Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 6721 - 6740 of total 20087 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
crunch

Social climber
CO
Jul 5, 2013 - 12:05am PT
I look at this from a personal perspective here in Pueblo West, a middle class community 10 miles from Pueblo, on the high S. Colorado prairie. There is no central business area out here, but a number of strip malls and individual business buildings. I have observed small business after small business vanish starting just after the Great Recession began. Recently that trend seems to have accelerated, leaving a large number of empty spaces. Also, in my extended family there are significant unemployment problems among several younger members who were well-trained for their work. One is a very competent driller whose job vanished with the downturn in precious metals' values.

When someone recommends taxing imports from China, etc. if they do not follow the lead of the US, I think Yes, and then those in my family skirting near the edge of financial disaster will have to pay 12$ for an item at Walmart previously listed as 10$. Who ends up paying the price? And, yes, import fees might increase US production, but that's a dangerous path.

Your argument could turned on its head.

No one yet knows how hard global climate change will hit us.

But the people hardest hit will be those living in locations where the climate is hot and dry, marginal for agriculture already. Southeast Colorado would fit into that category.

Among the other, non-human forcings and variables, currently the human-caused element is feeble. But even this feeble effect has, seemingly, wrecked agriculture and ruined ranchers and farmers in southeast Colorado and into Oklahoma.

So, any tax that serves to stall climate change will benefit places like southeast Colorado and Oklahoma and New Mexico far more than Vermont or Pennsylvania.

So, by this logic, the people of Pueblo should be the most enthusiastic supporters of carbon taxes and the like.
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Jul 5, 2013 - 12:20am PT
Did you get clipped by The Chief?

No, he's shot at me before though. It's time to get an SUV......with armored windows and side walls!
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Jul 5, 2013 - 12:39am PT
So, any tax that serves to stall climate change . . .


Good luck with that.

I don't think the majority of people of Pueblo would rush to support such a tax. Ervaz Steel Mill (formerly CF&I) modernized, removing old coal burning furnaces a number of years ago, replaced by electric furnaces fueled by the Commanche (coal) Power Plant nearby. Additional taxations would injure the economy - we are not primarily an agricultural or ranching community. However, SE Colorado is and you might find a little support there, but I doubt it, as families out there are concerned about where their next meals will come from and the "promise" of "possibly stalling climate change" is pretty nebulous.
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Jul 5, 2013 - 12:46am PT
We should just wait and see if it gets bad enough to do anything about, like Rick says. But, we could tax chalk too. Chalk is getting off easy.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 5, 2013 - 11:50am PT
jgill, it is an interesting problem you spotlight. How do we, on a micro level, deal with a problem that is macro in nature?


Because the economy is directly tied to energy and its cost, any bump to the energy supply will resonate with the economies of the world.

As you say, the latest recession is still bouncing off the walls, and while the DOW just hit its all-time high, the under-structure is rotten to the core. People with skills can't find work and people without skills are in a worse way.

And now, we're hit with some crazy problem with our energy source?

Yeah, we are.




DMT, 123,123,123. I loved that--Brilliant!
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 5, 2013 - 12:06pm PT
all for an unproven disaster that may occur (according to a minority of scientists)many decades in the future.

And here is the lie, in all it's glory.

I AM a member of the scientific community. I personally meet climate scientists.

"according to a minority of scientists" is bald-faced rubbish. You can find a very small number of climate deniers among climate scientists, but those consist almost exclusively of those on the payrolls of industry, earning their bucks.
Ken M

Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
Jul 5, 2013 - 12:17pm PT
k-man,

If I might take a stab at your question:

The old adage in hiking might apply: If you take care of the oz, the lbs take care of themselves.

An example might be the Kyoto treaty, which the US has not signed. My city, Los Angeles, HAS signed the treaty.....and HAS met the established goals of the treaty.....as have a number of cities.

LA has a plan to be off all coal-fired electricity, and it is making it's way in that direction at breakneck speed...we'll be off in 12 years.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/20/los-angeles-wants-nothing-to-do-with-coal-fired-power/

Ironic the way the Mayor describes it:

“I believe the only way to get the goal is to set aggressive timetables,” Villaraigosa said. “Climbing mountains that have never been climbed before [isn't] easy.”


LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa initially set twin goals, to achieve 20 percent renewable energy in the city’s mix by 2010, and to get LA off of coal by 2020.

The city has reached the 20 percent renewables goal.

The Sierra Club’s Evan Gillespie likes that quitting coal will bring L.A.’s greenhouse gas emissions 60 percent below 1990 levels.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Jul 5, 2013 - 01:23pm PT
The most obvious thing to do is get Pueblo off of that coal fired power

My first glimpse of Pueblo occurred 51 years ago when my first wife and I drove south on the new I-25. Smoke was billowing from the furnaces of CF&I that early evening drifting to the south along the freeway, in a leisurely fashion - 90 miles to Trinidad. I was impressed, but back then the paper mill on the Black Warrior was still emitting a far more lethal product, so I wasn't shocked.

About 10 years later I moved to Pueblo, and the air seemed a little cleaner. Then, some years later, the steel mill went electric, and suddenly Pueblo had amazingly clean air, far better than Aspen, Colorado Springs, Denver, or Fort Collins. Back in Tuscaloosa the paper mill shut down and air quality improved enormously.

Those of you who are younger perhaps have not lived through such remarkable advances and your baselines are quite high from my perspective. I'm not being critical, but only mentioning this so you might recognize that older people sometimes see things a bit differently.

The Commanche (coal) plant is actually pretty clean these days. I would not recommend advocating its closure or conversion anytime soon. Although, from the distant reaches of Canada you might be safe doing so.


;>)
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Jul 5, 2013 - 02:12pm PT

LA has a plan to be off all coal-fired electricity, and it is making it's way in that direction at breakneck speed...we'll be off in 12 years.

Amazing news - good to see! Unless.....it's just a conversion to natural gas.
command error

Trad climber
Colorado
Jul 5, 2013 - 02:35pm PT
Aerosols from wildfires and volcano's and my burned chicken wings are all
helping to cool the climate.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 5, 2013 - 03:02pm PT
Ron plays card #1:

The WEAKEST stuff ever..

I agree Ron, your argument is as weak as a left jab from a toddler.


OF COURSE warmer temps mean harder burning fires.. But a a degree or so diff ISNT going to make or break ANYTHING in wildifires.

Sounds like opinion to me. For me, I'd sooner listed to somebody who knows what they're talking about, and would pay extra attention to somebody who studies the subject for a living:

"Even a degree or so warmer, day in day out, evaporates water faster and that desiccates the system more," said fire ecologist Steve Running of the University of Montana.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 5, 2013 - 03:22pm PT
Funny Ron, we're talking climate change and how it has an effect on wild fires.

Your prior knowledge on wild fires doesn't give your opinion traction.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 5, 2013 - 03:29pm PT
Ron, tell me how you know about the scope of my wild fire knowledge?

More hot air and ad-hoc opinion. Keep at it, the respect for your writings dwindles with each of your baseless posts.
Elcapinyoazz

Social climber
Joshua Tree
Jul 5, 2013 - 03:32pm PT
Hi Ron,

What factors influence the fuels moisture %?
And what effects do those fuel moisture levels have on fires?
Dr. Christ

Mountain climber
State of Mine
Jul 5, 2013 - 03:44pm PT
But a a degree or so diff ISNT going to make or break ANYTHING in wildifires.

It is THE FUEL MOISTURES that are lacking in many areas.

And you know this how, intuition?


You KNOW plants lose more water when it is hot, right?
You know soil does too right?

A 1.0F increase in air temperature can result in an increase in water loss of over 1/2" of per month. The article Bruce posted says the 10 year average air temperature has changed 2.3F in AZ.

Do you really think a loss of 1/2" per month is insignificant given the very low precipitation in the area? (HINT: the little blue line WELL below 1/4" is the average precipitation.

Credit: Dr. Christ

What effects fuel moistures? HUMIDITY, TEMPERATURE, WEATHER and TOPOGRAPHY.

So, tell me, how is it that "a degree or so diff ISNT going to make or break ANYTHING in wildifires."



The explanation of how these affect wildfires are complex and far too long for me to indulge here.

Your combination of arrogance and ignorance is tiresome and nauseating.
jgill

Boulder climber
Colorado
Jul 5, 2013 - 03:45pm PT
. . . the wisdom of past eras that got us into this mess in the first place

Oooh . . . I feel so bad about that . . .


;>\
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 5, 2013 - 03:51pm PT
What effects fuel moistures? HUMIDITY, TEMPERATURE, WEATHER and TOPOGRAPHY.

weath·er
[ wéər ]

state of atmosphere: the state of the atmosphere with regard to temperature, cloudiness, rainfall, wind, and other meteorological conditions


Looks like you failed the question Ron, and that you're not as knowledgeable about these things as you'd like to feel.

But you're funny. And that does have merit, so chin up.
raymond phule

climber
Jul 5, 2013 - 04:11pm PT
It is strange, Ron has no problem at all to ignore scientist or disagree with them on subjects that he has very limited knowledge about but when people disagree with him on subjects that he claims he know he seems to became frustrated.
Dr. Christ

Mountain climber
State of Mine
Jul 5, 2013 - 04:17pm PT
So young idgets like wes will now post his graphs not to prove anything but to just show his disdain for me.

Really Rong, you can't even see the point of that graph? It doesn't PROVE anything, it SHOWS that the average precipitation around Yarnell is less than 1/4". Others have proven (and damn near anyone can show) that a 1.0F increase in temperature can increase water loss by over 1/2". Are you REALLY so willfully ignorant that you refuse to accept 1.0F ABSOLUTELY WILL make a difference in fuel moisture, and hence fire behavior?


I have in my library may reports from fatal fires that i was involved with one way or the other. But never mind that right?

Right, because your reports from fires have NOTHING TO DO with what influences fire behavior.

I appreciate your hard work on the lines, but you NEVER studied how fire behaves. It is complicated and you don't learn it in those 1 week FS classes.

I was on a hand crew for 5 years before working for the Riverside Fire Lab (USDA) where they ACTUALLY STUDY WHAT INFLUENCES FIRE BEHAVIOR. Huge advances have been made since the 1970's. I'm sorry you are too stubborn and/or willfully ignorant to accept that. But that is okay, the world will go on without your ridiculous mixture of arrogance and ignorance.
Dr. Christ

Mountain climber
State of Mine
Jul 5, 2013 - 04:32pm PT
Nope, I don't know you or the classes you took. All I know is that you are either unable or unwilling to provide any relevant information about anything, ever. You acknowledge that fuel moisture affects fire behavior, but refuse to admit air temperature affects fuel moisture... something any 8 year old can CLEARLY understand and demonstrate. Instead of addressing how air temperature affects FIRE BEHAVIOR you go off about the jobs you held over 3 decades ago and the reports you have. You bring it on yourself. Those of us interested in the truth can't help but correct you when you are FLAT OUT WRONG.

Did you take the equivalent of S-590? Were you ever FBAN?
Messages 6721 - 6740 of total 20087 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews