The environment thread

[Balta1701]

If you want people to take you (not you personally) seriously:

 

1) stop the hyperbole. The world isn't going to be underwater next year. tell the truth. When you lie, outrageously, it makes you look bad.

 

2) Act like you believe what you say. Stop driving when you don't have to, stop flying when you don't have to. You don't need people flying private jets to exotic locations to scheme how you can get more money out of the US and say its because of 'climate change'. Teleconference anyone?

 

3) If everyone isn't going to do it (China, Russia, Indoa, etc.), just the US screwing up their economy isn't going to solve anything. Except screwing up the US economy.

 

4) Stop falsifying data. There may be truth to the data, but messing it up to make it seem more extreme makes you look like liars. Also stop cherry-picking data. Present it all. Make you models open for people to see how you get there instead of just saying 'trust us'. because nobody does.

1. I'd like to say that most scientists do. I can't verify that everyone does, but "large scale ice sheet collapses within the next century" are totally reasonable.

 

2. Go bike home in the rain as much as I do and then tell me that again.

2a. big part of the problem? one person doing that does very, very little. The real setup should be that people have to pay for what they're actually emitting, and thus people get to choose whether it's worth it to them.

 

3. That's why there are international efforts to set up agreements. Unfortunately, getting the U.S. on board has been one of the biggest problems.

 

4. I wish you'd apply those same standards of "stop falsifying data" to people who deny climate change, because the 2000 page IPCC reports blow those away.

4a. Virtually all models do get published and made public. There's just a learning curve to figure out the code and most people can't be bothered to learn how those work.

[EvilMonkey]

1. I'd like to say that most scientists do. I can't verify that everyone does, but "large scale ice sheet collapses within the next century" are totally reasonable.

 

2. Go bike home in the rain as much as I do and then tell me that again.

2a. big part of the problem? one person doing that does very, very little. The real setup should be that people have to pay for what they're actually emitting, and thus people get to choose whether it's worth it to them.

 

3. That's why there are international efforts to set up agreements. Unfortunately, getting the U.S. on board has been one of the biggest problems.

 

4. I wish you'd apply those same standards of "stop falsifying data" to people who deny climate change, because the 2000 page IPCC reports blow those away.

4a. Virtually all models do get published and made public. There's just a learning curve to figure out the code and most people can't be bothered to learn how those work.

Love how you completely missed or ignored the "not you personally' part of what I wrote so you can appear to be personally offended. Oh, and as for 2a, bravo for what you do. but seeing a millionaire politician tell me I have to do X or Y when he refuses to do it himself, doesn't make it seem like such a priority. Lead by example. Oh, and the US wont' sign those because they usually hold US to a higher standard, and there is inadequate ways to catch and/or punish the offenders, other than the US. Tell China to stop using so much coal. Have fun with that.

Edited July 17, 2015 by Alpha Dog

[Balta1701]

Love how you completely missed or ignored the "not you personally' part of what I wrote so you can appear to be personally offended.

In general, you'd be impressed at how much scientists do try to green their lifestyles, but the idea that you can pull off the kind of work that is done at a conference using a teleconference is just silly and that really should be dumped. You can do some things that way, but 1000+ person teleconferences aren't exactly very efficient.

[StrangeSox]

The Animas River mine spill in Colorado is pretty awful.

 

[farmteam]

In general, you'd be impressed at how much scientists do try to green their lifestyles, but the idea that you can pull off the kind of work that is done at a conference using a teleconference is just silly and that really should be dumped. You can do some things that way, but 1000+ person teleconferences aren't exactly very efficient.

Based off my inadequate sample size of roommates and friends in college, this is 100% the case. They all did a lot of biking, were generally efficient with energy. Were generally good citizens of the Earth. Maybe you had the same experience at Indiana.

[Balta1701]

The Animas River mine spill in Colorado is pretty awful.

 

So, just finished an article on this spill for the outreach page I write for. My opinion now is that this spill is not a scandal, but instead the real scandal is what is legal.

 

The spill reports constantly say ~3 million gallons of contaminated water spilled but there is no context for that number. Is 3 million gallons a lot?

 

Well, this particular mine reportedly is leaking about 200+ gallons per minute, which translates to 3 million gallons leaked in a period of under 2 weeks. However, this is not the only mine at this site, there are something in the range of 5-7 mines on this site all of which are leaking substantially ever since the water treatment site at the last operational mine shut down in 1996. The largest 2 flow rates are at 300 gallons per minute. If you total up the leak rate from all the mines, a 3 million gallon spill represents the amount leaked into Cement Creek from this one site in about 2-3 days.

 

Cement Creek feeds into the Animas River, the Animas has a flow rate about 3x that of Cement Creek. So, when this burst happened, it was a sudden flow of 2-3 days worth of what flows into that river normally. That will still do damage to the ecosystem in the river, but it's not a major loss.

 

Downstream it entered the San Juan River system and the pulse of dissolved solids in the San Juan River was not even the largest pulse of dissolved solids in the last month. Large rain events across the basin cause larger pulses into that river system and into lake Powell to than this spill.

 

Cement Creek, also, is on average more contaminated than this mine effluent. I found measurements from Cement Creek showing that it typically had a pH of about 4.1 all the way back in 1997; the lowest pH measured in the Animus after this spill was about 4.5, and other contaminants like copper follow the same pattern - even more concentrated in the normal Cement Creek than in the Animas after this flood.

 

Basically, this flood was a sudden release of 2-3 days worth of what has reached this river every single day since the mid-1990s from these abandoned mines.

[NorthSideSox72]

So, just finished an article on this spill for the outreach page I write for. My opinion now is that this spill is not a scandal, but instead the real scandal is what is legal.

 

The spill reports constantly say ~3 million gallons of contaminated water spilled but there is no context for that number. Is 3 million gallons a lot?

 

Well, this particular mine reportedly is leaking about 200+ gallons per minute, which translates to 3 million gallons leaked in a period of under 2 weeks. However, this is not the only mine at this site, there are something in the range of 5-7 mines on this site all of which are leaking substantially ever since the water treatment site at the last operational mine shut down in 1996. The largest 2 flow rates are at 300 gallons per minute. If you total up the leak rate from all the mines, a 3 million gallon spill represents the amount leaked into Cement Creek from this one site in about 2-3 days.

 

Cement Creek feeds into the Animas River, the Animas has a flow rate about 3x that of Cement Creek. So, when this burst happened, it was a sudden flow of 2-3 days worth of what flows into that river normally. That will still do damage to the ecosystem in the river, but it's not a major loss.

 

Downstream it entered the San Juan River system and the pulse of dissolved solids in the San Juan River was not even the largest pulse of dissolved solids in the last month. Large rain events across the basin cause larger pulses into that river system and into lake Powell to than this spill.

 

Cement Creek, also, is on average more contaminated than this mine effluent. I found measurements from Cement Creek showing that it typically had a pH of about 4.1 all the way back in 1997; the lowest pH measured in the Animus after this spill was about 4.5, and other contaminants like copper follow the same pattern - even more concentrated in the normal Cement Creek than in the Animas after this flood.

 

Basically, this flood was a sudden release of 2-3 days worth of what has reached this river every single day since the mid-1990s from these abandoned mines.

Interesting (and sad) stuff. Thanks Brian.

 

[StrangeSox]

Mt. McKinley officially renamed to Denali over the weekend

[Jenksismyhero]

Mt. McKinley officially renamed to Denali over the weekend

 

why?

 

[StrangeSox]

That's the traditional indigenous name of the mountain (and the name of the park surrounding it). It was renamed McKinley in the early 20th century.

[Balta1701]

why?

Because President McKinley had nothing to do with Alaska whatsoever, it's the traditional name of the mountain, the state of Alaska petitioned to have the name officially changed back in the 1970s, Congress's original writings on "Naming authority" for the Dept. of Interior gives the executive branch the authority to unilaterally change names if there is no response from Congress during a reasonable period of time (don't remember the exact words but it's something like that), and it makes a nice press release while on an Alaskan trip.

[CrimsonWeltall]

Kinda weird.

 

Denali is definitely a cooler name though.

[cabiness42]

Because President McKinley had nothing to do with Alaska whatsoever, it's the traditional name of the mountain, the state of Alaska petitioned to have the name officially changed back in the 1970s, Congress's original writings on "Naming authority" for the Dept. of Interior gives the executive branch the authority to unilaterally change names if there is no response from Congress during a reasonable period of time (don't remember the exact words but it's something like that), and it makes a nice press release while on an Alaskan trip.

 

I wish more things had that kind of rule attached to it.

Besides, if the people of Ohio really want something named after McKinley that badly, why don't they name their tallest mountain after him?

Edited August 31, 2015 by HickoryHuskers

[StrangeSox]

Some background on the history of the name of the mountain and the attempts to change it.

 

http://www.adn.com/article/20141221/denali...ckinley-renamed

[knightni]

I wish more things had that kind of rule attached to it.

Besides, if the people of Ohio really want something named after McKinley that badly, why don't they name their tallest mountain after him?

Charles Campbell would say something if he wasn't already dead

[StrangeSox]

For reasons that still aren't clear, Volkswagen had deliberately implemented controls on their TDI diesel cars that could detect for vehicle emissions test patterns and would then turn on the required emissions controls. The rest of the time, the car would be polluting far more than legally allowed. This impacts almost 500,000 cars, and VW could face fines as high as $18B.

 

http://jalopnik.com/your-guide-to-dieselga...ng-c-1731857018

 

edit: really glad I didn't end up going with the Jetta TDI I considered last year.

Edited September 21, 2015 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

For reasons that still aren't clear, Volkswagen had deliberately implemented controls on their TDI diesel cars that could detect for vehicle emissions test patterns and would then turn on the required emissions controls. The rest of the time, the car would be polluting far more than legally allowed. This impacts almost 500,000 cars, and VW could face fines as high as $18B.

 

http://jalopnik.com/your-guide-to-dieselga...ng-c-1731857018

 

edit: really glad I didn't end up going with the Jetta TDI I considered last year.

I have some friends in california who just had a new baby this summer. They were looking over the past couple weeks to switch to a larger car than their 2010 or 2011 VW car and of course were going to use that as the trade-in. They suddenly can't buy that car because the trade in value of their vehicle has instantly dropped to zero since it can't pass an actual unrigged California emissions test. They'll get part of a settlement in the end I'm sure but they're unfortunately stuck because of this.

[iamshack]

I have some friends in california who just had a new baby this summer. They were looking over the past couple weeks to switch to a larger car than their 2010 or 2011 VW car and of course were going to use that as the trade-in. They suddenly can't buy that car because the trade in value of their vehicle has instantly dropped to zero since it can't pass an actual unrigged California emissions test. They'll get part of a settlement in the end I'm sure but they're unfortunately stuck because of this.

Wow.

 

That sucks. I would be fuming (ok, the pun was kind of intended).

[StrangeSox]

Yeah, that's really gotta suck for the 500,000 people with new/newish cars who suddenly have lost tons of resale value. Jalopnik has a little article on "what should I do if I'm a Volkswagen TDI owner?" The worst possible spot to be in would be your friends' spot, though. Wonder if they could get a local media campaign going and pressure VW into giving them a new, larger replacement free of charge or something? Still, what a head ache.

 

VW has admitted that this "cheat" is in place on 11 million engines worldwide. Most other countries don't have as stringent NOx emissions controls as the US does, but it still represents a major problem for them.

 

eta: some interesting info from the article's comments. Back in the 00's, there was a similar scandal involving large diesel emissions cheating. Many states don't have a strong enforcement mechanism or even any emissions testing at all in some cases to force compliance with the updates, so these "unfixed" engines have actually been appreciating in value (because they're more efficient and powerful). Something similar could conceivably happen with VW TDI's in states that don't do any emissions testing.

Edited September 22, 2015 by StrangeSox

[Chisoxfn]

Wow.

 

That sucks. I would be fuming (ok, the pun was kind of intended).

Yeah that is awful. I also think the fact that you have the company fined vs. people who conspired put behind bars, is also awful. Fining the Company doesn't hurt the execs, it hurts all the shareholders who lose their money because of the inethical actions of a few.

[StrangeSox]

The shareholders gains are ill - gotten through massive, coordinated fraud.

[NorthSideSox72]

The shareholders gains are ill - gotten through massive, coordinated fraud.

No, the company's results are ill-gotten through massive, coordinated fraud. The shareholders, unless they were somehow aware (which is unlikely if this was a publically traded company and not closely held), are victims of the fraud (though obviously not at nearly the scale of people who were sickened or lost loved ones). This is an important distinction, legally and morally.

 

[StrangeSox]

No, the company's results are ill-gotten through massive, coordinated fraud. The shareholders, unless they were somehow aware (which is unlikely if this was a publically traded company and not closely held), are victims of the fraud (though obviously not at nearly the scale of people who were sickened or lost loved ones). This is an important distinction, legally and morally.

 

Yeah, I wasn't trying to put blame on the shareholders, but their gains are still not legitimate. VW the company committed international regulatory fraud, and part of their stock's value was based on that deception.

 

As far as who owns VW, there was actually a weird story several years back where Porsche essentially became a hedge fund company that also made cars, made a bunch of aggressive moves to try and gain control of VW, had it all blow up and their face and were then taken over by VW. The two companies are linked back to their founders, the Porsche and Piech families. A German state/province actually owns 20% of VW, Porsche's holding company owns 50%, Qatar owns 17% and I think the rest is publicly owned.

[NorthSideSox72]

Yeah, I wasn't trying to put blame on the shareholders, but their gains are still not legitimate. VW the company committed international regulatory fraud, and part of their stock's value was based on that deception.

 

As far as who owns VW, there was actually a weird story several years back where Porsche essentially became a hedge fund company that also made cars, made a bunch of aggressive moves to try and gain control of VW, had it all blow up and their face and were then taken over by VW. The two companies are linked back to their founders, the Porsche and Piech families. A German state/province actually owns 20% of VW, Porsche's holding company owns 50%, Qatar owns 17% and I think the rest is publicly owned.

Porsche has been a wildly successful company, even though they make very little margin on their core sports car lines. They have shown to be quite business savvy, the VW re-merger mess aside.

 

The 959 program was a perfect example. In the late 80's they build a "cost no object" supercar, that they will build only a few hundred of, in one run, period. No options, just a color choice. All 500 were sold before a single one was built, to the tune of $300,000+ in 1990 dollars (over half a million in today's money). They actually priced it in a way they would break even on the car. Why? Because it was free R&D - they basically got funding to create brand new high tech stuff from brakes to air bags to electronics, which they patented and sold, and that is where they made the big bucks.

 

[StrangeSox]

Porsche has been a wildly successful company, even though they make very little margin on their core sports car lines. They have shown to be quite business savvy, the VW re-merger mess aside.

 

The 959 program was a perfect example. In the late 80's they build a "cost no object" supercar, that they will build only a few hundred of, in one run, period. No options, just a color choice. All 500 were sold before a single one was built, to the tune of $300,000+ in 1990 dollars (over half a million in today's money). They actually priced it in a way they would break even on the car. Why? Because it was free R&D - they basically got funding to create brand new high tech stuff from brakes to air bags to electronics, which they patented and sold, and that is where they made the big bucks.

 

Bugatti, another VW-owned company, actually sold the Veyron super/hypercars at a loss. Lexus loses money on their LF-A supercar. It's not uncommon for these tech showpieces to lose money.

 

Porsche's Cayenne diesel may also be affected by this incident as that platform is a joint effort with VW.

 

edit: Porsche makes far too many models and variations within each model these days. Please eliminate three. PS I am not a crackpot.

Edited September 23, 2015 by StrangeSox