Lipdrag Posted June 25 Posted June 25 The exact remorse being reported here would be interesting to know. The article is behind a paywall. This industry "news" site is usually left of hyper-progressives and has been a shill for EVs for at least half a decade. I would not be surprised if their conclusion is that the remorse is that the EV subsidies are too small, EV mandates are too weak, and the biggest remorse is that vehicles operating on organic fuels were not banned during the 1973 oil embargo.
mspart Posted June 25 Posted June 25 I think it goes without saying that we should be good stewards of the environment. We should try to move to better and less polluting energy. Nuclear does not pollute the air but its waste lasts thousands of years. That can work but we need something better. Wind and Solar take too much out of the earth to be carbon neutral both in manufacturing and disposal. Plus they are not reliable methods to produce energy. Dams are good and reliable but do affect the landscape and salmon out here are affected negatively. They seem to manage but salmon stocks are reducing. Hydrogen power is good and reliable. From Fusion to fuel cells, hydrogen is a good option and it is plentiful. And with fusion we get helium for our balloons. Who doesn't want helium for their balloons? Fusion is non polluting. But dangerous with extreme temps that melt everything. mspart
ionel Posted June 25 Posted June 25 3 hours ago, mspart said: I think it goes without saying ... mspart 2BPE 11/17/24 SMC
uncle bernard Posted June 25 Posted June 25 3 hours ago, Husker_Du said: lmao "What do we do with this?' Well, you could start by actually reading the article before assuming it's stupid. The gist is that the heating effect of increased carbon in the atmosphere has always been slightly offset by the air pollution caused by those gases. The aerosols in carbon cause darker cloud cover which better blocks the sun. As air pollution is cleaned up, less of the greenhouse effect is offset because the aerosols block less sun which means that the Earth would heat even faster than it has been.
mspart Posted June 25 Posted June 25 38 minutes ago, uncle bernard said: "What do we do with this?' Well, you could start by actually reading the article before assuming it's stupid. The gist is that the heating effect of increased carbon in the atmosphere has always been slightly offset by the air pollution caused by those gases. The aerosols in carbon cause darker cloud cover which better blocks the sun. As air pollution is cleaned up, less of the greenhouse effect is offset because the aerosols block less sun which means that the Earth would heat even faster than it has been. So hence our efforts at cleaning up emissions is causing global warming. So we should stop and pollute the crap out of the atmosphere. That's what that is saying to me. mspart
uncle bernard Posted June 26 Posted June 26 9 minutes ago, mspart said: So hence our efforts at cleaning up emissions is causing global warming. So we should stop and pollute the crap out of the atmosphere. That's what that is saying to me. mspart No, our efforts at removing air pollution - in the form of aerosols - makes the reduction of total emissions even more necessary. Both must be reduced. Pollution causes serious health issues. Carbon causes rapid temperature increases that are too fast for the environment to adapt.
Scouts Honor Posted June 26 Posted June 26 4 hours ago, uncle bernard said: "What do we do with this?' Well, you could start by actually reading the article before assuming it's stupid. The gist is that the heating effect of increased carbon in the atmosphere has always been slightly offset by the air pollution caused by those gases. The aerosols in carbon cause darker cloud cover which better blocks the sun. As air pollution is cleaned up, less of the greenhouse effect is offset because the aerosols block less sun which means that the Earth would heat even faster than it has been. so you are saying the current plan by experts and geniuses to put something in the atmosphere to block the sun... is stupid. noted.
Scouts Honor Posted June 26 Posted June 26 3 hours ago, uncle bernard said: No, our efforts at removing air pollution - in the form of aerosols - makes the reduction of total emissions even more necessary. Both must be reduced. Pollution causes serious health issues. Carbon causes rapid temperature increases that are too fast for the environment to adapt. carbon is supposedly at skyrocketed levels already... heating hasn't followed...
Husker_Du Posted June 26 Author Posted June 26 6 hours ago, Scouts Honor said: the entire world is china's bitch, basically. they do whatever they want. 1 TBD
RockLobster Posted June 26 Posted June 26 (edited) 18 hours ago, nhs67 said: Brass Tacks - Details of immediate practical importance. Ah, I am familar with the concept of brass tacks. Husker is one goofy poster... he made brass tax appear to be a type of tax. As weird as that may seem, much weirder things are posted here daily. Edited June 26 by RockLobster
RockLobster Posted June 26 Posted June 26 17 hours ago, Scouts Honor said: dont tell me climate change caused the 'drought' in california... when it was always dry. they had to bring water in... shut that off... blame climate change You tell me, you seem to think you have answers.
JimmyBT Posted June 26 Posted June 26 10 hours ago, RockLobster said: You, TPT and a couple more aliases. Nice family you got there. Looks like the one in the middle has transitioned. Good for “it”.
red viking Posted June 26 Posted June 26 12 hours ago, Scouts Honor said: carbon is supposedly at skyrocketed levels already... heating hasn't followed... 150% wrong. Extreme heating has followed the skyrocketing CO2 levels. Are you smoking crack? 1
Scouts Honor Posted June 27 Posted June 27 19 hours ago, red viking said: 150% wrong. Extreme heating has followed the skyrocketing CO2 levels. Are you smoking crack? extreme heating? where i was told we were .5 degrees hotter
Scouts Honor Posted June 27 Posted June 27 On 6/26/2024 at 1:16 AM, RockLobster said: You tell me, you seem to think you have answers. i just did.
Danny Deck Posted June 27 Posted June 27 https://www.joshbarro.com/p/progressive-groups-lie-because-lying
RockLobster Posted June 28 Posted June 28 15 hours ago, Scouts Honor said: i just did. Except that you didn't. Don't be lazy. Scroll up and do it right.
Scouts Honor Posted June 28 Posted June 28 i told you not to tell me that climate change isn't causing the drought. there was always drought.. they brought water in to make it an oasis. then took it away and called it climate change did i spell it out enough for you.. or do you need pictures too 1
Scouts Honor Posted June 29 Posted June 29 a few years ago for my 50th, we went to vegas. first time. we were out and about and it was warm but not terrible. two different uber drivers were like man it's hot today aren't you guys wiped out. im like no.. its not bad out.. how hot... 97 they said.. i was like this is nothing... no humidity. 97 in nebraska? i would have been soaked .
Dylan Greenstein Northfield Mt. Herman, Massachusetts Class of 2025 Committed to Harvard Projected Weight: 285
Isabella Marie Gonzales Clovis East, California Class of 2025 Committed to Iowa (Women) Projected Weight: 117, 124
Maeve Witte Freehold Township, New Jersey Class of 2025 Committed to Lock Haven (Women) Projected Weight: 117
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now