Climate Change & The Paris Agreement · Page 2

Free Fall
Auctions

Specials
Auctions

QuickBuy
Auctions

Newly Added
Auctions

Ending Soon
Auctions

Welcome Guest

Forum Terms & Conditions | My Topics

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#21

Right - so the insufficiently regulated banks that are "too big to fail" take the US tax payer for Billions - but out of of the thousands of green companies you find a list of a few dozen and post it as relevant.

How is Tesla doing?

Btw - I think your total is less than the Trump bankruptcies.....

Brewha wrote:

we could look at plenty of other types of bad gubment spending too... I was trying to stick to the topic tho.... 😟

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#22

we could even ponder what ethanol is really doing for us..... 🤔

tailgater
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#23

So what source would you consider credible for a pie chart?

I think you have disregarded the governments of the world as unfairly biased. Scientist cannot be trusted. Is there anyone left? God sakes man - you even think NOAA is lying with malice and for thought.

Honestly, I think your position boils down to "no one can be trusted". So why ask for further assessment?

Brewha wrote:

Nice deflection.
You rant on in dozens of posts, laying down facts and figures to make your point. You've done this in two different threads.
But when asked for specific details that might justify the government intervention, you determine that I won't consider it credible.

mikey1597
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#24

California targets dairy cows to combat global warming
The Seattle Times 12 hours ago

GALT, Calif. (AP) — California is taking its fight against global warming to the farm. The nation’s leading agricultural state is now targeting greenhouse gases produced by dairy cows and other livestock. Despite strong opposition from farmers, Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation in September that for the first time regulates heat-trapping gases from livestock operations and landfills. Cattle and other farm animals are major sources of methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide as a heat-trapping gas. Methane is released when they belch, pass gas and make manure. “If we can reduce emissions of methane, we can really help to slow global warming,” said Ryan McCarthy.

Are ya fuggin kiddin me!!

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#25

Feeding the Homeless and Illegals is expensive... gotta maintain the sanctuary cities somehow.. 😟

mikey1597
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#26

maybe we should drink more mice milk...... they have teats so's you can milk them and no way do they fart more than a cow

opelmanta1900
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#27

mikey1597 wrote:

I'm not a fan of the governor... at all... but he has it right here... I've actually long stated that regulating methane from dairies and emissions from big rigs would probably take care of half the air problems here in California...

Back in 1999 i had 2 buddies involved in the construction of one of California's first "super dairy's"... these things are horrific ... look into them... they're terrible for every imaginable reason, and methane output is at the top of that list...

opelmanta1900
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#28

I should also say I'm a big supporter and fan of farming and agriculture... I'm not against dairies in any way... but I'm against any kind of agriculture that takes large portions of land and uses it for a single crop or purpose... there are plenty of studies out there showing how harmful this is to the environment...

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#29

ever drive thru Amarillo..?? 😕

gummy jones
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#30

You don't know that.

New industries and technology boom the economy and create specialty job where none were needed before. But if your rich, it is only costly investment.

But you just keep calling it false until the water reaches your bottom lip....

Brewha wrote:

you get off on being as condescending as you can
even when unprovoked

must be quite the burden to be that much smarter than everyone else

jjanecka
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#31

Climate change in the capacity that our current technology has to actually monitor is a flawed theory. We don't understand the whole process; there needs to be more research.

With that being said, I disagree with it being used as a political stunt to merely try and corral industries into streamlining and becoming more efficient. If the process were more intuitive businesses would just simply make the transition because it would be good business. If it's not good business then adopting the change is not worth the merit and no government should intervene unless we're talking real and actual irresponsibility like dumping caustic wastes into streams et cetera.

We know this to be a complete farce as even oil companies are claiming to be "sustainable" and "eco-friendly."

The only reason governments support it is because it is a new way to levy tax.

Edited by user 9 years ago | Reason: Not specified

MACS
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#32

we could even ponder what ethanol is really doing for us..... 🤔

DrafterX wrote:

Nothing. Nothing but making our gasoline less efficient, and gumming up our internal combustion engines.

F*** ethanol.

dstieger
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#33

My (step) FIL is a Midwest corn crop consultant....I tried to have a rational discussion about ethanol with him....I'd have rather been trying to reason with Brew and Fuzz.....FIL wasn't exactly swayed by my eloquent, scientific and economic based arguments

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#34

Something you're missing is the "commons" problem.

Air... climate... streams... these are common resources. We all use them and benefit from them. The damage done to any part of the environment is spread across a population. While the benefits/ profit of not being environmentally conscious are reaped by one organization. This is a well studied business effect, there is zero reason to think that businesses will autonomously act in a manner that reduces the impact on common resources at the expense of their own resources. That would be dumb . They will only do it if there is a political requirement.

Just think for a minute who you elected president. He's a walking, tweeting, most divisive example of a need for regulations (if you want something done) ever. He was applauded for his "good business sense" for doing as much as possible to screw others in order to maximize profit or reduce costs.

To say businesses will do something if there's "good business sense" misses completely the fact that the environmental cost of businesses is not realized by the business.

tailgater
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#35

Nothing. Nothing but making our gasoline less efficient, and gumming up our internal combustion engines.

F*** ethanol.

MACS wrote:

Spoken like a true boating enthusiast.

jjanecka
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#36

Victor, the initial point was that other governments were all bandwagoning together over climate change and that since so many governments are doing so means that it must be true. Additionally, based on the interpretation of the data we really only have recorded over the past 300 years, I really think that our input into the situation is a bit limited. While it may be true that our involvement may directly accelerate the speed in which the earth warms or cools, we definitely shouldn't be so great an impact as to be the singular cause of the issue.

Once again, this is an issue that the government can utilize to expand its authorities and tax the people.

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#37

Of course it can jj... but just because it's an opportunity for govt to tax doesn't mean it shouldn't.... (?)

There are certain things government control and taxes are well suited for... ensuring a user of a common resource realizes the cost of that resource is one of them, and governing the exploitation of common resources is another.

The amount of taxation and control is debatable... but air... moving water... the long term use of the planet... these are arguably common resources.

bgz
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#38

After reading all this (who am I kidding, I didn't read it all)...

I think we need to ramp up our space exploration technology so we can go conquer ... er I mean inhabit other planets.

We need to figure out how the aliens do it, but do it better!

We'll have the best star-fighters, we'll have the best planet warmers and, and with our gay community... we'll have the best alien probers of all time!

Let's make our galaxy great again.

Covfireman
Aficionado

9 years ago

#39

Nothing. Nothing but making our gasoline less efficient, and gumming up our internal combustion engines.

F*** ethanol.

MACS wrote:

+1

You leave out driving the price of groceries up . The ethanol requirements moves food production to energy production . It also effects national security by increasing our demand for imported food .

Drafter for president certainly a better choice than we were presented this year . 🇨🇮

Covfireman
Aficionado

9 years ago

#40

victor809 wrote:

I agree we should tax pollution but let's start by taxing imports from foriegn countries that pollute ie China , India , Mexico et al . That would help keep us companies competitive and allow for more pollution controls .

One example Iknow of is the paper industry. 25 years ago my uncle who sells paper to everything from printers, to box manufacturers almost any industry that uses paper sold 95 % domestic paper the imported paper was usually specialty paper made in Europe for food and medical uses . Now almost 50 % of the paper is imported because the paper can't be made here as cheap . Not because of the labor but the environmental regulations made the companies here less profitable than Chinese imports . We can produce the paper here with better productivity ( ie more production per employee ) but not as economically due to the cost of the environmental control . I'd love to see more environmentally made paper here but not at the cost of importing paper from countries that can just dump the pollution into the rivers . Dioxin ,chlorine, carbon ( atmospheric and organic l )and acids all by products of paper . In the us we control how much they can emit and some of the byproducts have been converted to salable commodities. From activated carbon hydrogen sulfide . That's an example of environmental on troll that produced economic benifits but it still doesn't cover the cost of complying. . Why use the carrot of free trade when the stick of economic tariffs ? If the us andt EU Britain also would stick together then those countries would pollute less .

Users browsing this topic

Important Information: