Do you remember it being colder

It's not about the free lunch, it's about saying what you have already bought and paid for is not acceptable and you must now give us more money cause we have all these reasons that sound so dramatic but not a real economic savings. Agree, totally remove subsidy and let em stand on their own. But wait, my power company already has added a surcharge to reach some certain percentage of "green" energy. Maybe we should coin the term "greed" energy.
Cheap reliable energy is bad, very bad. It makes life good, and that's bad.

If you told me someone could convince a whole group of people to off themselves, I would immediately think of koolaid.
 
You missed my point entirely. Many folks think being smart environmentally means doing away with 100% of anything fossil-fuel-wise. By using wind, solar, nuclear, and geothermal for power generation as additional / supplemental sources of energy, (thus reducing greenhouse gases) - I'll ask it again ........ what the H is wrong with that?? Less pollution is less pollution. Do we care nothing for what our kids & grandkids will be saddled with???

Before we see a post again about China burning coal for electricity - if a pile of people jump off a building - do we all want to follow suit?? The argument that, "..... well - China burns coal ....." is the same logic as jumping off buildings. China is working on many ways to generate power much more cleanly. They want a piece of the world-wide "green technology" market. Just because they haven't shut down all their coal plants doesn't mean they aren't moving toward transitioning from coal to cleaner energy sources. Smart, intelligent countries will want to grab as much of that global green market as possible, since it'll create thousands of good-paying jobs in those countries. Will the U.S. lead in that endeavor ..... or suck hind T##???

I worked on stack pollution mitigation projects at coal-fired power plants in my career. Coal is filthy, any way you look at it, and burning it releases a toxic brew of particulate and chemical pollution that no one would want to live near. I worked on one in Jersey where the people living downwind of that plant had a long list of ailments, diseases, and neurological problems. After numerous air studies, soil studies, plant studies, water studies, and blood samples from residents - it was found that the mercury levels were very high downwind of the plant. Not so upwind. Burning coal gives off mercury pollution, as well as sulfur compounds and many other toxic gases. Chemical fact. But .......... maybe the science community has it all wrong ....... and social media yappers know soooooo much more. 🤣 🤣 🤣

If you read much financial / investment reporting, the big oil companies are going ahead with their future-sighted, smart plans to "go greener" whether the "all-knowing" public agrees with it or not. The transition to cleaner isn't going to stop. An article I just read about a week ago had interviews with the CEO's of Exxon, Chevron, and I believe Shell. They all said the same thing - "Don't look for us to 'drill-baby-drill.' We're looking at 'cash-baby-cash' since we're producing record amounts of oil already. Much of our future growth will be from mergers & acquisitions, plus our ongoing projects for cleaner sources of energy - not more drilling." Bringing more oil into the marketplace may be good for consumers at the pumps - but it's not good for their bottom lines. Or the environment - and the big oil companies are playing the long game. They know cleaner & greener is the way forward.
You never heard XOM’s CEO say they won’t be developing more O&G production in the near term.

XOM’s recent Outlook on Energy affirmed once again for like the 5th straight year that substantial new O&G development will be required to meet energy and petrochemical product demand even with the most optimistic implementation of renewables and electrification. It says precisely that more drilling will be needed to meet needs into 2050.

Now with that said, of course they’re investing tactically in other technologies. They aren’t an O&G company. They’re an energy company.

BP is the major going headlong into the uncharted territory of “O&G is bad.” Have a look-see at how that’s working out. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bp-announces-layoffs-aims-cut-141100974.html
 
Last edited:
Global warming full on here….

Single digits here for the next week and below zero windchills.
 
Couple of days of historic snow in south La, and then bam, springtime.

View attachment 74044
Incredible. We are at least 2+ months away from anything close to that here in MN. It's been a little colder this winter than the past few but our drought continues with less than 12" of snow so far this winter.
 
Weird weather here, we had 3 1/2” of rain Wednesday night with temps dropping like a rock.

Right now it’s 8 degrees with no wind, our sidewalk looks like an ice rink and my old truck looks like a crab boat on the Bering sea.

IMG_8900.jpeg

IMG_8901.jpeg

Supposed to get some snow Sat-Sun then they are calling for it to get really cold for about a week.

Ice is ten inches thick on pond.
 
Wild winter here too. We got 18” of snow on January 4th. Some of it is still around. We got 3 more inches a couple nights ago and a few more chances of snow coming up. I can’t remember ever getting this much snow.
4fc53c4b59f768dc61153ba5c3caecd6.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Yea this Winter is going to be one of the coldest and snowiest we have had in a lot of years.
 
January was the warmest on record globally. In Minnesota, a few record highs were set but then it quickly went back down and is now colder than the 30 year average.

Here is a good link that explains some of the ocean currents affecting this winter's weather:
 
For the last week or so -20 in the mornings, with barely getting above 0 for highs. We have about 10 inches of snow on the ground, which most of it came in the last 2 weeks.

The local weather man is a complete left wing global warming idiot. He gets excited with higher temps because it shows the climate is warming, but complains when it is colder than average, because it will be harder to break new records, and people wont believe in global warming anymore.

He will say, if we take away the coldest 10 days of the year, it puts us in the warmest year on record. But doesnt comment what would happen if you took away the warmest 10 days of the year. But the sheep follow his lead and repeat what they want to hear from it.
 
I still think y'all are nuts for living up there 12 months a year. I was on a call with one of my QC Canada projects yesterday and they were freaking out that they were closing schools. Oh wait, not actually closing schools, just shutting down the busses. Bring your kids in, we will be here. Think they got 16" yesterday.
 
For the last week or so -20 in the mornings, with barely getting above 0 for highs. We have about 10 inches of snow on the ground, which most of it came in the last 2 weeks.

The local weather man is a complete left wing global warming idiot. He gets excited with higher temps because it shows the climate is warming, but complains when it is colder than average, because it will be harder to break new records, and people wont believe in global warming anymore.

He will say, if we take away the coldest 10 days of the year, it puts us in the warmest year on record. But doesnt comment what would happen if you took away the warmest 10 days of the year. But the sheep follow his lead and repeat what they want to hear from it.
Yeah, they really stress the global warming about the middle of July. I suppose they have to try to make the weather interesting somehow. Sheep is right. Bring back common sense please, we really miss it.
 
Sticks & leaves are not pollution. They're above ground and part of nature on the Earth's surface - which is where we live - not underground. Co2 is part of nature - surface nature. The Co2 we get from burning fossil fuels would not have migrated up through thousands of feet of soil & rock unless we dig or drill it to the surface - thus the name "fossil fuels."

The Co2 that's been here since Creation is surface Co2, and plants need it for photosynthesis, which causes them to give off oxygen. When plants die & decay, they release that original, surface carbon back into the atmosphere & soil - at a slow rate. The carbon sources that come from deep inside the earth are an overloading of carbon - any way you slice it. Without digging or drilling it out of the ground - it would stay right there - underground. For clarity - - I'm not suggesting that 100% of all oil products should be done away with, and I know of no one who is suggesting that. But what is the harm in reducing fossil fuel sources to generate electricity, and moving to cleaner energy sources?? The often-lamented position that jobs will be lost for miners & drillers (and they won't all go away) ........ that can be said of all kinds of industries. Workers in past years were told to re-train for new kinds of jobs. Wait until the big players get AI into everything. That'll cost millions & millions of jobs .... by their own admission & comments. Some big companies are already laying off thousands of people, even "safe career" coders & engineers, because AI is replacing them.
Have you looked at co2 graphs? How did it change before humans existed then?

Do volcanoes not take co2 up through thousands of feet of earth into the atmosphere?
 
Sticks and leaves are made of carbon. When they deteriorate in the soil they release co2. Damned pollution emitters those sticks and leaves.
Agreed. But those two sources are already on top of the ground, where we're breathing. And they release it at a very slow rate - as compared to burning billions of tons of carbon every year that was trapped underground. And ...... when leaves and sticks decay, they don't produce mercury pollution into the air / then soil / then water either. God didn't design a mess in nature .... we created the mess.
For every combustion engine that is replaced by electric, the equivalent power plus the efficiency loss must be used to produce that electricity. Essentially you are taking an engine out of a car and putting in a fixed location to generate the equivalent power. Solar and wind will not do it.

There is no free lunch.
Agree there is no free lunch. But isn't it wise to be "on a diet" when it comes to polluting the only atmosphere we have?? It's called being prudent. The moves to wind and solar as electricity sources won't 100% eliminate all fossil fuels - at least not in the near future. They're supplements to a grid using mixed fuels. Increasing the variety of cleaner energy sources while scaling back on the dirtier fuels is a sensible direction to 3/4 of the population. I like to think I'm doing my part to leave a cleaner world for our kids & grandkids ...... and so do millions of other folks.
 
Have you looked at co2 graphs? How did it change before humans existed then?
Key words - humans didn't exist back then. The earth was also covered by gobs more trees & plants back then - not concrete & blacktop - so gabillions more plants to take up extra carbon, I would think. Jungle everywhere.

I believe in God - and he put us here to be stewards of His creation. I guess look up "steward." Dictionaries say a steward is a "trustee, caretaker" and the verbal form of steward is "to guard" or "protect."
 
Key words - humans didn't exist back then. The earth was also covered by gobs more trees & plants back then - not concrete & blacktop - so gabillions more plants to take up extra carbon, I would think. Jungle everywhere.

I believe in God - and he put us here to be stewards of His creation. I guess look up "steward." Dictionaries say a steward is a "trustee, caretaker" and the verbal form of steward is "to guard" or "protect."
I agree with you there.

It also says don’t store up for tomorrow. The birds and flowers are clothed because of Him. That’s where I will Put my faith.
 
Agreed. But those two sources are already on top of the ground, where we're breathing. And they release it at a very slow rate - as compared to burning billions of tons of carbon every year that was trapped underground. And ...... when leaves and sticks decay, they don't produce mercury pollution into the air / then soil / then water either. God didn't design a mess in nature .... we created the mess.
So take a look at how you are wording things; minimizing sticks and leaves while blowing up carbon. Carbon is not your enemy. Pretty much everything tangible has a good amount of carbon.
Did you know that those sticks and leaves on top of the ground also equate to billions of tons?
Did you know that underground carbon you speak of, was actually atmospheric carbon and was sequestered during what is believed to be the most biologically productive time on the planet?
Sticks and leaves also emit methane, as well as the most powerful "greenhouse gas" in the world; water.




Agree there is no free lunch. But isn't it wise to be "on a diet" when it comes to polluting the only atmosphere we have?? It's called being prudent. The moves to wind and solar as electricity sources won't 100% eliminate all fossil fuels - at least not in the near future. They're supplements to a grid using mixed fuels. Increasing the variety of cleaner energy sources while scaling back on the dirtier fuels is a sensible direction to 3/4 of the population. I like to think I'm doing my part to leave a cleaner world for our kids & grandkids ...... and so do millions of other folks.

THe red circles are PV solar fields. The little green circle is three gas fired turbines producing more power than all of the red circles combined. A few miles south are a million empty roof tops.

1739639426509.png

When co2ists speak, the speaketh with forked tongue.
 
Heard guys up north are starting to worry about frozen pipes after this next cold blast. Frost getting deep.
 
Heard guys up north are starting to worry about frozen pipes after this next cold blast. Frost getting deep.

Our concern is the cold and no snow to insulate. We covered the wells with a pile of what snow we do have. There are two houses here. The old farmhouse septic is starting to slow down. The new house is still going strong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Agree there is no free lunch. But isn't it wise to be "on a diet" when it comes to polluting the only atmosphere we have?? It's called being prudent. The moves to wind and solar as electricity sources won't 100% eliminate all fossil fuels - at least not in the near future. They're supplements to a grid using mixed fuels. Increasing the variety of cleaner energy sources while scaling back on the dirtier fuels is a sensible direction to 3/4 of the population. I like to think I'm doing my part to leave a cleaner world for our kids & grandkids ...... and so do millions of other folks.
I'm on the right, I'll wear the MAGA hat anywhere anytime. I'm in Ok, one of the king states for fossil fuels, and it drives most of our state's economy. I believe in MOST science.

I don't believe in global warming (in the context the extremists lay it out). I think what Bows is saying is well said. Moderation is the key for almost everything. Anyone older than around 35 yrs has enough life experience to understand how critical moderation is. Prove me wrong on this..

I'm also a numbers guy, and while numbers don't lie, they can be misunderstood. Take West_Forks pic above as a great example...that one TINY green circle provides more power that all the GIANT red circles combined! (Now, I'm taking his word for that, as he seems to be a decent knowledgeable guy.) If I had all the numbers for what it took to: source the materials, manufacturer, build, maintain, etc for ALL those power plants, I'd have a fancy report that tells me what my eyeballs already see. There's no way the carbon footprint left by the creation of the solar plants is less than the footprint of the single gas powered plant. Yeah, maybe lonnggg term, like 100 years, but we all know that solar equipment likely will likely only last 10 yrs or so.

So, I support Bucks on moderation, and we need to pay attention to this potential future problem. I also support West, because the "juice may not be worth the squeeze" Continued scientific research is necessary, If we could just keep the politics out of it...
 
Back
Top