I am really glad to know that the U.S. govt ...

[Dennis_Harmon]

I am really glad to know that the U.S. government now finally conceeds that global-warming is anthropogenically produced and is the result of Detroit, Michigan based industries. I just hope it's not too late. Get a clue people! Americans can't be that stupid! Don't take your science again from Rush Limbaugh. Dennis

[AlpineK]

Dennis,

 

I don't think you've met one of the other long time posters, "Fairweather," but you're about to... He's going to give you links to sources like the Cato(SP?) Institute, who's financial backing comes from industries opposed to any kind of change in types of fuel used by the US. Also Fairweather will give you links to, "scientific," studies that lack peer review, but have funding from the institutions I noted above.

 

Have fun with Fairweather; I think he's got a lot of stock in Texaco and such.

[RedMonk]

just because it is popular to bash on americans and blame them for the woes of the world....doesn't mean that you dont have to get your facts straight.....why dont you look at places like jakarta (which hosts some of the worst air quality especially for population size). while i'm sure taht detroit isn't a model for clean air....it isn't to blame for the poor air quality that abounds throughout the world.... lets try and not be so cliche as to blame the U.S. government for everything....i hate them just like the next guy....but try and be original and quit jumping on the "anti WTO" bandwagon...your a lil' late

 

[ 07-06-2002, 08:43 PM: Message edited by: RedMonk ]

[AlpineK]

RedFunk,

 

I don't think Dennis, and I know I'm not bashing on America. I just think we should set a good example; especially since we've got so much money compared to countries like Indonesia.

 

I think it is in our economic best interest to move to an economy fueled by hydrogen (which would solve global warming problems) Not only that, but I think it's in our national security interest to stop burning oil. Think about it; how many wars have we fought in the middle east. Maybe we should get our fuel from somewhere else. (and Alaskan oil ain't going to do it).

 

[ 07-06-2002, 09:02 PM: Message edited by: AlpineK ]

[Dennis_Harmon]

AlpineK, You got it right that Alaskan oil ain't going to cut it. And hydrogen isn't going to work either, by the way, because it takes more energy to split off the hydrogen atom from the H2O molecule than can be derived from the process. Unless, of course, you've come up with a nuclear fusion means that the best minds of this world have been unable to attain for decades. Basically, there's no two ways around it... energy-wise we are screwed. Dennis

[texplorer]

Dennis, we could just ride around in cars with Hydrogen pressure tanks. Just a little fender bender could set off a hindenburgesqe exposion. Not only would you be cleaning hte environment but you would be keeping road ragers at a distance.

[texplorer]

or maybe we could use methane

[RedMonk]

trollin trollin trollin.....have i ever said anything that wasn't imflamatory? i think not

[RedMonk]

oh and bye the way...alpine k i am 110% in agreement with you about minimizing our dependance on foreign (and domestic for that matter) oil.... take it easy and have some great climbs this week.....

[AlpineK]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dennis Harmon:

... it takes more energy to split off the hydrogen atom from the H2O molecule than can be derived from the process. Dennis

---

Ding dong Dennis. So I found some stuff from a report for the National Library of Congress. The disclaimer at the bottom of the page says the report is, "nonpartisan."

 

quote:

---

---

Steam Reforming

 

Steam reforming is a chemical process that makes hydrogen from a mixture of water and a hydrocarbon feedstock...

 

The energy content of the hydrogen produced is actually higher than that of the natural gas consumed, but considerable energy is required to operate the reformer, so the net conversion efficiency is typically only about 65 percent.(8) Hydrogen produced by this technique can cost as little as 65¢ per kilogram.(9)

 

So Dennis you get 65% efficiency from this process. If you were right there would be less than 0% efficiency. There are a few other methods of producing hydrogen too.

 

 

 

Anyhow bite me Dennis. You are an idiot

 

Source: CRS Report for Congress

 

[ 07-06-2002, 11:13 PM: Message edited by: AlpineK ]

[Dennis_Harmon]

AlpineK, O.K. I'm a big idiot, But what in the world is this "hydrocarbon feed-lot" horseshit? Sounds, and smells, kind of like methane to me. Dennis

[Uncle_Tricky]

We've got plenty of energy. It's just that right now, we've built up a whole global industry based on burning the products of past sunshine (dead dinos) instead of harvesting the sun directly. We now have the technology to do just that.

 

As far as global warming, I don't see what the big deal is. My plan is to buy property in (currently) landlocked Forks. By the time I'm old and gray, the ocean will have risen to the point where I'll be sitting on beachfront property and sipping a margarita in a climate like So-Cal.

PS. Dennis, why isn't this topic in spray?

 

[ 07-07-2002, 02:11 AM: Message edited by: Uncle Tricky ]

[bellemontagne]

You know, we have this immense source of energy in the sky... I think it's called the sun. Plus it will last billions of years; unfortunately, it will eventually burn out though.

 

It is estimated that ALL the fossil fuel reserves on earth are equal to about two weeks worth of the incoming solar radiation. The sun's energy drives not only our air temperature but our ocean currents and our weather fronts. There are a gazillion ways of harnessing this energy that are very environmentally friendly.

 

Hydrogen power also rocks. Lurk around on the Internet, and you will see various engine and tank designs. You will find that some of the concerns regarding auto accidents and tank safety have been resolved.

[sk]

Just over the past ten years things have changed alot... more people recycle, there are Hybrid cars for sale to the general public. I think all people are more aware of our impact on the planet, and that if we want to be here for long we will each have to do what we can/ are willing to do, to extend our stay . It is not impossible to change the world, just time consuming . As soon as they have a hybrid 4 wheel drive, that will be my first brand new car

 

P.S. tell the bad people to stay out of alaska... the amount of oil there is not worth the trama of drilling it. I can get you info on who to write and where to send fax and e-mail if you want it.

[Dennis_Harmon]

sk, Please do post the E-mail address's of political figures who may oppose the drilling for oil in Alaska's (is it the National Wildlife Refuge?) Cariboo are more important than SUV's. Thanks. Dennis

[AlpineK]

In some sense the debates we've had about human caused global warming are kind of funny. I mean we all have little power to effect anything. However, one thing that I've gotten out of it has been a new source of fuel for my chipper.

 

For the last month I've been running biodiesel in my chipper. The chipper runs great, and instead of stinky black diesel smoke it smells like popcorn when I run it. The down side is it cost more, $2.50/gal, but on the positive side I'm not contributing to net CO2 increases, I don't have to inhale nasty fumes, and I'm supporting American farmers.

 

If you live near Ballard and have a diesel engine I recommend the stuff.

 

You can check out more info at: Dr. Dans

[richard_noggin]

I was climbing all weekend. You guys really need to get a climbing life.

[Uncle_Tricky]

Well hey Rich, hope you had fun. Yup, I've been stuck working all weekend, but plan to climb all week. More days, less people.

[richard_noggin]

Dude I have seen you at the Tieton ,you climb hard and I wouldn't call you a spray board wanker .You stuck with one of those weekend jobs where you can't find partners ? Bummer!!!!

[richard_noggin]

quote:

---

Originally posted by richard noggin:

Dude I have seen you at the Tieton ,you climb hard and I wouldn't call you a spray board wanker .You stuck with one of those weekend jobs where you can't find partners ? Bummer!!!!

---

Dude you can call me Dick (HEAD)

[Uncle_Tricky]

Luckily I know a lot of unemployed people!

[crazyjizzy]

Per unit of GDP, the USA is by FAR THE CLEANEST country in the history of the world.

[Dru]

quote:

---

Originally posted by crazyjz:

Per unit of GDP, the USA is by FAR THE CLEANEST country in the history of the world.

---

ya cuz you spend all that money on soap and shampoo.

[glen]

And the global warming debate continues... Even if we instantly stopped all of our factories and cars, global wraming would continue. It's been happening for the last 15,000 years since the end of the last glacial maximum (at which point Seattle and Tacoma were under a km or so of ice). The evidence for anthropogenic induced global warming is a change in the rate of temperature increase where the inflection point in the mean global temperature curve is about 1860 (read Upton Sinclair if that decade doesn't mean anything to you). The earth has seen radical temperature differences in the past. During the Cretaceous (aka, rise of mammals and death of dinosaurs) there were no ice caps. None. Nada. Now that's some global warming! Even if we did stop burning fossil fuels, large amounts of C02, HCl, Sulfur and other gasses would still be put into the atmosphere at rates of Megatons per day from the planet's volcanoes. On an average day, Popocateptl (above Mexico City) puts out about 3 megatons of SO2 per day, peaking at about 50 megatons per day.

 

Bottom line: Stopping burning fossil fuels will not stop global warming. Period. The main question is wether the rate at which global warming occurs and if it will happen faster than ecosystems can adapt sans mass extinctions.

 

Also, glacial retreat isn't just due to temperature change. The seattle times story of a couple weeks ago claimed that the summit ice on Kiliminjaro was due to an increase in temperature. The temperature there never gets even close to the melting point of ice. The ablation of the summit ice fields is a simple mass balance resulting from less precipitation. By the same token, some models of global warming actually predict an *increase* in precipitation on Cascade glaciers which would result in a glacial advance, not a retreat. Beware of token evidence used to support arguments in either direction, even if what is being said bolsters what you want.

 

Does that mean that we should continue to think that crude oil is the best thing since the invention of the wheel? No. Production of hydrocarbon-based products is not environmentally friendly (Prudhoe Bay has several hundred spills *every year*). Dependence on foreign oil puts us at a strategically unfavorable position leading to more than a couple of wars from the mid eighteen hundreds through the present. Some of the nastier examples come from the Philipines (read Daniel Yergin's The Prize for examples, though pretty strongly biased towards pro-oil). The list goes on and on and on and on. There are other means of producing energy, but the bottom line is that it isn't going to happen until exactly the day that it costs less to buy kilowatts from alternative sources than to buy a barrel of oil. The world economy is based on the price of oil, and the world economy is what will eventually change that.

 

As for ANWAR... I personally don't think that arctic oil reserves are what it is about. ANWAR is a litmus test for what can be gotten away with. Gail Norton (head of Dept. of Interior and thus BLM, fish and wildlife and NPS, but not USFS) has issued instructions to all of her land agencies to give the green light to all economic extraction requests. If ANWAR drilling is approved- in an area that congress very specifically said is not okay to drill in- what will be safe. A strong precedent will be set saying that wilderness designations and the like can be reversed and mined. THAT is what scares me about drilling in ANWAR. Nobody would go to that much national debate for that little oil. It is the perfect place to set the precendent though because it is in a remote place far from the reality of everyday life for the voting public. There is far more oil offshore in northern california that would be far faster, easier and mroe profitable to extract. Politically, it would be impossible - whithout a precendent that is.

 

Anyways, that's what I think.

 

Cheers.

[Dru]

Save the Iceworms!!!!