Global warming???

[randolph]

Originally Posted by Jenae LaTorque

I am in the fossil fuel business and I really believe that we had better get our shit together because we are running out of easily exploitable resources here on this planet. Some years ago, some caps with the logo:

Earth First We'll drill the other planets later

were popular in the oilfield. Funny, yes, in a way. But also true. The other planets and the rest of space are going to be our next sources of hydro-carbons. Meanwhile, we had best get with the space program while we still have the resources to get out there. Mankind has a long history of being wasteful and short-sighted and I really don't see that changing much for the better in the near future. I applaud the efforts of the conservation-minded folks out there; but are very many people listening? And how many really give a damn? Where is the motivation to take care of what we have now? What is going to motivate our ruling bodies to make wise rulings when the fact is that money talks loudest of all?

Is global warming a fact? Seems to be a lot of doubt in the media right now. There is no doubt that historically the temperature goes up and down. I think it is good that we are looking at the potential problem, but I don't really believe that we have any solid answers yet, much less, a clear course of action. Something that I think is a much more pressing concern now is WATER. Clean water that is usable. ???????????

An excellent post!
According to the "experts" peak oil was many years ago. We are using oil faster than we can find it. We are finding ways to get gas out of rock layers that was unavailable in the past, this will help for a while. Coal is our most abundant fuel resource and we will have to use it if we want to keep our current wasteful ways (more co2).
We have a stochastic climate system. With our limited knowledge of how climate works we can only guess what will happen in the future. I am very concerned that politics will impose "regulations" that will do no good and likely cause harm. Defining co2 as a pollutant for example. Co2 is the basis for life on this planet Plants cant live without it.

We can do many things to reduce energy use without expensive draconian government regulations.
For example:
Insulate houses and buildings.
In warm climates, paint roof white.
Stop eating beef (50% of greenhouse gases).
Hybrid and diesel cars.
Keep car in garage (walk, bike).
55 MPH limit.
Shop when returning from work.
Stay home and watch porn.
And so on.

The politicians don't want to encourage simple solutions, they want to enhance their power over society and the public does not want to change their energy consuming habits.

Water? Yes indeed, soon there will be violence and even wars over water as populations continue to increase, especially in India where glaciers are melting in the Himalayas (global warming), which are the source of much of India's water.

One thing for sure, the future will be full of news, most of it bad.

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by randolph

Stop eating beef (50% of greenhouse gases).

I doubt that cows are more of a polluter than cars. Besides, we all fart methane(cows, humans, cats, dogs etc.) and I guarantee you that a burrito from your local taco joint will have you putting the Hindenberg to shame in the department of volatile gases.

Originally Posted by randolph

Water? Yes indeed, soon there will be violence and even wars over water as populations continue to increase, especially in India where glaciers are melting in the Himalayas (global warming), which are the source of much of India's water.

Will the future be like Tank Girl? Will a blonde, half shaven Lori Petty be driving around in a souped up Sherman?

I think the Indians could benefit alot more by purifying the water from the Ganges instead of floating turds and dead bodies down it. I'm all for tradition, but shitting in your own messkit seems a tad counterproductive...

[Jenae LaTorque]

Originally Posted by randolph

Stop eating beef (50% of greenhouse gases).

Aw, come on now! 50%?? Where did you pull that from? Even if you add up the methane emissions from their rear ends, the methane emissions from ours after heating a burger, the exhaust from the ranchers truck, the shipping truck, the packing fatory exhausts, the delivery truck, etc, and the hot air from the auctioneer at the sale ring.....you are still several magnitudes off from 50%. Seems like I heard that your friends and ours, the termites, produce more methane than cattle.
Give up our burgers?!? No way!!

[randolph]

Originally Posted by Jenae LaTorque

Aw, come on now! 50%?? Where did you pull that from? Even if you add up the methane emissions from their rear ends, the methane emissions from ours after heating a burger, the exhaust from the ranchers truck, the shipping truck, the packing fatory exhausts, the delivery truck, etc, and the hot air from the auctioneer at the sale ring.....you are still several magnitudes off from 50%. Seems like I heard that your friends and ours, the termites, produce more methane than cattle.
Give up our burgers?!? No way!!

This is from Earth Save.org.

Methane and Vegetarianism
By far the most important non-CO2 greenhouse gas is methane, and the number one source of methane worldwide is animal agriculture.

Methane is responsible for nearly as much global warming as all other non-CO2 greenhouse gases put together. Methane is 21 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2. While atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have risen by about 31% since pre-industrial times, methane concentrations have more than doubled. Whereas human sources of CO2 amount to just 3% of natural emissions, human sources produce one and a half times as much methane as all natural sources. In fact, the effect of our methane emissions may be compounded as methane-induced warming in turn stimulates microbial decay of organic matter in wetlands-the primary natural source of methane.

With methane emissions causing nearly half of the planet's human-induced warming, methane reduction must be a priority. Methane is produced by a number of sources, including coal mining and landfills-but the number one source worldwide is animal agriculture. Animal agriculture produces more than 100 million tons of methane a year. And this source is on the rise: global meat consumption has increased fivefold in the past fifty years, and shows little sign of abating. About 85% of this methane is produced in the digestive processes of livestock, and while a single cow releases a relatively small amount of methane, the collective effect on the environment of the hundreds of millions of livestock animals worldwide is enormous. An additional 15% of animal agricultural methane emissions are released from the massive "lagoons" used to store untreated farm animal waste, and already a target of environmentalists' for their role as the number one source of water pollution in the U.S.

The conclusion is simple: arguably the best way to reduce global warming in our lifetimes is to reduce or eliminate our consumption of animal products. Simply by going vegetarian (or, strictly speaking, vegan), , , we can eliminate one of the major sources of emissions of methane, the greenhouse gas responsible for almost half of the global warming impacting the planet today.

Well, we are not ready to go vegan or even to eliminate all meat, but we have pretty much eliminated beef particularly hamburger. Hamburger is nasty stuff anyway, often contaminated with salmonella.

[The Conquistador]

Randolph. I'm pretty sure that you seen the cracking towers at an oil refinery right? The flames that jutt up from the tops of the towers are burning off methane as there is just way too much of it to be captured and be effectively stored. They are burning 24/7, 365 days a year and it is logical that they empty more methane into the air than cow doodie.

Natural gas(Methane) is being used as fuel to power vehicles, heat homes and is considered to be alot more environmentally "friendly" than gasoline.

If anything, eating more beef would result in less cattle. Just like if you leave an animal population alone, it explodes. Therefore, harvesting more of them will result in a decrease of the animal population.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

Randolph. I'm pretty sure that you seen the cracking towers at an oil refinery right? The flames that jutt up from the tops of the towers are burning off methane as there is just way too much of it to be captured and be effectively stored. They are burning 24/7, 365 days a year and it is logical that they empty more methane into the air than cow doodie.

Natural gas(Methane) is being used as fuel to power vehicles, heat homes and is considered to be alot more environmentally "friendly" than gasoline.

If anything, eating more beef would result in less cattle. Just like if you leave an animal population alone, it explodes. Therefore, harvesting more of them will result in a decrease of the animal population.

I love your amazing logic! Your joking of course.

[The Conquistador]

No I was not joking.

The whole cow poo affecting the climate thing is preposterous. It is just a ploy by vegans to make others feel guilty for eating beef by claiming that the beef that they eat somehow contributes to GW.

[randolph]

Here are a few of the websites pointing out the contribution of agricultural methane to global warming.