Run" oldfarmer. In the future the earths atmoshphere and oceans are polluted from wars and giant SUV's. People must live in an underground city. The only way to survive is to eat those fellow citizens when they reach their 30th birthday. This is done via the carasoel. The "has beens" walk into this giant zero gravity chamber. They start spinning around, and start exploding like popcorn as the younger people stand around cheering. They don't realize that the prime rib they were feasting on at dinner was their neighbor.
> The "has beens" walk into this giant zero gravity chamber. They start spinning around, and start exploding like popcorn as the younger people stand around cheering. They don't realize that the prime rib they were feasting on at dinner was their neighbor.
"...Sounds like the futuristic movie, "Logan's Run"..."
I liked that movie where the old codgers got popped. Of course I was under 30 back then. I never realized that they were cooking up the old folks though, I just thought they were bumping them off to reduce their footprint. (Hey, let's not give these young pups any ideas).
I think Ted Turner might have been hitting the bottle while watching Logan's Run before that interview or maybe even "Soylent Green".
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Even though the Earth's core was and is molten today it wouldn't be today after 4 billion years, without the sun to keep it warm.
That's not quite right. The Earth's core is heated primarily by the decay of radioactive isotopes and by friction under the action of tidal forces. Solar radiation keeps the surface warm but has a negligible effect on the core's rate of cooling.
I didn't know that. It does make sense. I wonder how much the molten lava flowing to the surface warms the earth. I would say molten rock flowing into the ocean has some affect.
I do know that after you get through about 1400 feet of permafrost in the Arctic the earth is warm. The oil comes out of the ground at about 180 degrees F. Not sure how much it has cooled by the time it gets through the frozen crust.
Yes you are correct about the radioactive isotopes having the core molten now, but you are forgetting that heat loss s a function of the temperature difference. Take away the 60F air and replace it with -459F vacuum on the surface and you will lose that heat much more quickly. The oceans would freeze on the surface on Day 1 (starting 4 billion years ago) and freeze inward. The radioactive isotopes might keep the Earth 1 to 2 degrees above absolute zero.
You can use Pluto as an example; it stated molten the same as Earth, and even with some solar radiation it is frozen solid. Take the Sun away entirely and the Earth freezes solid to the core probably within a few million years.
I'm inclined to agree with your reasoning on this subject, however, as we all know, for every rule, there's an exception. In this case, I'm referring to Saturn's moon Enceladus, a moon that is thought to have liquid water trapped below its frozen surface. Under the assumption that Enceladus has no apmosphere to trap solar heat, how is it that this moon isn't frozen solid?
but you are forgetting that heat loss s a function of the temperature difference.
No, I haven't forgotten that. While it's true that the rate of cooling depends on the temperature difference it also depends on the thermal conductivity of the material in question. In this case, it would be silicon based rock which has a fairly low coefficient of thermal conductivity, even lower than that of ice. The insulating layer provided by the Earth's crust and mantle has the effect of minimizing the temperature gradient and, thus, the rate of cooling.
With regard to Pluto, Enceladus that Shipo mentioned and other moons or planets in our Solar System, the conditions there are substantially different. The large moons of Jupiter and Saturn are not terrestrial (i.e. not likely to have heavy radionuclides) and so would not have radioactive decay as a significant contributor to internal heating. However, some of them are subjected to rather severe tidal forces which tend to cause substantial internal heating.
Pluto is a very low density plantetoid likely containing very little in the way of heavy elements and, being so far from the Sun or serious gravitating object, is subject to neither significant tidal forces nor substantial radiant heating of the surface. It's cold out there and that likely runs to the core!
Here's an article in the NY Times that make the obvious (to me, at least) conclusions that: 1) The planned carbon trading bureaucracy will accomplish next to nothing, except 2) Gravely harm many economies, particularly those of emerging nations, if it applies to them, and 3) Little meaningful can be accomplished by the developed countries as long as India and China are rushing headlong into massive energy use, often powered by coal. The article says major new technologies are needed, not restraints on current ones.
A number of moons of Saturn and Jupiter are warm because of the 'tidal heating' they endure, constantly being squeezed as they orbit close to the giant planets. Without that heating they would be frozen solid. Pluto's not a good example of solar heating, it has a completely differnt composition than earth, and may never have had a liquid/solid, radioactively-heated core. Does solar heating affect the earth's interior temperature? Some, but I think the radioactive heating is much more a factor.
Earth being larger in diameter and closer to the Sun hasn't cooled as quick. But it's mass is cooling. Once the Earth was molten even at the surface; now it's cooled enough so continental plates are several hundred miles thick. And that is despite our atmosphere and constant radiant energy from the Sun insulating us from the cold of space.
"Over geologic time, the inner core grows as the whole Earth cools. Iron crystals freeze out at the top of the outer core and rain onto the inner core."
Once the Earth was molten even at the surface; now it's cooled enough so continental plates are several hundred miles thick.
50-250 miles to be precise. Plate tectonics is the lifeforce of our planet though. Without the movement of these plates the Earth would become a dead planet... much like Mars. :sick:
On the movie Logans Run, I don't recall seeing any vehicles in the movie. But, in the television series, there was a vehicle that ran on the abundance of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Yes that thickness of the continental plates sounds about right. And getting thicker every day. Nothing is constant - except change.
From the 1st link of # 2334: "And it offers a vision of things to come on Earth. As Dr. Hansen said, Earth will eventually exhaust its internal energy and shut down its dynamo. With no protective magnetic field, intense radiation from the Sun will strip away the Earth's atmosphere and water.
''What Mars went through at a very young age is what will occur on the Earth eventually,'' she said.
"...Is membership info and dues available on your CarSpace page?..."
No need for that. Just send your dues to my Swiss bank account. In six to eight weeks you will receive your official T-shirt and decoder ring. That is if those two kids in the mail room (jipster and jmonroe) aren't goofing off again.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Well if we just listen to some of the more radical environmentalists, the Earth will be a paradise forever, if we just shutdown our machines, and be kind to the Earth. So planet migration wouldn't be necessary if you believe that.
I've been thinking of joing the Tidester fan-club too, if he's working on warp-drive, and the club has St. Pauli Girl waitresses serving good beer.
I didn't think they were religious or bible reading. The Garden of Eden was created by God, and the two humans put on a migration path after a shared light snack. AKA no C02 generating automobiles at the time :sick: :shades: How do you like them apples?
"All over the country, people are noticing that they can grow more southerly plants farther north. There's also been a lot of data that shows that plants are flowering earlier in the spring about one to three days earlier per decade over the past 30 years."
if he's working on warp-drive, and the club has St. Pauli Girl waitresses serving good beer.
We're still looking for a good source of dilithium crystals. They are hard to come by with OSHA and EPA regulations.
Regarding the beer, we'll settle for nothing but the best. And it's environmentally friendly too! We sequester all the CO2 in little green bottles and save the planet. The only downside is that upon drinking the beer, that CO2 gets released back into the atmosphere but by then nobody really cares!
To fight global warming, a bill in Sacramento would enable Los Angeles County transit officials to increase taxes on motorists. It's a bad idea that may foreshadow even worse to come.
Billed as a "climate change mitigation and adaptation fee," the measure would cost motorists either an additional 3 percent motor fuel tax, or up to a $90 annual flat fee, based on vehicle emissions. The new charges would be on top of taxes already paid at the pump. Either option requires a majority approval by a vote of the people.
"At this point the people of the Los Angeles region have just had it when it comes to traffic and air quality," claimed Assemblyman Mike Feuer, a Los Angeles Democrat and author of Assembly Bill 2558.
We concur about the traffic mess, but with little else Mr. Feuer claims in seeking to overtax motorists. The assemblyman's sleight of hand conflates two issues, the real problem of congested traffic and the contrived emergency of so-called global warming.
Congested traffic is easily verifiable. If it went away tomorrow, politicians would be unable to persuade voters to tax themselves to fix it.
Global warming at best amounts to less than a degree of temperature increase during the past century. If the recent several-year cooling trend is an indication, global warming may be going away. But because the only "proof" of long-term catastrophic consequences lies in contrived computer models, politicians like Mr. Feuer can insist even as temperatures decline that doomsday still lies ahead unless people tax themselves to fix the problem.
Los Angeles County motorists should ask Mr. Feuer what global temperature would persuade him that a new tax is unneeded. Global warming, now conveniently rechristened "climate change," is perfect for demagoguery. Those advancing the cause won't explain how they will know we have won the global warming fight, let alone what the ideal temperature is supposed to be.
Climate has changed as long as the Earth has spun on its axis. It's been considerably warmer in recent centuries than today, and during those periods humanity simply adapted, indeed, flourished with fewer cold-weather deaths and more abundant crops.
But facts don't deter schemes like Mr. Feuer's to raise $400 million in additional taxes to pay for already funded transit projects. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority would have to place the issue on the ballot if AB2558 becomes law, and probably would do so because the agency would reap the bounty.
We hope, however, that motorists see the ploy for what it is and reject the additional tax. If not, it's a good bet this scare tactic will be repeated throughout the state.
It was bound to happen. These guys won't be happy until they get you to leave all your money on the porch in a paper bag so it will be easier for them to pick it up.
And when you are wearing a barrel (certified organic, of course) to work they will be driving past you in limos blowing exhaust in your face.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Well, at least Californians get to vote on these taxes. Here in U.K., our Lords and Masters - sorry, our Elected Representatives, (we pay them, they work for us NOT), just increase such taxes without reference to the will of the people. Gasoline here is over $8 per US Gallon equiv and 65% of that is taxes. On top of that we have Annual Road Tax, (Vehicle Excise Duty), just to keep your car on the road. Rates are based on CO2 emmissions and my Volvo S60 D5 will cost me £270 per year from 2009, currently £210. The worst "polluters", e.g. Range Rover etc will pay £400 per year.
All this in the name of environment. Problem is; no-one seems to know what "environmental" do-goodery the money is being spent on. Just a government scam. Coming to a State near you soon. Be afraid.
Don't forget that hit if you want to drive into London.
We are really not that far behind you in reality. You get about 45 MPG US on the highway. We would get about 25 MPG with the gas version. Gas was $3.71 for regular yesterday at my Shell station. So we are near paying $7 to go as far as you do on $8 in the UK.
Your high taxes could be the reason I meet so many British folks living in CA. The weather could be a factor also. It should get to 80 degrees today. GW you know?
You folks in the U.K. seem to be ahead of us in a good number of causes. Last night I was watching an old episode of "Rumpole of the Bailey". In this show Rumpole was being lectured by some children on the evils of smoking. Their arguments sound very similar to those used by the anti-smoke zealots here in the US today,
The funny thing is that this episode of Rumpole must have been made in the late 1980's,
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
I guess you are correct re the Rumpole series. Not been made for a while. Smoking in U.K. is a pariah activity. Now illegal to smoke in pubs, restaurants, public buildings, offices, public transport - even in commercial vehicles that may have more than one driver, e.g. trucks that may have different drivers at different times during the working day.
It's certainly much more pleasant to be in a smoke-free environment whilst having a oint or a meal but our leaders are sure to find other ways of raising revenue lost by a decrease in smoking. Cigarette's are heavily taxed, (isn't everything ?), and a pack of 20 cigarettes now retails for around the equiv of $11, (£5.65).
Looks like they're trying to make driving a pariah activity also.
I love my country dearly - but not the folks who run it.
I love my country dearly - but not the folks who run it.
We have a lot in common. That includes the ones that want to run our country as well.
There are counties & cities in CA that have outlawed smoking on the beach, parks and your Own yard. There is talk of a bill to ban all smoking in cars. At least 4 states have laws or laws proposed to ban smoking in cars when minors are in the car.
Sounds good to me - they finally posted signs at the hill to forbid lighting up in the lift line or on the chair lift. Lots of us keep pressing to make the whole resort smoke free.
They also finally got around to posting no idling signs in the bus parking area - the school bus drivers were the worst.
How would you like to sit in a school bus for 6-8 hours with no heat in sub-freezing weather? Most schools tell drivers they have to remain with the bus. The choice becomes keep warm or violate policy and maybe get fired.
We once had a new driver that tried to comply with this stupid rule. She had to be carried off the bus due to hypothermia.
Another thing to consider. Guess what happens when you pile a bunch of sweaty panting students into an ice cold bus. Right, the windows fog over and can not be defrosted for a good 30 minutes. Makes for a very interesting drive home.
But that's all OK, just as long as you don't have to smell that diesel. :mad:
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
When I worked in the Arctic our trucks were started at 5AM and shut down about 5PM 90% of the time they were idling in front of where we were working. We could plug them in. You still have to wait a good time before you take off for the transmission to warm a bit. We tried to get a garage built to no avail.
Truck drivers in CA are no longer allowed to let their trucks idle to keep warm. I hear some have propane heaters in the cab. That can be hazardous from fire and CO.
Let me be clear. I am no advocate for excessive idling. It wastes fuel and contributes to pollution. What I rant about is the lack of consideration for the unintended consequences of otherwise noble laws. In the bus example, it is the lack of consideration for how the driver will fare in a cold or vision impaired bus. Frequently those who advocate well-intentioned solutions to complex problems never consider the impact these solutions have on the "little people". The trouble is, if you impact enough little people, eventually the consequences will trickle up to the "people that matter".
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
The drivers know when the return trip is - all they have to do is walk out of the warm cozy lodge ten minutes before the trip time and warm up the bus. They move the buses to the loading zone from the parking area anyway, so it's not like they aren't already doing that. The bus parking area is near the tubing hill where employees can spot people sneaking around.
Makes no sense to leave them idling for thirty minutes, much less six hours.
Comments
Yes that is my main problem with the environmentalist movement most of the time. That and the fact that everytime we as a nation enact an environmental law and reach a certain standard, that is not good enough. How many times have we passed laws to limit pollution, and when we reach that level, the cry goes out that that's too dirty. Look how clean the emissions from a new car are, and yet you have extremists saying that's too much.
Well as a chemical engineer, let me pass this along to you - there is no perfect chemical reaction or energy source such that you don't get something out of it that you'll probably consider a pollutant. The only way humanity can not pollute or otherwise change the Earth, is for the population to go into a coma. For even putting up solar panels or windmills will be a major environmental change. The only way not to change the environmental is not to do anything. Since we are physical beings that is definitely not a viable choice.
And if people will watch some of the science shows that are all over TV, you'll realize that we're not going to hurt the Earth. The Earth has been through far more than man can do to it, and life is far more resilient than most people understand.
Best Regards,
Shipo
The temperature of the vast majority of space is a few fractions above absolute zero = -459F. The sun through all its forms of radiant energy - UV, visible light, IR, gamma provides the energy to keep the Earth at an average of 59F. So the sun has provided the energy to keep the Earth 518F above what it otherwise would be today. Even though the Earth's core was and is molten today it wouldn't be today after 4 billion years, without the sun to keep it warm. That's similar to whether you keep a big-meatball under a warming lamp, or stuck it in a very, very cold freezer.
So with the sun being the only real energy source in the solar system, and providing that sort of energy to keep the Earth 518F warmer than it otherwise would be, I don't see how someone can possibly think the sun is not the MAIN factor in climate.
And for anyone confused about cloud cover - I thought that was fairly well understood. I mean everytime I hear about hurricane formation, it's well understood that the sun evaporates water from the ocean and this process starts the air swirling. Cloud formation and thus water in the air is a result of the sun's radiation evaporating water from the oceans, seas, and lakes. And the amount of water that can be held in the air - relative humidity - is based on temperature, which again goes back to the only significant energy source in the solar system - the Sun.
Another interesting tidbit that compliments what you've just written is that both Russian and American observations of Mars over the last several decades show that it too is experiencing a warming trend that mimics Earth's warming trend. Is that factoid definitive in and of itself that the Sun is the major cause of our climactic changes? No. Is it a compelling piece of the puzzle? I certainly think so.
Best Regards,
Shipo
The World Meteorological Organization's secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, told the BBC it was likely that La Nina would continue into the summer.
This would mean global temperatures have not risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory.
La Nina and El Nino are two great natural Pacific currents whose effects are so huge they resonate round the world.
El Nino warms the planet when it happens; La Nina cools it. This year, the Pacific is in the grip of a powerful La Nina.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm
So where does man and his puny contribution fit into this picture? IF El Nino or La Nina can turn in a year or two all that mankind contributes to the climate "What is Man"?
"The World Bank's foray into climate change has gone down like a lead balloon," Friends of the Earth campaigner Tom Picken said at the end of a major climate change conference in the Thai capital.
"Many countries and civil society have expressed outrage at the World Bank's attempted hijacking of real efforts to fund climate change efforts," he said.
Before they agree to any sort of restrictions on emissions of the greenhouse gases fuelling global warming, poor countries want firm commitments of billions of dollars in aid from their rich counterparts.
GW rip-off
In any case economic pressures will force us to reduce our energy use at the moment.
Scott
Perhaps that is the real problem . Folks that either are innoculated with the "holy grail" narcotic or syndrome, walking around looking for "perfection"
Don't try to confuse the true believer kool-aid drinkers with the facts. They will call you a racist, sexist, homophobe bigot, or maybe even a Republican (Gasp!).
I personally like the prediction by CNN's owner Ted Turner (you know, Jane Fonda's ex). Good old Ted says that in 20 years the earth will be 8 degrees hotter, all the crops will be dead and the few humans who don't die will be cannibals.
I don't know about you but I'm going out in my SUV and make a list of my tastiest looking neighbors.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Sounds like the futuristic movie, "Logan's Run" oldfarmer. In the future the earths atmoshphere and oceans are polluted from wars and giant SUV's. People must live in an underground city. The only way to survive is to eat those fellow citizens when they reach their 30th birthday. This is done via the carasoel. The "has beens" walk into this giant zero gravity chamber. They start spinning around, and start exploding like popcorn as the younger people stand around cheering. They don't realize that the prime rib they were feasting on at dinner was their neighbor.
Sounds like Sweeney Todd.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I liked that movie where the old codgers got popped. Of course I was under 30 back then. I never realized that they were cooking up the old folks though, I just thought they were bumping them off to reduce their footprint. (Hey, let's not give these young pups any ideas).
I think Ted Turner might have been hitting the bottle while watching Logan's Run before that interview or maybe even "Soylent Green".
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
That's not quite right. The Earth's core is heated primarily by the decay of radioactive isotopes and by friction under the action of tidal forces. Solar radiation keeps the surface warm but has a negligible effect on the core's rate of cooling.
I do know that after you get through about 1400 feet of permafrost in the Arctic the earth is warm. The oil comes out of the ground at about 180 degrees F. Not sure how much it has cooled by the time it gets through the frozen crust.
Yes you are correct about the radioactive isotopes having the core molten now, but you are forgetting that heat loss s a function of the temperature difference. Take away the 60F air and replace it with -459F vacuum on the surface and you will lose that heat much more quickly. The oceans would freeze on the surface on Day 1 (starting 4 billion years ago) and freeze inward. The radioactive isotopes might keep the Earth 1 to 2 degrees above absolute zero.
You can use Pluto as an example; it stated molten the same as Earth, and even with some solar radiation it is frozen solid. Take the Sun away entirely and the Earth freezes solid to the core probably within a few million years.
Best Regards,
Shipo
"Oh, no, no, there's nobody else here but me and my cats. Oh, no, no, no one else."
The Sandmen that chase after anyone trying to escape the underground city. It'd be worth a tune-up watch again just for giggles and grins.
I don't remember seeing any automobiles in that futuristic timeframe of the movie's setting, either. Is the movie prophetic as well as sickening?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
No, I haven't forgotten that. While it's true that the rate of cooling depends on the temperature difference it also depends on the thermal conductivity of the material in question. In this case, it would be silicon based rock which has a fairly low coefficient of thermal conductivity, even lower than that of ice. The insulating layer provided by the Earth's crust and mantle has the effect of minimizing the temperature gradient and, thus, the rate of cooling.
With regard to Pluto, Enceladus that Shipo mentioned and other moons or planets in our Solar System, the conditions there are substantially different. The large moons of Jupiter and Saturn are not terrestrial (i.e. not likely to have heavy radionuclides) and so would not have radioactive decay as a significant contributor to internal heating. However, some of them are subjected to rather severe tidal forces which tend to cause substantial internal heating.
Pluto is a very low density plantetoid likely containing very little in the way of heavy elements and, being so far from the Sun or serious gravitating object, is subject to neither significant tidal forces nor substantial radiant heating of the surface. It's cold out there and that likely runs to the core!
1) The planned carbon trading bureaucracy will accomplish next to nothing, except
2) Gravely harm many economies, particularly those of emerging nations, if it applies to them, and
3) Little meaningful can be accomplished by the developed countries as long as India and China are rushing headlong into massive energy use, often powered by coal.
The article says major new technologies are needed, not restraints on current ones.
Change in the GW tide?
Sincerely,
Oldfarmer50
Public Relations Mgr.-- Tidester Fan Club
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D02E0DE113DF933A05757C0A96F95826- - - 0&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
Earth being larger in diameter and closer to the Sun hasn't cooled as quick. But it's mass is cooling. Once the Earth was molten even at the surface; now it's cooled enough so continental plates are several hundred miles thick. And that is despite our atmosphere and constant radiant energy from the Sun insulating us from the cold of space.
"Over geologic time, the inner core grows as the whole Earth cools. Iron crystals freeze out at the top of the outer core and rain onto the inner core."
http://geology.about.com/od/core/a/about_the_core.htm
Public Relations Mgr.-- Tidester Fan Club
Is membership info and dues available on your CarSpace page? :P
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
50-250 miles to be precise. Plate tectonics is the lifeforce of our planet though. Without the movement of these plates the Earth would become a dead planet... much like Mars. :sick:
On the movie Logans Run, I don't recall seeing any vehicles in the movie. But, in the television series, there was a vehicle that ran on the abundance of CO2 in the atmosphere.
From the 1st link of # 2334: "And it offers a vision of things to come on Earth. As Dr. Hansen said, Earth will eventually exhaust its internal energy and shut down its dynamo. With no protective magnetic field, intense radiation from the Sun will strip away the Earth's atmosphere and water.
''What Mars went through at a very young age is what will occur on the Earth eventually,'' she said.
does this (the quote) signal and trigger planet migration?
No need for that. Just send your dues to my Swiss bank account. In six to eight weeks you will receive your official T-shirt and decoder ring. That is if those two kids in the mail room (jipster and jmonroe) aren't goofing off again.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
I've been thinking of joing the Tidester fan-club too, if he's working on warp-drive, and the club has St. Pauli Girl waitresses serving good beer.
C'mon - you've all seen the crazy way other people drive. What more proof do you need?
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-04-07-budburst_N.htm
That sounds like good news to me. But I still think I'll retire to Hawaii, Costa Rica, or somewhere else with with a nice 65-90F climate.
We're still looking for a good source of dilithium crystals. They are hard to come by with OSHA and EPA regulations.
Regarding the beer, we'll settle for nothing but the best. And it's environmentally friendly too! We sequester all the CO2 in little green bottles and save the planet. The only downside is that upon drinking the beer, that CO2 gets released back into the atmosphere but by then nobody really cares!
April 7, 2008 - 9:58AM
The Orange County Register
To fight global warming, a bill in Sacramento would enable Los Angeles County transit officials to increase taxes on motorists. It's a bad idea that may foreshadow even worse to come.
Billed as a "climate change mitigation and adaptation fee," the measure would cost motorists either an additional 3 percent motor fuel tax, or up to a $90 annual flat fee, based on vehicle emissions. The new charges would be on top of taxes already paid at the pump. Either option requires a majority approval by a vote of the people.
"At this point the people of the Los Angeles region have just had it when it comes to traffic and air quality," claimed Assemblyman Mike Feuer, a Los Angeles Democrat and author of Assembly Bill 2558.
We concur about the traffic mess, but with little else Mr. Feuer claims in seeking to overtax motorists. The assemblyman's sleight of hand conflates two issues, the real problem of congested traffic and the contrived emergency of so-called global warming.
Congested traffic is easily verifiable. If it went away tomorrow, politicians would be unable to persuade voters to tax themselves to fix it.
Global warming at best amounts to less than a degree of temperature increase during the past century. If the recent several-year cooling trend is an indication, global warming may be going away. But because the only "proof" of long-term catastrophic consequences lies in contrived computer models, politicians like Mr. Feuer can insist even as temperatures decline that doomsday still lies ahead unless people tax themselves to fix the problem.
Los Angeles County motorists should ask Mr. Feuer what global temperature would persuade him that a new tax is unneeded. Global warming, now conveniently rechristened "climate change," is perfect for demagoguery. Those advancing the cause won't explain how they will know we have won the global warming fight, let alone what the ideal temperature is supposed to be.
Climate has changed as long as the Earth has spun on its axis. It's been considerably warmer in recent centuries than today, and during those periods humanity simply adapted, indeed, flourished with fewer cold-weather deaths and more abundant crops.
But facts don't deter schemes like Mr. Feuer's to raise $400 million in additional taxes to pay for already funded transit projects. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority would have to place the issue on the ballot if AB2558 becomes law, and probably would do so because the agency would reap the bounty.
We hope, however, that motorists see the ploy for what it is and reject the additional tax. If not, it's a good bet this scare tactic will be repeated throughout the state.
And when you are wearing a barrel (certified organic, of course) to work they will be driving past you in limos blowing exhaust in your face.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
All this in the name of environment. Problem is; no-one seems to know what "environmental" do-goodery the money is being spent on. Just a government scam. Coming to a State near you soon. Be afraid.
We are really not that far behind you in reality. You get about 45 MPG US on the highway. We would get about 25 MPG with the gas version. Gas was $3.71 for regular yesterday at my Shell station. So we are near paying $7 to go as far as you do on $8 in the UK.
Your high taxes could be the reason I meet so many British folks living in CA. The weather could be a factor also. It should get to 80 degrees today. GW you know?
You folks in the U.K. seem to be ahead of us in a good number of causes. Last night I was watching an old episode of "Rumpole of the Bailey". In this show Rumpole was being lectured by some children on the evils of smoking. Their arguments sound very similar to those used by the anti-smoke zealots here in the US today,
The funny thing is that this episode of Rumpole must have been made in the late 1980's,
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
It's certainly much more pleasant to be in a smoke-free environment whilst having a oint or a meal but our leaders are sure to find other ways of raising revenue lost by a decrease in smoking. Cigarette's are heavily taxed, (isn't everything ?), and a pack of 20 cigarettes now retails for around the equiv of $11, (£5.65).
Looks like they're trying to make driving a pariah activity also.
I love my country dearly - but not the folks who run it.
We have a lot in common. That includes the ones that want to run our country as well.
There are counties & cities in CA that have outlawed smoking on the beach, parks and your Own yard. There is talk of a bill to ban all smoking in cars. At least 4 states have laws or laws proposed to ban smoking in cars when minors are in the car.
They also finally got around to posting no idling signs in the bus parking area - the school bus drivers were the worst.
How would you like to sit in a school bus for 6-8 hours with no heat in sub-freezing weather? Most schools tell drivers they have to remain with the bus. The choice becomes keep warm or violate policy and maybe get fired.
We once had a new driver that tried to comply with this stupid rule. She had to be carried off the bus due to hypothermia.
Another thing to consider. Guess what happens when you pile a bunch of sweaty panting students into an ice cold bus. Right, the windows fog over and can not be defrosted for a good 30 minutes. Makes for a very interesting drive home.
But that's all OK, just as long as you don't have to smell that diesel. :mad:
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
When I worked in the Arctic our trucks were started at 5AM and shut down about 5PM 90% of the time they were idling in front of where we were working. We could plug them in. You still have to wait a good time before you take off for the transmission to warm a bit. We tried to get a garage built to no avail.
Truck drivers in CA are no longer allowed to let their trucks idle to keep warm. I hear some have propane heaters in the cab. That can be hazardous from fire and CO.
Let me be clear. I am no advocate for excessive idling. It wastes fuel and contributes to pollution. What I rant about is the lack of consideration for the unintended consequences of otherwise noble laws. In the bus example, it is the lack of consideration for how the driver will fare in a cold or vision impaired bus. Frequently those who advocate well-intentioned solutions to complex problems never consider the impact these solutions have on the "little people". The trouble is, if you impact enough little people, eventually the consequences will trickle up to the "people that matter".
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Makes no sense to leave them idling for thirty minutes, much less six hours.
Meanwhile childhood asthma rates have doubled in the last two decades. (CNN) Childhood Asthma/Diesel Exhaust