The environment thread, Post news, opinions, etc regarding this hot issue Options

[iamshack]

Ok, well this is why I stay out of this thread for the most part.

I thought I saw something on the History Channel about Mt. Vesuvius releasing something like 30,000 times the CO2 into the atmosphere in one second that we have produced in the last 130 years. Apparently this would not have the same results as what we are currently causing, however.

My mistake.

[Balta1701]

Ok, well this is why I stay out of this thread for the most part.

I thought I saw something on the History Channel about Mt. Vesuvius releasing something like 30,000 times the CO2 into the atmosphere in one second that we have produced in the last 130 years. Apparently this would not have the same results as what we are currently causing, however.

My mistake.

You've actually got the right number you just have the sources backwards. Right now, human-related CO2 emissions are about 130 times the annual volcanic CO2 production rate. Sinngle eruptions usually don't change this flux all that much.

[iamshack]

You've actually got the right number you just have the sources backwards. Right now, human-related CO2 emissions are about 130 times the annual volcanic CO2 production rate. Sinngle eruptions usually don't change this flux all that much.

Right, but what if there was some monster eruption such as the one in AD 79?

[Balta1701]

Right, but what if there was some monster eruption such as the one in AD 79?

79 AD wasn't actually a monster eruption in terms of size. 1815 tambora was, at least on a scale of what humans have seen (largest in the last 10000 years. A reasonable estimate for Tambora's CO2 emissions in 1815 would be about 3000 MT of CO2. Human emissions annually are still 10 times that. Even if I'm off by a factor of 5, human CO2 emissions still are much, much larger.

[iamshack]

79 AD wasn't actually a monster eruption in terms of size. 1815 tambora was, at least on a scale of what humans have seen (largest in the last 10000 years. A reasonable estimate for Tambora's CO2 emissions in 1815 would be about 3000 MT of CO2. Human emissions annually are still 10 times that. Even if I'm off by a factor of 5, human CO2 emissions still are much, much larger.

Wow. Good to know. I'm clueless.
Thanks Balta.

[kapkomet]

Quit breathing. That would solve the problem.

[Y2HH]

Yea, I have to say, the longer you guys drone on about this environment bulls*** the more I yawn.

It's the most hypocritical stupid crap I've EVER had to listen too.

Especially since it's all self-reassuring, "I'm better than you" and "I care more than you" bulls*** so many of you love to talk about but not actually do jack s*** about. Look around your desk right now -- that computer you're typing on -- you can't even imagine the amount of pollution that was caused just to get to where that computer is now in terms of speed, etc. And I'll guess it wasn't your first computer/cell phone/other crazy pollution causing device, either. That pen/paper/water bottle -- tons more. 99% of the garbage you don't need in your houses, but have and use every day...that's right...tons more. You b**** about it, you think we should do more about it...yet you set ZERO example of saving the trees and continue to consume the very things you supposedly hate, you continue to buy them, and you continue to fund this pollution crazy economy/world.

Ohhhhh, I'm so f***ing proud of you, you bought a hybrid car -- too bad the batteries in them are worse for the environment than the gas you saved. Oh, and those batteries HAVE TO BE REPLACED someday. That's an unfortunate side effect of batteries...someday, they will go into a landfill. Good job.

Ohhh, you installed mercury filled light bulbs in your houses to save energy...too bad when those do burn out you added a bunch of mercury content to the earth. Good job.

My point is, the small changes you think you've made have done nothing, because honestly, you don't really care...it's just another thing you can hang your hats on because you have nothing else to do.

Either shut off your computers, go live in the middle of no where in Alaska in a rustic shack without electricity or heat...or shut the f*** up and get off your high horses.

The real sacrifices we would have to make to TRULY make a dent...no American is going to make them. And that's a fact.

Every water bottle you guys don't use, I'm going to use 3 of from now on. Just to erase any difference you tried to make. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

[NorthSideSox72]

Yea, I have to say, the longer you guys drone on about this environment bulls*** the more I yawn.

It's the most hypocritical stupid crap I've EVER had to listen too.

Especially since it's all self-reassuring, "I'm better than you" and "I care more than you" bulls*** so many of you love to talk about but not actually do jack s*** about. Look around your desk right now -- that computer you're typing on -- you can't even imagine the amount of pollution that was caused just to get to where that computer is now in terms of speed, etc. And I'll guess it wasn't your first computer/cell phone/other crazy pollution causing device, either. That pen/paper/water bottle -- tons more. 99% of the garbage you don't need in your houses, but have and use every day...that's right...tons more. You b**** about it, you think we should do more about it...yet you set ZERO example of saving the trees and continue to consume the very things you supposedly hate, you continue to buy them, and you continue to fund this pollution crazy economy/world.

Ohhhhh, I'm so f***ing proud of you, you bought a hybrid car -- too bad the batteries in them are worse for the environment than the gas you saved. Oh, and those batteries HAVE TO BE REPLACED someday. That's an unfortunate side effect of batteries...someday, they will go into a landfill. Good job.

Ohhh, you installed mercury filled light bulbs in your houses to save energy...too bad when those do burn out you added a bunch of mercury content to the earth. Good job.

My point is, the small changes you think you've made have done nothing, because honestly, you don't really care...it's just another thing you can hang your hats on because you have nothing else to do.

Either shut off your computers, go live in the middle of no where in Alaska in a rustic shack without electricity or heat...or shut the f*** up and get off your high horses.

The real sacrifices we would have to make to TRULY make a dent...no American is going to make them. And that's a fact.

Every water bottle you guys don't use, I'm going to use 3 of from now on. Just to erase any difference you tried to make. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

That was an almost Kap-worthy rant - both in its grandeur, and its departure from reality.

First, what is really "self-reassuring" as you put it, is the people who choose to believe they have no impact on their environment. They are then further reassured by politicians who make up all manner of ridiculous things to bolster this belief, because its the easier, lazier one to take. Its the one that says "no really, you can do whatever you want, without consequences". Its idiotic on its face to believe that humans don't effect their environment in a signficant way. And you cited a whole bunch of reasons for it in your own post.

Now, some people do actually live under an illusion of greendom, because they are misinformed - but they are at least aware of reality, and trying (though often failing) to act affirmatively to help things.

And your idea that little things don't help is patently absurd. Of course they help. This sort of absolutist, dismissive attitude you take on things like polls, or scientific data, is right out of the GOP playbook - lay waste to all data as subjective, thus allowing you to believe whatever you want, regardless of fact. Everything that is an action of CONSERVATION, helps (note: not the same as ENVIRONMENTALISM, though related). Keeping lights on less of the time, using a timed thermostat, recycling, using less plastic whenever possible, using CFL's (which have less and less mercury, and new ones have NONE)... all these things make a difference, and if everyone did them, it would make a HUGE difference. But, it makes everyone feel better to say, eh, since you cannot save the world youself, you might as well not bother trying.

Instead, what is true here, is that people don't necessarily see the full consequences of their actions. They see that a hybrid car uses less gas and pollutes less - which it does - but are blissfully unaware of the fact that the batteries in that car are more environmentally costly than normal ones. Now, I have read articles on this, and your statement that the batteries require more pollution than what you save in output from the car is bunk. For one thing, you cannot make a true apples-to-apples comparison anyway, since mining consequences are different than gaseous air pollution. But it also focuses on only one aspect of the positives of hybrid use - pollution. Using less gas, which means less oil, has additional positives - LOTS of them.

You want to make everything black and white. You have this odd belief that if you can't go all the way and save the world, then don't bother trying. That is utterly absurd logic. I'll keep doing the little things, because I know it makes a difference. You want to call that being on a high horse, fine, whatever makes you feel better. If you want to give up, that saddens me, but I can't stop you.

[Y2HH]

That was an almost Kap-worthy rant - both in its grandeur, and its departure from reality.

First, what is really "self-reassuring" as you put it, is the people who choose to believe they have no impact on their environment. They are then further reassured by politicians who make up all manner of ridiculous things to bolster this belief, because its the easier, lazier one to take. Its the one that says "no really, you can do whatever you want, without consequences". Its idiotic on its face to believe that humans don't effect their environment in a signficant way. And you cited a whole bunch of reasons for it in your own post.

Now, some people do actually live under an illusion of greendom, because they are misinformed - but they are at least aware of reality, and trying (though often failing) to act affirmatively to help things.

And your idea that little things don't help is patently absurd. Of course they help. This sort of absolutist, dismissive attitude you take on things like polls, or scientific data, is right out of the GOP playbook - lay waste to all data as subjective, thus allowing you to believe whatever you want, regardless of fact. Everything that is an action of CONSERVATION, helps (note: not the same as ENVIRONMENTALISM, though related). Keeping lights on less of the time, using a timed thermostat, recycling, using less plastic whenever possible, using CFL's (which have less and less mercury, and new ones have NONE)... all these things make a difference, and if everyone did them, it would make a HUGE difference. But, it makes everyone feel better to say, eh, since you cannot save the world youself, you might as well not bother trying.

Instead, what is true here, is that people don't necessarily see the full consequences of their actions. They see that a hybrid car uses less gas and pollutes less - which it does - but are blissfully unaware of the fact that the batteries in that car are more environmentally costly than normal ones. Now, I have read articles on this, and your statement that the batteries require more pollution than what you save in output from the car is bunk. For one thing, you cannot make a true apples-to-apples comparison anyway, since mining consequences are different than gaseous air pollution. But it also focuses on only one aspect of the positives of hybrid use - pollution. Using less gas, which means less oil, has additional positives - LOTS of them.

You want to make everything black and white. You have this odd belief that if you can't go all the way and save the world, then don't bother trying. That is utterly absurd logic. I'll keep doing the little things, because I know it makes a difference. You want to call that being on a high horse, fine, whatever makes you feel better. If you want to give up, that saddens me, but I can't stop you.

Like I said, note that I will use 3 water bottles for every 1 you save. I will heat my house to 100 degrees day and night. I will waste aerosol sprays, and do everything in my power to undo everything you try to conserve. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

As for hybrids...LOL. Note there are many stories on this: http://www.caradvice.com.au/39714/hybrid-v...hortage-report/

Way to go...environmentalists! You traded one finite resource (oil) for a BUNCH of even MORE finite resources...a lot of which we have no idea what kind of damage they will even cause in the long run yet.

Oh, and Northside...I was only kidding with my rant. It's just that this back and fourth bickering is getting old now...so I had to say it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Jenksismybitch]

That was an almost Kap-worthy rant - both in its grandeur, and its departure from reality.

First, what is really "self-reassuring" as you put it, is the people who choose to believe they have no impact on their environment. They are then further reassured by politicians who make up all manner of ridiculous things to bolster this belief, because its the easier, lazier one to take. Its the one that says "no really, you can do whatever you want, without consequences". Its idiotic on its face to believe that humans don't effect their environment in a signficant way. And you cited a whole bunch of reasons for it in your own post.

Now, some people do actually live under an illusion of greendom, because they are misinformed - but they are at least aware of reality, and trying (though often failing) to act affirmatively to help things.

And your idea that little things don't help is patently absurd. Of course they help. This sort of absolutist, dismissive attitude you take on things like polls, or scientific data, is right out of the GOP playbook - lay waste to all data as subjective, thus allowing you to believe whatever you want, regardless of fact. Everything that is an action of CONSERVATION, helps (note: not the same as ENVIRONMENTALISM, though related). Keeping lights on less of the time, using a timed thermostat, recycling, using less plastic whenever possible, using CFL's (which have less and less mercury, and new ones have NONE)... all these things make a difference, and if everyone did them, it would make a HUGE difference. But, it makes everyone feel better to say, eh, since you cannot save the world youself, you might as well not bother trying.

Instead, what is true here, is that people don't necessarily see the full consequences of their actions. They see that a hybrid car uses less gas and pollutes less - which it does - but are blissfully unaware of the fact that the batteries in that car are more environmentally costly than normal ones. Now, I have read articles on this, and your statement that the batteries require more pollution than what you save in output from the car is bunk. For one thing, you cannot make a true apples-to-apples comparison anyway, since mining consequences are different than gaseous air pollution. But it also focuses on only one aspect of the positives of hybrid use - pollution. Using less gas, which means less oil, has additional positives - LOTS of them.

You want to make everything black and white. You have this odd belief that if you can't go all the way and save the world, then don't bother trying. That is utterly absurd logic. I'll keep doing the little things, because I know it makes a difference. You want to call that being on a high horse, fine, whatever makes you feel better. If you want to give up, that saddens me, but I can't stop you.

While I agree with all of this, don't you think the same can be said for liberals that want to make the environmental discussion into a do or die issue? The way some of these people (including people in this thread) speak, it's as if we're all going to die tomorrow if we don't change immediately. It's funny to me that liberals gave the GOP crap for "fear-mongering" us into a war that we didn't truly analyze before we started, but they use the same tactics to get the government to spend billions on actions that may or may not work.

At this point even if we all can agree that humans cause AN effect on the environment, we don't know the extent of it. We don't know what will happen. We have "models" and "theories" that are debunked annually (either positively or negatively). The fact of the matter is we don't have any idea what is going to happen, so the environmentalists need to stop leading the charge as if we do. That's not to say we shouldn't do ANYTHING, but as much as people on the one side might be purposefully blind to the issue, so is the other.

[BigSqwert]

Ohhh, you installed mercury filled light bulbs in your houses to save energy...too bad when those do burn out you added a bunch of mercury content to the earth. Good job.

Didn't that mercury already come from the earth to begin with? How are you adding more mercury content to the earth unless you brought it from another planet?

[NorthSideSox72]

Like I said, note that I will use 3 water bottles for every 1 you save. I will heat my house to 100 degrees day and night. I will waste aerosol sprays, and do everything in my power to undo everything you try to conserve. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

As for hybrids...LOL. Note there are many stories on this: http://www.caradvice.com.au/39714/hybrid-v...hortage-report/

Way to go...environmentalists! You traded one finite resource (oil) for a BUNCH of even MORE finite resources...a lot of which we have no idea what kind of damage they will even cause in the long run yet.

Oh, and Northside...I was only kidding with my rant. It's just that this back and fourth bickering is getting old now...so I had to say it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

As for the bolded, I had forgotten the name of the book you were referring to, then found it - the Dust to Dust study. Problem is, a wide variety of scientific studies by various institutions and universities, that were actually peer-reviewed and handled scientifically, completely debunk this claim. I particularly like how this DTD study puts the cost of production of a Prius at $286,000 (LOL).

I still think its not an apples-to-apples comparison, but overall, its obvious that the majority of studies conducted in a professional way make it clear that the higher levels of pollution and indirect cost of manufacturing hybrids, is outweighed by the reduction in pollution and gas use during its lifetime.

[Y2HH]

As for the bolded, I had forgotten the name of the book you were referring to, then found it - the Dust to Dust study. Problem is, a wide variety of scientific studies by various institutions and universities, that were actually peer-reviewed and handled scientifically, completely debunk this claim. I particularly like how this DTD study puts the cost of production of a Prius at $286,000 (LOL).

I still think its not an apples-to-apples comparison, but overall, its obvious that the majority of studies conducted in a professional way make it clear that the higher levels of pollution and indirect cost of manufacturing hybrids, is outweighed by the reduction in pollution and gas use during its lifetime.

While I think claims like a Prius cost 286k are just ridiculous -- those batteries ARE made of very rare materials.

[NorthSideSox72]

While I agree with all of this, don't you think the same can be said for liberals that want to make the environmental discussion into a do or die issue? The way some of these people (including people in this thread) speak, it's as if we're all going to die tomorrow if we don't change immediately. It's funny to me that liberals gave the GOP crap for "fear-mongering" us into a war that we didn't truly analyze before we started, but they use the same tactics to get the government to spend billions on actions that may or may not work.

At this point even if we all can agree that humans cause AN effect on the environment, we don't know the extent of it. We don't know what will happen. We have "models" and "theories" that are debunked annually (either positively or negatively). The fact of the matter is we don't have any idea what is going to happen, so the environmentalists need to stop leading the charge as if we do. That's not to say we shouldn't do ANYTHING, but as much as people on the one side might be purposefully blind to the issue, so is the other.

Agreed on most of this. Yes, of course, liberals have just as much tendency to scream and yell do-or-die on topics, though their styles are sometimes different. Yes, I think we can all agree humans have some effect on the environment, and yes, we cannot know for sure exactly how much.

I would not go so far though, as to say we "don't have any idea what is going to happen". There is all sorts of documented scientific evidence pointing to some things being LIKELY. So I'd agree with your statement if you were to say we don't know FOR SURE what is going to happen.

I tend to like McCain's thinking on this. Even if we're all wrong, and the human effect is minimal, then what's the worst case of being environmentally responsible? We create new industries and lower pollution? How are those bad things, even on their own?

[NorthSideSox72]

While I think claims like a Prius cost 286k are just ridiculous -- those batteries ARE made of very rare materials.

No argument there. Nickel, cadmium, etc., those are all metals that are seeing massive demand increases, and mining them does indeed have an environmental consequence.