The environment thread

[kapkomet]

So, Tex, has your evening news introduced you to the term "pyrocumulonimbus" yet?

 

 

It's really, really bad just west of where I live.

[Balta1701]

Anyone ever notice the negative correlation between fuel prices and intelligence?

President Barack Obama said on Thursday the U.S. attorney general was assembling a team to root out any fraud and manipulation in the oil markets that might be contributing to higher U.S. gasoline prices.

 

Earlier, the Justice Department announced the working group, which will include representatives from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Reserve Board, the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as the Departments of Agriculture, Energy, Justice and Treasury.

[kapkomet]

Anyone ever notice the negative correlation between fuel prices and intelligence?

 

 

Yea. You're exactly right with that observation.

[Balta1701]

I'll believe it when I see someone convicted of something.

An investigation into possible manipulation of gasoline prices has uncovered "disturbing'' revelations, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.

 

"There are a couple things that … are disturbing,'' Holder said, declining to elaborate.

 

He indicated the information would be reviewed by a fraud task force formed last week.

[lostfan]

I really have to slam my face against the wall whenever I see religious conservatives talking about end times bulls*** and all these horrible tornadoes that have killed hundreds of people being signs from God, when this kind of extreme weather intensifying every year (and tornadoes happen every spring) is exactly what the "do something about climate change" crowd has been screaming would happen for the last decade and a half. Except they were being shouted down by the same people. Oh well, guess I better get used to it

[Balta1701]

I really have to slam my face against the wall whenever I see religious conservatives talking about end times bulls*** and all these horrible tornadoes that have killed hundreds of people being signs from God, when this kind of extreme weather intensifying every year (and tornadoes happen every spring) is exactly what the "do something about climate change" crowd has been screaming would happen for the last decade and a half. Except they were being shouted down by the same people. Oh well, guess I better get used to it

With some storms (i.e. Nashville last year, Katrina and Rita, the huge heatwaves that keep striking the north pole) I'll say the climate change people have a point. On the storms earlier this week, there's really no way to make the point sound correct, and they're better off keepign their mouths closed.

 

This week's storms were a La Nina driven phenomenon, but it's a once in a few centuries la nina type phenomenon. Yes, the fact that atmospheric CO2 has changed is affecting every weather pattern, but there's no way to draw any sort of link on this one.

[lostfan]

With some storms (i.e. Nashville last year, Katrina and Rita, the huge heatwaves that keep striking the north pole) I'll say the climate change people have a point. On the storms earlier this week, there's really no way to make the point sound correct, and they're better off keepign their mouths closed.

 

This week's storms were a La Nina driven phenomenon, but it's a once in a few centuries la nina type phenomenon. Yes, the fact that atmospheric CO2 has changed is affecting every weather pattern, but there's no way to draw any sort of link on this one.

The increase in severe weather = climate change cause and effect. Whether this last series of storms had anything to do with it or not

[Balta1701]

The increase in severe weather = climate change cause and effect. Whether this last series of storms had anything to do with it or not

I know that, but I think you have to be especially careful with things like last week...tornado outbreaks were possible 500 years ago, and they'll be possible 100 years from now, and I've seen little to no evidence that "Tornado outbreaks" specifically become more common with increasing CO2. We've seen "incredibly intense hurricanes" and "massive precipitation events" (i.e. Nashville, repeated midwestern flooding) become more common over the last 2 decades, but we haven't seen an increasing frequency of tornado outbreaks. At least not yet.

[lostfan]

I know that, but I think you have to be especially careful with things like last week...tornado outbreaks were possible 500 years ago, and they'll be possible 100 years from now, and I've seen little to no evidence that "Tornado outbreaks" specifically become more common with increasing CO2. We've seen "incredibly intense hurricanes" and "massive precipitation events" (i.e. Nashville, repeated midwestern flooding) become more common over the last 2 decades, but we haven't seen an increasing frequency of tornado outbreaks. At least not yet.

My point was: these things seem more common (the people I'm talking about lump all these events together) because of changes in weather patterns that have been predicted for a while now, not because God got all pissed off and decided to act like an angry abusive spouse.

[Balta1701]

My point was: these things seem more common (the people I'm talking about lump all these events together) because of changes in weather patterns that have been predicted for a while now, not because God got all pissed off and decided to act like an angry abusive spouse.

I hope you're seeing that in response, I'm trying to stay as close to what I can actually argue for as possible, and not go a step beyond what we have solid evidence for.

 

Any time someone goes farther than what we legitimately have evidence for, then "this person is exaggerating the climate change thing" winds up being testimony before Congress.

[lostfan]

I hope you're seeing that in response, I'm trying to stay as close to what I can actually argue for as possible, and not go a step beyond what we have solid evidence for.

 

Any time someone goes farther than what we legitimately have evidence for, then "this person is exaggerating the climate change thing" winds up being testimony before Congress.

Oh I get what you're saying. I never actually said this = that in my original post.

[Balta1701]

The House Republicans have established a solve-the-energy-crisis (aka start drilling more) task force.

 

Nothing funny about it...except the acronym/name.

 

House

Energy

Action

Team.

 

Yes, that's right, they called it "HEAT."

[Balta1701]

The NYT has a front page long story today absolutely ripping the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and their safety inspections. Just to grab one of many clauses/examples.

The Vermont Senate, concerned about the problems, voted overwhelmingly last year to prevent the plant from operating beyond the scheduled expiration of its license on March 21, 2012 — invoking a 2006 state law, unique to Vermont, that requires legislative approval for continued operations.

 

But one day before the quake and tsunami that set Japan’s crisis in motion, the N.R.C. approved Vermont Yankee’s bid for license renewal — just as it has for 62 other plants so far. Its fate is now the subject of a federal lawsuit.

 

“How does a place like that get a license renewal?” Mr. Lochbaum said. “Because they asked for one. Absent dead bodies, nothing seems to deter the N.R.C. from sustaining reactor operation.”

[Balta1701]

a new paper by Duke University researchers that documents “systematic evidence for methane contamination” of household drinking water wells by shale gas drilling in Pennsylvania and New York.

First real good, solid evidence that the exploding drinking water is actually caused by the shale gas extraction.

[StrangeSox]

Saw my first Chevy Volt on the road today.

[Balta1701]

At least the people running U.S. nuclear plants are intelligent, well trained, solid public servants who realize the importance of their positions and take a moment to think before they act, like all great businessmen. Otherwise, they might make the sort of incredibly bad decisions that led to the Japanese disaster.

The clueless CEO in charge of the upstate Indian Point nuclear plant had a stunning meltdown in judgment when he kicked off an investor meeting by displaying the quote from the movie "The Hangover," "By the way, we're all gonna die!"

 

In a bonehead attempt to ease fears about potential disaster, Wayne Leonard, the boss at New Orleans-based energy conglomerate Entergy, littered his 111-page presentation with pictures and lines from the hit 2009 movie.

 

The slides, making up the first five pages and then randomly scattered throughout, included the characters discussing how to pronounce "retard" and the question, "Would you please put some pants on? I feel weird having to ask you twice."

 

He also stuffed the pages with the film's funniest moments, including three frames from the scene where Mike Tyson knocks out Zach Galifianakis and the classroom Tasering of the three main stars.

 

Leonard -- whose April 29 presentation came just seven weeks after the Japanese earthquake and tsunami caused a nuclear disaster -- said his point was that worries about safety are sinking the stock price of his highly profitable company.

 

"It's a comedy of how one things leads to another when you lose control of what's taking place," Leonard said of the movie, about a bachelor party in Las Vegas that careens wildly out of control.

 

He also dismissed the risks of nuclear energy by offering a bizarre array of more probable ways to die, including fireworks, legal execution, bee stings and lightning.

[StrangeSox]

that's an incredibly lame "attack" on the nuclear industry

 

lol New York Post

Edited May 12, 2011 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

Well, at least you think nuclear safety is a joke.

[StrangeSox]

Well, at least you think nuclear safety is a joke.

 

No, just your arguments against it!

 

A CEO's tasteless presentation has no impact or effect on how the plant is actually run and inspected. And although the NYT article you posted a couple of days ago raises legitimate concerns about the relationship between a regulatory body and the industry it is regulating, I also have a couple of years of first-hand experience from plants around the country.

 

I can't imagine an industry that is more heavily regulated and more safety-conscious. It's almost to the point of causing a paralysis because there is so much paperwork, meetings, checks, walkdowns, re-checks, etc. to get anything done. For industrial workers, it'd be hard to find a safer workplace. One plant is freaking out and banning all adjustable wrenches because one loosened the other week, which caused the wrench to slip off the nut and the guy to injure his elbow. When I see stuff like this first-hand, I just have to shake my head at some of the criticisms of the industry.

Edited May 12, 2011 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

No, just your arguments against it!

 

A CEO's tasteless presentation has no impact or effect on how the plant is actually run and inspected. And although the NYT article you posted a couple of days ago raises legitimate concerns about the relationship between a regulatory body and the industry it is regulating, I also have a couple of years of first-hand experience from plants around the country.

No, but it certainly supports my contention that this business is run no differently from any other on Wall Street, despite the fact that it needs to be.

[StrangeSox]

No, but it certainly supports my contention that this business is run no differently from any other on Wall Street, despite the fact that it needs to be.

 

Hmm, no it doesn't actually, because it is run significantly differently. Even the large utilities that own nuclear plants split them off in their own bastard division because of the exponential increase in rules and regulations over any other industry.

 

edit I'd be fine with nationalizing the industry, but fwiw the most safety-conscious plant I've seen was privately run, not one of the TVA sites.

Edited May 12, 2011 by StrangeSox

[southsider2k5]

On the bright side he can now be invited to the White House!

[Jenksismyhero]

No, just your arguments against it!

 

A CEO's tasteless presentation has no impact or effect on how the plant is actually run and inspected. And although the NYT article you posted a couple of days ago raises legitimate concerns about the relationship between a regulatory body and the industry it is regulating, I also have a couple of years of first-hand experience from plants around the country.

 

I can't imagine an industry that is more heavily regulated and more safety-conscious. It's almost to the point of causing a paralysis because there is so much paperwork, meetings, checks, walkdowns, re-checks, etc. to get anything done. For industrial workers, it'd be hard to find a safer workplace. One plant is freaking out and banning all adjustable wrenches because one loosened the other week, which caused the wrench to slip off the nut and the guy to injure his elbow. When I see stuff like this first-hand, I just have to shake my head at some of the criticisms of the industry.

 

As an attorney that works in this area (defending), the safety protocols are beyond the norm because of regulations. I just did a plant visit a month or so ago and saw it first hand. I was surprised that they didn't have signs all over the place reminding workers to breathe given the other safety measures in place.

Edited May 12, 2011 by Jenksismybitch

[bigruss]

As an attorney that works in this area (defending), the safety protocols are beyond the norm because of regulations. I just did a plant visit a month or so ago and saw it first hand. I was surprised that they didn't have signs all over the place reminding workers to breathe given the other safety measures in place.

My brother works at a nuclear power plant in SW Michigan and is involved in some of the security design and some of the stories you hear about what you have to go through just to get into the plant is pretty ridiculous, along with some of the work he is doing for defense against certain terrorist attack scenarios.

 

His company even pulled his supervisor from the electrical design team he is on to form an advisory committee that's sole focus is to answer questions that stem from the Japan Nuclear events.

 

Nuclear power plants are some of the most regulated buildings in the world, and the sad part is that some of the new technology that would increase efficiency (and sometimes safety) can't even be implemented because of regulations in the new nuclear plants being built (primarily in the south I believe).

[StrangeSox]

As an attorney that works in this area (defending), the safety protocols are beyond the norm because of regulations. I just did a plant visit a month or so ago and saw it first hand. I was surprised that they didn't have signs all over the place reminding workers to breathe given the other safety measures in place.

 

Seriously, it's ridiculous at times. Mind if I ask what plant you were at?