The environment thread

[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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

[Y2HH]

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?

 

While true, not quite fair. Removing something from the earth to be used in a product doesn't mean it's meant to be reintroduced into the earth in the fashion in which we will inevitably reintroduce it -- via it leaking from a landfill back into the earth -- possibly poisoning water supplies, etc.

 

The point is, those new light bulbs may save electricity, but they introduce a NEW type of pollution during their manufacture and after their discarded. Until we have tons of those types of bulbs leaking in landfills, and years pass so we can study what happens when enough of them leak down into the earth again, we won't really know what damage we may be causing with them...but hey, meanwhile we're saving a few cents on electric bills!

 

This goes back to my very point on the subject -- we need to carefully study all of these alternatives before we just start using them. Throwing tons of money into poor technologies only to have to go back and REDO it all in future because we realize how shortsighted and stupid it was is NOT the answer to our problems.

 

We have to be smart about it. Otherwise we are repeating the same mistakes we made when we hooked the world on oil -- I mean, back when we did that it seemed like a damn good idea...and it was cheaper than the alternatives!

[Balta1701]

This goes back to my very point on the subject -- we need to carefully study all of these alternatives before we just start using them. Throwing tons of money into poor technologies only to have to go back and REDO it all in future because we realize how shortsighted and stupid it was is NOT the answer to our problems.

 

We have to be smart about it. Otherwise we are repeating the same mistakes we made when we hooked the world on oil -- I mean, back when we did that it seemed like a damn good idea...and it was cheaper than the alternatives!

The flaw in this logic though is that it assumes what we're doing right now has no flaws, such that there is no negative consequences to doing this waiting that you try to advise. This is of course wrong. Your argument is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[Y2HH]

The flaw in this logic though is that it assumes what we're doing right now has no flaws, such that there is no negative consequences to doing this waiting that you try to advise. This is of course wrong. Your argument is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

 

No, I'm not saying don't start doing something -- but be smart about what. Don't just pick something and sink trillions into it now because "we must act RIGHT NOW OR EVERYONE WILL DIE OMG OMG OMG"...because this is the direction we are going right now...I'd prefer a smarter/slower approach.

[kapkomet]

No, I'm not saying don't start doing something -- but be smart about what. Don't just pick something and sink trillions into it now because "we must act RIGHT NOW OR EVERYONE WILL DIE OMG OMG OMG"...because this is the direction we are going right now...I'd prefer a smarter/slower approach.

You, sir, are on the wrong side of history. You know, there were those who thought we need to slow down when it came to slavery. There were those who thought we needed to slow down when it came to women's rights to vote. There were those who thought we needed to slow down when it came to civil rights. Come on, now is not the time to slow down. FULL SPEED AHEAD, BABY! You know utopia awaits those who agree with me!

 

[Y2HH]

You, sir, are on the wrong side of history. You know, there were those who thought we need to slow down when it came to slavery. There were those who thought we needed to slow down when it came to women's rights to vote. There were those who thought we needed to slow down when it came to civil rights. Come on, now is not the time to slow down. FULL SPEED AHEAD, BABY! You know utopia awaits those who agree with me!

 

[StrangeSox]

You, sir, are on the wrong side of history. You know, there were those who thought we need to slow down when it came to slavery. There were those who thought we needed to slow down when it came to women's rights to vote. There were those who thought we needed to slow down when it came to civil rights. Come on, now is not the time to slow down. FULL SPEED AHEAD, BABY! You know utopia awaits those who agree with me!

 

There were those who thought we needed to slow down when it came to not destroying the ecosystem, and then there was big business and the GOP and conservatism in general with its head firmly up its ass.

 

 

You guys should have a kap-off to see who can make the most absurd, logically flawed and inconsistent arguments. Y2HH took a big lead in this thread.

Edited December 18, 2009 by StrangeSox

[Y2HH]

There were those who thought we needed to slow down when it came to not destroying the ecosystem, and then there was big business and the GOP and conservatism in general with its head firmly up its ass.

 

 

You guys should have a kap-off to see who can make the most absurd, logically flawed and inconsistent arguments. Y2HH took a big lead in this thread.

 

Fail.

[Y2HH]

Looks like all the climate talk is falling apart as other nations are showing what I thought all along -- they don't give a crap if it's going to cost money.

[Rex Kickass]

Looks like all the climate talk is falling apart as other nations are showing what I thought all along -- they don't give a crap if it's going to cost money.

According to BBC reporting, the issue wasn't really about money as much as it was about accountability.

[NorthSideSox72]

Looks like all the climate talk is falling apart as other nations are showing what I thought all along -- they don't give a crap if it's going to cost money.

That's not what is going on in this case, but, certainly money is the key factor. And saying they don't give a crap is not accurate, since most of these countries are indeed doing things, just perhaps not enough.

 

[StrangeSox]

Looks like all the climate talk is falling apart as other nations are showing what I thought all along -- they don't give a crap if it's going to cost money.

another factually incorrect statement.

[Y2HH]

another factually incorrect statement.

 

Oh, ok then, it has NOTHING to do with money.

 

You need to wake up and realize its ALWAYS about money.

 

Period.

 

You may proceed living in fantasy land now.

[southsider2k5]

Oh, ok then, it has NOTHING to do with money.

 

You need to wake up and realize its ALWAYS about money.

 

Period.

 

You may proceed living in fantasy land now.

 

If it had nothing to do with money, but most importantly JOBS, this would have been done decades ago.

[Balta1701]

If it had nothing to do with money, but most importantly JOBS, this would have been done decades ago.

Yeah, because if there's one thing that's been proven again and again over the last year, our government cares vastly more about jobs than about the money in the pockets of its contributors.

[Balta1701]

If you're not in this field, and you want to spend an hour or so watching a paleo-climate scientist go through the basics of the geologic side of the evidence for the interaction of CO2 and climate, here's a pretty good named lecture from last week's AGU meeting (Was supposedly standing room only). There's very little jargon and I'm happy to fill in any blanks if you have any.

 

And yes Tex, SOB, wrong thread. Good catch. Thanks.

[Balta1701]

So, in case you still were in the "They need to redo all those calculations because the scientists are evil!" camp, here's another version of it redone, including more data than the british Hadley Center typically does. It, of course, shows that the earth has warmed more over the last 60 years than the previous survey, not less. (The difference basically winds up coming down to how much detail you get on temperature records from the polar regions, which are screaming upwards in temperature)

[Y2HH]

So, in case you still were in the "They need to redo all those calculations because the scientists are evil!" camp, here's another version of it redone, including more data than the british Hadley Center typically does. It, of course, shows that the earth has warmed more over the last 60 years than the previous survey, not less. (The difference basically winds up coming down to how much detail you get on temperature records from the polar regions, which are screaming upwards in temperature)

 

Frankly, it's a little cold out right now...so as far as I'm concerned a little global warming is a good thing.

Edited December 22, 2009 by Y2HH

[kapkomet]

But you see, it is cold precisely because of global warming. Don't you get it?

 

[BigSqwert]

But you see, it is cold precisely because of global warming. Don't you get it?

Wow. You must be a scientist.

[Y2HH]

But you see, it is cold precisely because of global warming. Don't you get it?

 

Oh, I get it...