The environment thread

[StrangeSox]

I think the "55 million year event" is similar to "100 year flood". It doesn't mean it endured for that long, it means a periodic event time.

 

They said "the 55 million year event", not "a 55 million year event".

[StrangeSox]

OK, now I get why you're misunderstanding it.

 

The 55 million year old event was in itself a fairly rapid event. The phrase is the "Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Maximum". It was in itself a (geologically speaking) rapid event. Within a period of 10,000-100,000 years a substantial amount of carbon was released to the atmosphere. That carbon probably was stored in fossil form, most people would guess stored in some sort of methane ices. It was released geologically rapidly, and it was a huge event in climate.

 

The correct way to say it would be we're on the verge of releasing the same amount of carbon in 200 years that were released in 10,000 years at the PETM, and that much carbon at the PETM shifted ocean currents, caused extinctions of creatures, formed large scale deserts, and prevented formation of long-lived ice caps for 20 million years.

 

 

Ah, so the "55 million year event" was the warming event of 10-100k years that occured approximately 55 million years ago?

 

Either way, we're still dumping carbon into the system at a rate that's several orders of magnitude faster.

[Balta1701]

Ah, so the "55 million year event" was the warming event of 10-100k years that occured approximately 55 million years ago?

 

Either way, we're still dumping carbon into the system at a rate that's several orders of magnitude faster.

Yes. You are correct on both of those statements.

 

(Was this comprehensible eventually? Communicating science to people who don't know the field is obviously a skill I could use).

[StrangeSox]

Yes. You are correct on both of those statements.

 

(Was this comprehensible eventually? Communicating science to people who don't know the field is obviously a skill I could use).

 

I'm an engineer and also a science junkie, but as soon as I read your second post I knew what you meant.

[Balta1701]

A couple of farsighted, newly elected Republican Governors seem ready to turn down 100% funding from the government for a couple of high-speed rail projects in their states.

several newly elected Republican governors from states that received rail funds have indicated that they don’t want the money. (Michael Cooper of The Times detailed Republican opposition to high-speed rail prior to the election.)

 

Scott Walker, the incoming governor of Wisconsin, for instance, vowed on Wednesday to carry out a campaign pledge to kill a proposed high-speed rail link between Milwaukee and Madison, part of a larger project to create a high-speed rail corridor across the upper Midwest, from Minneapolis to Chicago. The project was to be fully paid for with $810 million in federal stimulus funds.

 

Mr. Walker said he wanted the money spent on roads, although under the terms of the grants, such a use of the funds is prohibited.

 

The newly elected Republican governor of Ohio, John Kasich, who ousted Ted Strickland, a Democrat, has also reiterated a campaign pledge to kill a $400 million stimulus-funded rail project in his state.

 

“Passenger rail is not in Ohio’s future,” Mr. Kasich said at his first news conference after the election. “That train is dead.”

 

Mr. Kasich had previously called the high-speed rail project the “dumbest idea” he had ever heard, saying that there was too little demand to justify its construction and that the state could not afford to operate it. Like his Wisconsin counterpart, he also said the rail money should be spent on roads.

 

Instead, the funds will almost certainly revert to the federal government for reassignment elsewhere.

[Balta1701]

Getting into a climate change debate on Twitter could be even more exhausting than it sounds now that a software developer named Nigel Leck has automated the process. Tired of arguing with climate change deniers in 140 character quips, the programmer wrote a script to do it for him. Chatbot @AI_AGW scans Twitter every five minutes searching for hundreds of phrases that fit the usual denier argument paradigm. Then it serves them up some science.

 

Those responses are pulled from a database of hundreds of responses that the software matches up to the argument made by the original tweeter. Those who claim the entire solar system is warming are met with something like: “Sun’s output has barely changed since 1970 & is irrelevant to recent global warming” followed by a link to corresponding scientific research.

 

People on the other end of an argument don’t usually pick up on the fact that they are arguing with a program and will continue the argument. And AI_AGW continues to fire back responses. Even when the tweeter keeps throwing the same argument at the chatbot, it will respond with a variety of different arguments and links.

link

[NorthSideSox72]

A couple of farsighted, newly elected Republican Governors seem ready to turn down 100% funding from the government for a couple of high-speed rail projects in their states.

Yeah, I saw this about the Wisconsin thing, in the Trib. I mean, if the state had money at stake, I could understand halting work and studying the real positive vs negative of doing it, because its possible it may not be a good use of the money. While I am in general in favor of better and more rail infrastructure, that doesn't mean that every rail project is a good one.

 

But in this case, its stupid x3. For one, the federal government already made the outlay for the money - if they don't use it, its just going to go to a rail project in another state. Why turn down free money and jobs and infrastructure like that? Second stupid thing, by doing this in this way, he makes it far less likely for his state to get big grant money in the future. Third and finally, this is part of a regional and national rail infrastructure, so this is not all about Wisconsin.

 

[Balta1701]

Yeah, I saw this about the Wisconsin thing, in the Trib. I mean, if the state had money at stake, I could understand halting work and studying the real positive vs negative of doing it, because its possible it may not be a good use of the money. While I am in general in favor of better and more rail infrastructure, that doesn't mean that every rail project is a good one.

 

But in this case, its stupid x3. For one, the federal government already made the outlay for the money - if they don't use it, its just going to go to a rail project in another state. Why turn down free money and jobs and infrastructure like that? Second stupid thing, by doing this in this way, he makes it far less likely for his state to get big grant money in the future. Third and finally, this is part of a regional and national rail infrastructure, so this is not all about Wisconsin.

What you have to realize is that there is a more important issue here...it's about pissing off liberals. It doesn't matter if you hurt the state, it doesn't matter if you hurt the country, it doesn't matter if you waste money or cost people jobs, method #1 of playing to the base = spitting on liberals. Liberals are concerned about the environment and want rail systems? HA!

 

New Jersey has a similar one going with a rail tunnel to manhattan that would significantly relieve driving pressure on the tunnels/bridges, but the governor continues to refuse to pay for it using the federal funds allocated to pay for it.

[kapkomet]

What you have to realize is that there is a more important issue here...it's about pissing off liberals. It doesn't matter if you hurt the state, it doesn't matter if you hurt the country, it doesn't matter if you waste money or cost people jobs, method #1 of playing to the base = spitting on liberals. Liberals are concerned about the environment and want rail systems? HA!

 

New Jersey has a similar one going with a rail tunnel to manhattan that would significantly relieve driving pressure on the tunnels/bridges, but the governor continues to refuse to pay for it using the federal funds allocated to pay for it.

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

In this case, I'd say he's right. This is a 100% federally funded initiative that was meant to be part of a regional effort. The state loses nothing, and stands to gain jobs, cheaper and more efficient transit, and probably more tourist dollars. What possible reason does this Governor have for turning it down than to make a political point?

 

[EvilMonkey]

What you have to realize is that there is a more important issue here...it's about pissing off liberals. It doesn't matter if you hurt the state, it doesn't matter if you hurt the country, it doesn't matter if you waste money or cost people jobs, method #1 of playing to the base = spitting on liberals. Liberals are concerned about the environment and want rail systems? HA!

 

New Jersey has a similar one going with a rail tunnel to manhattan that would significantly relieve driving pressure on the tunnels/bridges, but the governor continues to refuse to pay for it using the federal funds allocated to pay for it.

The NJ one is not completely funded, that's why it is stopped. And with the ones that were originally mentioned, who has to maintain those systems once they are built? You now have a new expense on the books when the states are already broke. And You know that they will not be creating any kind of profit to pay for themselves. Sure, they will have 'jobs' during the construction of it, btu what about when it is done? Oh wait, union jobs to run it, I see. Another expensive bill that the states would have to find a way to pay for. That grant is kinda like someone buying you the 11 CD's for a penny from Columbia House for your birthday, and then leaving YOU with having to buy the remaining 10 at full inflated price to fulfill the committment. Only this committment never ends, just gets more expensive.

[NorthSideSox72]

The NJ one is not completely funded, that's why it is stopped. And with the ones that were originally mentioned, who has to maintain those systems once they are built? You now have a new expense on the books when the states are already broke. And You know that they will not be creating any kind of profit to pay for themselves. Sure, they will have 'jobs' during the construction of it, btu what about when it is done? Oh wait, union jobs to run it, I see. Another expensive bill that the states would have to find a way to pay for. That grant is kinda like someone buying you the 11 CD's for a penny from Columbia House for your birthday, and then leaving YOU with having to buy the remaining 10 at full inflated price to fulfill the committment. Only this committment never ends, just gets more expensive.

You are vastly overstating the maintenance costs to the state. States don't generally have to maintain in this situation, its Amtrak and the freight lines that will pay for this line.

 

NJ one I agree though, New Jersey was on the hook for big bucks and any cost overruns, so I can understand it in that case.

 

[StrangeSox]

This is just an embarrassment.

 

Climate change = not reality because of Genesis. This line of thought isn't uncommon among certain Evangelical groups. Nothing man can do is bad because Earth was made for man.

 

And then he says a bunch of other inane s***, like how horrible is was for miners to loose their jobs thanks to the Clean Air Act.

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

SecTrans LaHood says to WI and OH governors: use the money for its intended purpose or we're taking it back. Further adds that since New Jersey is backing out of their project, they now have to pay $271M of federal funds given out for the tunnel project back to the Feds.

 

I get it with New Jersey, its at least a meaningful reason to stop it - NJ could be on the hook for a lot of money. But for WI and OH, really, its just patently stupid.

 

[EvilMonkey]

SecTrans LaHood says to WI and OH governors: use the money for its intended purpose or we're taking it back. Further adds that since New Jersey is backing out of their project, they now have to pay $271M of federal funds given out for the tunnel project back to the Feds.

 

I get it with New Jersey, its at least a meaningful reason to stop it - NJ could be on the hook for a lot of money. But for WI and OH, really, its just patently stupid.

NJ WILL be on the hook for the money, one way or another. The Dems will make sure to stick it to Christie any and every opportunity they get. What he shold do is just say that he is suspending the project, indefinately, and that it will continue when they have the funds. Then tell the feds to stick it.

[NorthSideSox72]

NJ WILL be on the hook for the money, one way or another. The Dems will make sure to stick it to Christie any and every opportunity they get. What he shold do is just say that he is suspending the project, indefinately, and that it will continue when they have the funds. Then tell the feds to stick it.

Well, I don't know if he should do that or not, but I can at least understand why he's doing it. But I agree with the Feds that if he's stopping the project, he needs to pay back the $271M in outlays they already received for the project.

 

[Balta1701]

Well, I don't know if he should do that or not, but I can at least understand why he's doing it. But I agree with the Feds that if he's stopping the project, he needs to pay back the $271M in outlays they already received for the project.

I believe he's actually received about $750 million in outlays.

[NorthSideSox72]

I believe he's actually received about $750 million in outlays.

Whatever the number is, if the feds poured in money, anything that has not already created some piece of useful infrastructure, that money needs to be returned.

 

[Balta1701]

Whatever the number is, if the feds poured in money, anything that has not already created some piece of useful infrastructure, that money needs to be returned.

You just changed the game though...you said "useful infrastructure" rather than "the actual piece of infrastructure the money was intended for". All of these governors want to spend the money on roads.

[NorthSideSox72]

You just changed the game though...you said "useful infrastructure" rather than "the actual piece of infrastructure the money was intended for". All of these governors want to spend the money on roads.

I meant useful infrastructure as part of the intended project, I thought that was clear.

 

[Balta1701]

Link

[Balta1701]

Ford has announced that they're releasing an all-electric version of the Focus in 2011.

[Balta1701]

Motor Trend car of the year: Chevrolet Volt.

[StrangeSox]

Motor Trend car of the year: Chevrolet Volt.

 

Way too expensive, imo.

[Balta1701]

Way too expensive, imo.

Wasn't the same thing said about the Prius at first?

 

And anyway, the competition is pouring out. See the previous post.