redandblack (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:18:50 PM |
|
President Barack Obama challenged America and the world to step up efforts to fight global warming on Monday at the formal unveiling of his administration's controversial, ramped-up plan to cut carbon emissions from U.S. power plants. Declaring climate change the greatest threat facing the world, Obama said the regulation requiring the power sector to cut its emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 would reduce Americans' energy bills and improve the health of vulnerable populations nationwide. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/03/us-usa-climatechange-idUSKCN0Q820I20150803Sticking to the facts, it is accurate to state that today, carbon dioxide (CO2) makes up less than 0.04% of the Earth's atmosphere. It is also factual to state that carbon dioxide is a natural organic compound that is absolutely necessary for life on this planet! Here's a pie chart produced by the National Weather Service (as unbiased as I could find): OK, all this focus in on an essential atmospheric compound that makes up less than 0.04%.... But, today's modern coal-fueled power plants have state-of-the-art electrostatic scrubbers on them that have reduced emissions to such a healthy point that no American city is plagued with the dirty air we used to see in so many cities, like our big city of Denver, Colorado, back in the 1970's.
Now, what do you imagine the probable effect is going to be on your UTILITY BILLS after Obama has bankrupted the entire U. S. coal industry? In favor of what? Solar? Wind? Biomass? None of those can even begin to make up the loss of coal, and the costs would be stupid-expensive. Natural gas? Sure, we have enough of it, but what do you imagine the cost of natural gas will skyrocket to without coal to offset it?
Obama should have announced a new initiative to develop hydrogen fusion power, which would give us unlimited, non-polluting energy from fusion processes using SEA WATER, and continue burning clean coal in plants with the most advanced scrubbers until we have mastered fusion. Instead, he's throwing this new, expensive burden on top of us, and at a time when it will cost all of us, directly and indirectly, a lot more of our hard-earned money. But, hey, we've recovered from the Recession, and everybody's awash in big money now... right...?!
|
|
|
|
abasin
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:19:33 PM |
|
Water is also necessary for life....but it can still kill you.
|
|
|
|
KriszDev
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:20:46 PM |
|
Winters coming.How will the poor and people on fixed incomes afford the increased utility bills?
|
|
|
|
rio3232
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:21:37 PM |
|
Water is also necessary for life....but it can still kill you.
So true...so I guess we should do away we all water on the plant....or at least attempt to minimize it's availability. Damn, now I'm afraid to go outside on rainy days.
|
|
|
|
abasin
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:22:24 PM |
|
Winters coming.How will the poor and people on fixed incomes afford the increased utility bills?
Don't know if it's everywhere but many areas have utility assistance for low income households
|
|
|
|
abasin
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:23:24 PM |
|
So true...so I guess we should do away we all water on the plant....or at least attempt to minimize it's availability. Damn, now I'm afraid to go outside on rainy days.
Not my point, but let's not pretend that anything essential to life can't also be dangerous
|
|
|
|
rio3232
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:25:10 PM |
|
Not my point, but let's not pretend that anything essential to life can't also be dangerous
Getting out of bed in the mornings can be dangerous.
|
|
|
|
godlyitems
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:26:25 PM |
|
Don't know if it's everywhere but many areas have utility assistance for low income households
And who pays for this "utility assistance"?
|
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1386
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:26:46 PM |
|
Water is also necessary for life....but it can still kill you.
So true...so I guess we should do away we all water on the plant....or at least attempt to minimize it's availability. Damn, now I'm afraid to go outside on rainy days. No, you need to just think clearly. Better, just let your betters think for you. They will handle this problem and you will not have to worry about it. They will give you a booklet with coupons, and you can redeem them every day for just the right amount of water - so you don't have to worry about water killing you. You see how easy that was? Every day things just get better and better.
|
|
|
|
rio3232
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:27:18 PM |
|
Don't know if it's everywhere but many areas have utility assistance for low income households
And what about those that do not qualify as 'low income', but are still struggling to make ends meet? This is just another tactic to kill off the middle class.
|
|
|
|
|
Daewoo
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 31
Merit: 0
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:31:19 PM |
|
President Barack Obama challenged America and the world to step up efforts to fight global warming on Monday at the formal unveiling of his administration's controversial, ramped-up plan to cut carbon emissions from U.S. power plants. Declaring climate change the greatest threat facing the world, Obama said the regulation requiring the power sector to cut its emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 would reduce Americans' energy bills and improve the health of vulnerable populations nationwide. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/03/us-usa-climatechange-idUSKCN0Q820I20150803Sticking to the facts, it is accurate to state that today, carbon dioxide (CO2) makes up less than 0.04% of the Earth's atmosphere. It is also factual to state that carbon dioxide is a natural organic compound that is absolutely necessary for life on this planet! Here's a pie chart produced by the National Weather Service (as unbiased as I could find): http://burnanenergyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/atmospheric.gifOK, all this focus in on an essential atmospheric compound that makes up less than 0.04%.... But, today's modern coal-fueled power plants have state-of-the-art electrostatic scrubbers on them that have reduced emissions to such a healthy point that no American city is plagued with the dirty air we used to see in so many cities, like our big city of Denver, Colorado, back in the 1970's.
Now, what do you imagine the probable effect is going to be on your UTILITY BILLS after Obama has bankrupted the entire U. S. coal industry? In favor of what? Solar? Wind? Biomass? None of those can even begin to make up the loss of coal, and the costs would be stupid-expensive. Natural gas? Sure, we have enough of it, but what do you imagine the cost of natural gas will skyrocket to without coal to offset it?
Obama should have announced a new initiative to develop hydrogen fusion power, which would give us unlimited, non-polluting energy from fusion processes using SEA WATER, and continue burning clean coal in plants with the most advanced scrubbers until we have mastered fusion. Instead, he's throwing this new, expensive burden on top of us, and at a time when it will cost all of us, directly and indirectly, a lot more of our hard-earned money. But, hey, we've recovered from the Recession, and everybody's awash in big money now... right...?!That's a logical fallacy: Just because something is present at a small concentration doesn't mean that nearly doubling its concentration won't have consequences. As an example: The stress hormone cortisol is normally present at a concentration of 250 nM, much lower than the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. According to you argument, we should not pay attention to cortisol, because of its low conc. However, doubling the cortisol concentration has serious consequences, among others a constantly-stressed state and weight gain. So, if you want to advocate against AGW, please use other arguments, but not that CO2 is present at low concentration and, therefore, of no consequence.
|
|
|
|
abasin
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:32:21 PM |
|
And what about those that do not qualify as 'low income', but are still struggling to make ends meet? This is just another tactic to kill off the middle class.
Just like regulating smog emissions did
|
|
|
|
rajaaziz
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 45
Merit: 0
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:33:20 PM |
|
President Barack Obama challenged America and the world to step up efforts to fight global warming on Monday at the formal unveiling of his administration's controversial, ramped-up plan to cut carbon emissions from U.S. power plants. Declaring climate change the greatest threat facing the world, Obama said the regulation requiring the power sector to cut its emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 would reduce Americans' energy bills and improve the health of vulnerable populations nationwide. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/03/us-usa-climatechange-idUSKCN0Q820I20150803Sticking to the facts, it is accurate to state that today, carbon dioxide (CO2) makes up less than 0.04% of the Earth's atmosphere. It is also factual to state that carbon dioxide is a natural organic compound that is absolutely necessary for life on this planet! Here's a pie chart produced by the National Weather Service (as unbiased as I could find): http://burnanenergyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/atmospheric.gifOK, all this focus in on an essential atmospheric compound that makes up less than 0.04%.... But, today's modern coal-fueled power plants have state-of-the-art electrostatic scrubbers on them that have reduced emissions to such a healthy point that no American city is plagued with the dirty air we used to see in so many cities, like our big city of Denver, Colorado, back in the 1970's.
Now, what do you imagine the probable effect is going to be on your UTILITY BILLS after Obama has bankrupted the entire U. S. coal industry? In favor of what? Solar? Wind? Biomass? None of those can even begin to make up the loss of coal, and the costs would be stupid-expensive. Natural gas? Sure, we have enough of it, but what do you imagine the cost of natural gas will skyrocket to without coal to offset it?
Obama should have announced a new initiative to develop hydrogen fusion power, which would give us unlimited, non-polluting energy from fusion processes using SEA WATER, and continue burning clean coal in plants with the most advanced scrubbers until we have mastered fusion. Instead, he's throwing this new, expensive burden on top of us, and at a time when it will cost all of us, directly and indirectly, a lot more of our hard-earned money. But, hey, we've recovered from the Recession, and everybody's awash in big money now... right...?!This was as predictable as the sun rising from the east. He's taken the course he said he would, the course no media ever seriously questioned on and the course he knows will hurt the middle class US the most. The little bastard is a wrecking ball. He's done more damage to the country than any of our enemies could have hoped for and he's not through, either!
|
|
|
|
KriszDev
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:34:06 PM |
|
Don't know if it's everywhere but many areas have utility assistance for low income households
Ok well that would cover the poor and the fixed income people. But that program has a tax burden and that burden will be increased and its the middle class that will feel that increase in addition to the increase of their own utility bills. So how will the middle class afford it?
|
|
|
|
godlyitems
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:35:31 PM |
|
That's a logical fallacy:
Just because something is present at a small concentration doesn't mean that nearly doubling its concentration won't have consequences.
As an example: The stress hormone cortisol is normally present at a concentration of 250 nM, much lower than the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. According to you argument, we should not pay attention to cortisol, because of its low conc.
However, doubling the cortisol concentration has serious consequences, among others a constantly-stressed state and weight gain.
So, if you want to advocate against AGW, please use other arguments, but not that CO2 is present at low concentration and, therefore, of no consequence.
No matter the acronym of choice, what is the solution to replacing coal for energy? What is it? Will this be in place and running efficiently by fall 2015? How much is this going to cost each consumer, not just the "rich" ones? I thought the Earth was entering a cooling phase?
|
|
|
|
fontana
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:37:19 PM |
|
Just like regulating smog emissions did
Yeah, but I'm sure glad we did. I lived in LA when breathing its air was like smoking 2 paks of unfiltered Pall-Malls a day. Some of the middle class probably dropped into the low-income category because of the regulations, but at least they can breathe.
|
|
|
|
abasin
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:38:33 PM |
|
Ok well that would cover the poor and the fixed income people.
But that program has a tax burden and that burden will be increased and its the middle class that will feel that increase in addition to the increase of their own utility bills.
So how will the middle class afford it?
You're asking how people will Afford cost hikes that haven't happened? Guess it depends if they occur and how large they are.
|
|
|
|
peterson33
Member
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:40:00 PM |
|
Ok well that would cover the poor and the fixed income people.
But that program has a tax burden and that burden will be increased and its the middle class that will feel that increase in addition to the increase of their own utility bills.
So how will the middle class afford it?
That program amounts to pennies out of the Middle Class paycheck.
|
|
|
|
Juliozz
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 17
Merit: 0
|
|
August 04, 2015, 05:41:02 PM |
|
No matter the acronym of choice, what is the solution to replacing coal for energy? What is it? Will this be in place and running efficiently by fall 2015? How much is this going to cost each consumer, not just the "rich" ones?
I thought the Earth was entering a cooling phase?
Well sunshine and rainbows and the butterflies that fly out of Obama's ass will replace coal. But all kidding aside, Obama probably didn't know about this policy until he read about it in the paper.
|
|
|
|
|