Final Draft of Climate Deal Formally Accepted in Paris

[DonDadda59]

Now we wait for the Elephants in Congress to stall this because Obama. :applause:

[INDENT]Final draft of climate deal formally accepted in Paris

Paris (CNN)After years of buildup and weeks of negotiations, the final draft of an ambitious, global climate change agreement was formally accepted on Saturday in Paris.

The final draft of the Paris agreement, which the French foreign minister described as "fair ... and legally binding," was issued earlier in the day.

The accord sets a goal of halting average warming at no more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial temperatures -- and of striving for a limit of 1.5 degrees Celsius if possible.

"A month ago tomorrow, Paris was the victim of the deadliest terror attack in Europe for more than a decade," British Prime Minister David Cameron wrote in a Facebook post. "Today, it has played host to one of the most positive global steps in history."

World leaders hailed the draft as a milestone in the battle to keep Earth a planet that is hospitable to human life. But there is still a mountain to climb.

Now that the agreement has been passed in Paris, it's up to individual countries to approve the agreement back home.

The Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gas emissions was concluded in 1997. In the United States, the Clinton administration signed the agreement but, fearing defeat, never submitted it to the Senate for ratification.

"This is huge: Almost every country in the world just signed on to the #ParisAgreement on climate change

[senelcoolidge]

What a scam. The rich keep getting richer. Money laundering. Redistributing wealth you can say.

[DonDadda59]

What a scam. The rich keep getting richer. Money laundering. Redistributing wealth you can say.

That was bound to happen with or without this deal. :confusedshrug:

[nycjeff45]

huge scam? there is nothing legally binding in that pact...waste of ****ing taxpayer money for their vacation again...

[Akrazotile]

Now we wait for the Elephants in Congress to stall this because Obama. :applause:



Wait, didn't you just say in another thread that population booms are okay at the expense of the environment, because economic growth?

What if this is a hindrance to the American economy? Why are you applauding it?

[Akrazotile]

huge scam? there is nothing legally binding in that pact...waste of ****ing taxpayer money for their vacation again...




But the agreement doesn't mandate exactly how much each country must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.

Rather, it sets up a bottom-up system in which each country sets its own goal -- which the agreement calls a "nationally determined contribution" -- and then must explain how it plans to reach that objective.

Those pledges must be increased over time, and starting in 2018 each country will have to submit new plans every five years.

Many countries actually submitted their new plans before COP21 started last month -- but those pledges aren't enough to keep warming below the 2 degrees target. But the hope is that over time, countries will aim for more ambitious goals and ratchet up their commitments.

HOPE HOPE HOPE!
CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE!


This announcement and its 'action' appear to be absolutely nothing significant. Basically a propaganda bulletin declaring victory in the "War on Global Warming." Democrats of course throwing their caps in the air over it :oldlol:

[DonDadda59]

Wait, didn't you just say in another thread that population booms are okay at the expense of the environment, because economic growth?

Nope. Never once said that. You are the one who said you'd be willing to sterilize 50 million Africans to somehow save some birds. :lol


What if this is a hindrance to the American economy? Why are you applauding it?

How would this be a hindrance to the economy? :confusedshrug:

[nycjeff45]

fockers are clapping over a good will pact..amazing, pretty easy to please the retards..

[DonDadda59]

fockers are clapping over a good will pact..amazing, pretty easy to please the retards..

A good ole fashioned gentlemen's agreement. Old School. :applause:

[Akrazotile]

You are the one who said you'd be willing to sterilize 50 million Africans to somehow save some birds.

Hell yeah, there's already over a BILLION humans in Africa. Some species of bird are down to like, 12.

My grandchildren will have plenty of humans to interact with and learn from. But what if they want to observe the unique majesty of the Gray-Growned Crane?

http://10000birds.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Crane-Grey-Crowned-Ndutu-Tanzania-AR-6-2.jpg


They may never get that chance. And same with hundreds of other azygous species crafted by nature.

I don't want that blood on my hands :(

[HitandRun Reggie]

2 degrees max! You hear that Momma Nature? You've been put on notice!

[DonDadda59]

Hell yeah, there's already over a BILLION humans in Africa. Some species of bird are down to like, 12.

My grandchildren will have plenty of humans to interact with and learn from. But what if they want to observe the unique majesty of the Gray-Growned Crane?

http://10000birds.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Crane-Grey-Crowned-Ndutu-Tanzania-AR-6-2.jpg


They may never get that chance. And same with hundreds of other azygous species crafted by nature.

I don't want that blood on my hands :(

WOAT punk ass bird. They need to be more like pigeons. Pigeons were once known as T-Rexes... That's what you call survival of the fittest. Changing with the times, slipping the punches... Evolving. :applause:


2 degrees max! You hear that Momma Nature? You've been put on notice!

And this time... It's personal. :mad:

[TripleA]

Hell yeah, there's already over a BILLION humans in Africa. Some species of bird are down to like, 12.

My grandchildren will have plenty of humans to interact with and learn from. But what if they want to observe the unique majesty of the Gray-Growned Crane?

http://10000birds.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Crane-Grey-Crowned-Ndutu-Tanzania-AR-6-2.jpg


They may never get that chance. And same with hundreds of other azygous species crafted by nature.

I don't want that blood on my hands :(

It's already on your hands buddy hundreds of species extinct or nearing extinction due to human actions.

[DonDadda59]

The end of the fossil fuel era is finally upon us. Welcome to the 21st Century my nigguhs. During Obama's tenure, we've cut our dependence on foreign oil in half. No wonder we're not as gung ho about jumping ass first into another pointless decade-long insurgency quagmire. Those days are numbered. :applause:

[INDENT][B][U]Paris climate agreement

[GIF REACTION]

Anti-Coalist detected.

[DonDadda59]

Anti-Coalist detected.

http://i.imgur.com/vB9B5.gif

I've been saying it forever- the solution to our issues in the Middle East is to end our dependence on foreign oil and to create new sources of energy. With this deal and concerted investment, we may see that become a reality in our lifetimes.

I'm glad Someone (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=391014) finally stepped up to get it done. :bowdown:

But we need more bombs and more boots on the ground for another decade-long insurgency where we destabilize foreign governments and foment radicalism. That'll solve all of our problems. :roll:

[GIF REACTION]

Well you've already shown it, the change has begun

But you can't expect it to happen overnight

Oil's influence is the backbone of society

Any drastic measures will have trickledown effects of negative proportion

To be realistic, the transition will take decades

[Akrazotile]

http://i.imgur.com/vB9B5.gif

I've been saying it forever- the solution to our issues in the Middle East is to end our dependence on foreign oil and to create new sources of energy. With this deal and concerted investment, we may see that become a reality in our lifetimes.

I'm glad Someone (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=391014) finally stepped up to get it done. :bowdown:

But we need more bombs and more boots on the ground for another decade-long insurgency where we destabilize foreign governments and foment radicalism. That'll solve all of our problems. :roll:


But if they dont have any economic revenue we'll have to bring them all over here, right?

[DonDadda59]

Well you've already shown it, the change has begun

But you can't expect it to happen overnight

Oil's influence is the backbone of society

Any drastic measures will have trickledown effects of negative proportion

To be realistic, the transition will take decades

Was.

Saudi Arabia panicking right now.

Welcome to the future. :cheers:


But if they dont have any economic revenue we'll have to bring them all over here, right?

There will be plenty of jobs in new energy fields. I think most countries are getting $100 billion for development as part of the deal.

Win/Win.

The era of chasing bearded dudes through caves in Afghanistan or blowing up Hospitals in Iraq is coming to an end.

It's over.

[GIF REACTION]

When can I buy stocks in vegetable oil fuel?

[Akrazotile]

It's already on your hands buddy hundreds of species extinct or nearing extinction due to human actions.


I know, and I hate it.

Trust me, if we could boot every person out of Nebraska, South Dakota, and eastern Wyoming and wall that shit off and reintroduce wild buffalo and wolverines and all that stuff, I'd do it in a second. Id kick all those white people out, and make the thing a huge natural habitat, save for a few select areas created as minimally invasive safari opportunities for people who want to enjoy that kind of stuff.

Eventually we're just gonna destroy the whole natural environment. All bc socially conditioned fukkboys think we have some moral obligation to let the developing world do a bunch more damage to the environment just bc we already did some.

Fukkin betas.

[Nick Young]

Can anyone please explain to me how the five major ice ages began and ended?:confusedshrug:


Did species ever go extinct in the past because they weren't able to handle the changing climate?

[GIF REACTION]

Can anyone please explain to me how the five major ice ages began and ended?:confusedshrug:
Haven't you heard bro

CO2 is the most powerful substance of all time

[Nick Young]

Haven't you heard bro

CO2 is the most powerful substance of all time
Is CO2 some kind of man-made chemical composite that only came to be in recent times or has it existed as long as the Earth has existed?:confusedshrug:

[DonDadda59]

When can I buy stocks in vegetable oil fuel?

The future is now. So probably in a few weeks.

Oil prices, stocks plummeting right now. That's so 20th Century. Time keeps on slipping, slipping, slipping into the future. :applause:

[step_back]

Regardless of whether you believe in global warming or not finding a clean energy source is still vital. Pollution ****ing sucks. I spent a few days in Shanghai. Damm near coughed up my lungs.

[Dresta]

Being an actor himself, Don has now become so blind and brainwashed, that he can't tell the difference between a bunch of politicians acting out a pr exercise, and actual sincerity.

That Britain closed down all its coal plants, destroying local and productive jobs, and instead relying on a special relationship with nations like Saudi Arabia (who we sell weapons and buy oil from), was a complete disgrace, and had no substantial impact on worldwide CO2 levels (with China building coal plants by the day). This was actually a partial product of the green energy initiative; ya know, unintended consequences and stuff - that universal law?

Then the same liberal turds who whine about energy independence mindlessly slander the one thing actually capable of delivering it in the fracking industry.

You want people to use less energy? Well, then you need to do away with the obsession with GDP growth, which is what has been driving our modern obsession with consumption. As long as GDP lies at the centre of government initiatives, there will be no worthwhile changes made. The whole problem is one of priorities, and right now, the bulk on the so-called left and so-called right, prioritise economic (or 'GDP') growth over all other things - thus why American politics is only dominated by different sorts of liberals, arguing with each other over means and not ends.

That's why it's so funny that liberals are always questioning the motives and intentions of 'conservatives,' and is really a fine demonstration of their arrogance and conceit, when the people they consider evil incarnate, basically want more or less the same thing they do.

The whole thing just makes me :facepalm

[Hawker]

Foreign dependence on oil cut in half...by producing more domestic oil. Thanks fracking.

[bladefd]

That Britain closed down all its coal plants, destroying local and productive jobs, and instead relying on a special relationship with nations like Saudi Arabia (who we sell weapons and buy oil from), was a complete disgrace, and had no substantial impact on worldwide CO2 levels (with China building coal plants by the day). This was actually a partial product of the green energy initiative; ya know, unintended consequences and stuff - that universal law?

-Coal has to go. Dangerous stuff to breath in. Right move to pull away from coal. Jobs can be shifted to other energy sectors. Put up a few nuclear plants, and you have jobs shifting sectors.
-It is very childish to say "China is doing it too so why shouldn't we?" You are not saying that but many others out there are. If the Chinese all kill themselves, should we also kill ourselves? China is putting up fewer coal plants than couple years ago, this agreement will make them pull back more hopefully. Again. China is dangerous and polluted. We don't want that here. Also the Western countries use significantly more energy. We need to focus on something other than coal for energy needs, such as solar or nuclear plants. Get solar panels on every single house to create some energy independence.



Then the same liberal turds who whine about energy independence mindlessly slander the one thing
actually capable of delivering it in the fracking industry.

Fracking brings up a lot of dangerous toxic materials from deep in the ground. While it brings up natural gas, it also creates earthquakes, tremors, contaminates water supply, smog, etc. Fracking is not solution to the energy crisis.



You want people to use less energy? Well, then you need to do away with the obsession with GDP growth, which is what has been driving our modern obsession with consumption. As long as GDP lies at the centre of government initiatives, there will be no worthwhile changes made. The whole problem is one of priorities, and right now, the bulk on the so-called left and so-called right, prioritise economic (or 'GDP') growth over all other things - thus why American politics is only dominated by different sorts of liberals, arguing with each other over means and not ends.

We need more energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. No coal or oil. That includes:
-some nuclear fission plants like France
-continue nuclear fusion research, maybe more funding for it globally
-widespread solar power on every single building
-some wind, Hydro Dams, geothermal depending on location
-need to harness power of the ocean waves for along the ocean, ocean waves are nonstop
-some natural gas

These sources can power everything for us in a renewable manner while allowing GDP growth.

[Nick Young]

Have scientists figured out how the five major ice ages began and ended yet?:confusedshrug:

[DonDadda59]

-Coal has to go. Dangerous stuff to breath in. Right move to pull away from coal. Jobs can be shifted to other energy sectors. Put up a few nuclear plants, and you have jobs shifting sectors.
-It is very childish to say "China is doing it too so why shouldn't we?" You are not saying that but many others out there are. If the Chinese all kill themselves, should we also kill ourselves? China is putting up fewer coal plants than couple years ago, this agreement will make them pull back more hopefully. Again. China is dangerous and polluted. We don't want that here. Also the Western countries use significantly more energy. We need to focus on something other than coal for energy needs, such as solar or nuclear plants. Get solar panels on every single house to create some energy independence.



Fracking brings up a lot of dangerous toxic materials from deep in the ground. While it brings up natural gas, it also creates earthquakes, tremors, contaminates water supply, smog, etc. Fracking is not solution to the energy crisis.



We need more energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. No coal or oil. That includes:
-some nuclear fission plants like France
-continue nuclear fusion research, maybe more funding for it globally
-widespread solar power on every single building
-some wind, Hydro Dams, geothermal depending on location
-need to harness power of the ocean waves for along the ocean, ocean waves are nonstop
-some natural gas

These sources can power everything for us in a renewable manner while allowing GDP growth.

Like Clockwork....


Experimental 'Stellarator' Fusion Reactor Test Takes Us One Step Closer To Limitless Energy

Scientists have successfully tested the world's first full-scale 'stellarator' fusion reactor, proving that in the future, it could provide us with a safe, limitless source of energy.

Taking place at the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (IPP) in Greifswald, scientists were able to suspend plasma within the fusion device for one tenth of a second at a temperature of one million degrees.

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/3778364/thumbs/o-WENDELSTEIN-7X-570.jpg?2

The plasma used was made from helium, however for the device to become fully operational they'll need to carry out the same process using hydrogen.

Project leader Professor Thomas Klinger said: We’re not changing over to the actual investigation object, a hydrogen plasma, until next year, this is because it’s easier to achieve the plasma state with helium. In addition, we can clean the surface of the plasma vessel with helium plasmas.”

Nine years in the making, the Wendelstein 7-X fusion device has been designed by a supercomputer and built by humans. It utilises a revolutionary new design which could offer a safe, and practical way to get fusion power.

Fusion reactors give us the promise of a way out of the energy crisis. Capable of producing huge amounts of energy with few downsides it has become the holy grail of energy production.

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/3583834/thumbs/o-WENDELSTEIN-7X-570.jpg?7

It is extremely difficult to do however, and expensive. So far no fusion reactor has been able to produce more energy than is required to create it at any meaningful level.

On top of this, designs have varied greatly with safety becoming a major concern due in part to the huge burning ring of plasma that would be suspended in the middle of it.

Containing plasma in this state isn't just dangerous it's hideously difficult to do, however one group of scientists from the Max Planck Institute believe they may have the answer.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/12/14/experimental-stellarator-fusion-reactor-test-takes-us-one-step-closer-to-limitless-energy_n_8802794.html

Video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_kPM1J-F0Q) :applause:

But the 'Let's live like it's 1954 forever' crowd will tell you bombing caves in the Middle East and fighting psychos with death wishes indefinitely for fossil fuels is the way to go. :lol

[Dresta]

-Coal has to go. Dangerous stuff to breath in. Right move to pull away from coal. Jobs can be shifted to other energy sectors. Put up a few nuclear plants, and you have jobs shifting sectors.
-It is very childish to say "China is doing it too so why shouldn't we?" You are not saying that but many others out there are. If the Chinese all kill themselves, should we also kill ourselves? China is putting up fewer coal plants than couple years ago, this agreement will make them pull back more hopefully. Again. China is dangerous and polluted. We don't want that here. Also the Western countries use significantly more energy. We need to focus on something other than coal for energy needs, such as solar or nuclear plants. Get solar panels on every single house to create some energy independence.



Fracking brings up a lot of dangerous toxic materials from deep in the ground. While it brings up natural gas, it also creates earthquakes, tremors, contaminates water supply, smog, etc. Fracking is not solution to the energy crisis.



We need more energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. No coal or oil. That includes:
-some nuclear fission plants like France
-continue nuclear fusion research, maybe more funding for it globally
-widespread solar power on every single building
-some wind, Hydro Dams, geothermal depending on location
-need to harness power of the ocean waves for along the ocean, ocean waves are nonstop
-some natural gas

These sources can power everything for us in a renewable manner while allowing GDP growth.You haven't got a clue what you're blabbing about. The point is that Britain's coal plants were but a drop in the Ocean, a complete non-factor on the global scale - i don't see what right people like you have to ruin lives over what is no more than a high-minded and completely ineffectual noble gesture (and the closing of fully-functioning and profitable coal plants has hurt a lot of Brits).

"Coal has to go"

What the **** do a few coal plants in Britain have to do with you exactly? Nah, no point using the stuff already there when we can use a load of taxpayer money to subsidise unprofitable industries that make a small number of people a lot of money.

The UK is broke enough thanks. Gotta pay back some of the obscene amount of money owed before engaging on more wasteful and unsustainable grand environmental projects.

[NumberSix]

You haven't got a clue what you're blabbing about. The point is that Britain's coal plants were but a drop in the Ocean, a complete non-factor on the global scale - i don't see what right people like you have to ruin lives over what is no more than a high-minded and completely ineffectual noble gesture (and the closing of fully-functioning and profitable coal plants has hurt a lot of Brits).

"Coal has to go"

What the **** do a few coal plants in Britain have to do with you exactly? Nah, no point using the stuff already there when we can use a load of taxpayer money to subsidise unprofitable industries that make a small number of people a lot of money.

The UK is broke enough thanks. Gotta pay back some of the obscene amount of money owed before engaging on more wasteful and unsustainable grand environmental projects.
This entire thing is a scam to diminish the wealth/power of the rich countries.

[Hawker]

-Coal has to go. Dangerous stuff to breath in. Right move to pull away from coal. Jobs can be shifted to other energy sectors. Put up a few nuclear plants, and you have jobs shifting sectors.
-It is very childish to say "China is doing it too so why shouldn't we?" You are not saying that but many others out there are. If the Chinese all kill themselves, should we also kill ourselves? China is putting up fewer coal plants than couple years ago, this agreement will make them pull back more hopefully. Again. China is dangerous and polluted. We don't want that here. Also the Western countries use significantly more energy. We need to focus on something other than coal for energy needs, such as solar or nuclear plants. Get solar panels on every single house to create some energy independence.



Fracking brings up a lot of dangerous toxic materials from deep in the ground. While it brings up natural gas, it also creates earthquakes, tremors, contaminates water supply, smog, etc. Fracking is not solution to the energy crisis.



We need more energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. No coal or oil. That includes:
-some nuclear fission plants like France
-continue nuclear fusion research, maybe more funding for it globally
-widespread solar power on every single building
-some wind, Hydro Dams, geothermal depending on location
-need to harness power of the ocean waves for along the ocean, ocean waves are nonstop
-some natural gas

These sources can power everything for us in a renewable manner while allowing GDP growth.

While I agree renewables are the future, the bolded simply just isn't true (aside from smog but not the only industry to do so). You're making this up and there is nothing that supports it.

[bladefd]

You haven't got a clue what you're blabbing about. The point is that Britain's coal plants were but a drop in the Ocean, a complete non-factor on the global scale - i don't see what right people like you have to ruin lives over what is no more than a high-minded and completely ineffectual noble gesture (and the closing of fully-functioning and profitable coal plants has hurt a lot of Brits).

"Coal has to go"

What the **** do a few coal plants in Britain have to do with you exactly? Nah, no point using the stuff already there when we can use a load of taxpayer money to subsidise unprofitable industries that make a small number of people a lot of money.

The UK is broke enough thanks. Gotta pay back some of the obscene amount of money owed before engaging on more wasteful and unsustainable grand environmental projects.

So what exactly is your energy plan? I'm listening.. I told you mine in the last section of my previous post.

[DonDadda59]

So what exactly is your energy plan? I'm listening.. I told you mine in the last section of my previous post.

It's the 'stop being liberal, liberal' Plan. It goes as follows.

1) Tell the liberal that his ideas are liberal.
2) ???
3) Profit. :pimp:

^That's what is going to move us into the future.

[bladefd]

While I agree renewables are the future, the bolded simply just isn't true (aside from smog but not the only industry to do so). You're making this up and there is nothing that supports it.

'Fracking brings up a lot of dangerous toxic materials from deep in the ground.'
Do you really need me to find sources on fracking bringing up toxic materials? It has been documented over the years that while it brings up natural gas, it also brings other toxic materials up.

'it also creates earthquakes, tremors'
As fracking has gone up, number of tremors have increased. Fracking works by forcefully pumping water into the ground. Supposedly, it doesn't create many earthquakes so it is not a big deal. Few tremors are fine.

'contaminates water supply, smog, etc'
This is definitely true.. Chemicals are mixed with the water being pumped. Some of it makes its way into surrounding water sources, including drinking water. Smog I don't need to mention further..

In my post, I mentioned some natural gas is fine considering the risks vs benefits. It is better and quite a bit cleaner than coal.

[Nanners]

the problem with fracking isnt the fracking itself, but things like leaky well casings and waste water disposal.

[Akrazotile]

But the 'Let's live like it's 1954 forever' crowd will tell you bombing caves in the Middle East and fighting psychos with death wishes indefinitely for fossil fuels is the way to go. :lol

Nobody wants to live like it's 1954 technologically. :oldlol:

Just socially and demographically.



Aint nobody got time for this

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UynOpjeLBGA/TlRogq3JsnI/AAAAAAAAAAs/tLvTviYcw0g/s1600/ScreenHunter_21+Aug.+23+22.52.gif
http://libertyfirstnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/afight-810x424-810x424.jpg


Get these muh****as on board the Liberia train!




https://richardedmondsondotnet.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/chootrain.gif

[Hawker]

'Fracking brings up a lot of dangerous toxic materials from deep in the ground.'
Do you really need me to find sources on fracking bringing up toxic materials? It has been documented over the years that while it brings up natural gas, it also brings other toxic materials up.

'it also creates earthquakes, tremors'
As fracking has gone up, number of tremors have increased. Fracking works by forcefully pumping water into the ground. Supposedly, it doesn't create many earthquakes so it is not a big deal. Few tremors are fine.

'contaminates water supply, smog, etc'
This is definitely true.. Chemicals are mixed with the water being pumped. Some of it makes its way into surrounding water sources, including drinking water. Smog I don't need to mention further..

In my post, I mentioned some natural gas is fine considering the risks vs benefits. It is better and quite a bit cleaner than coal.

Can you list the toxic materials? Just seems like you're throwing out vague references that you've read in passing and not understood fully.

As fracking has gone up, number of tremors have increased is a logical fallacy. I am an engineer who has been on 100s of frack jobs. I'm aware of how it works and it does create an earthquake (technically) but it's really just a microseismic event.

Some of it makes its way into surrounding water sources? Include documented events...not shit you've seen in gasland and what you've read in journalism articles. And I'm talking about actual fractures reaching the water source, not using proper practices to detect casing leaks and bad cement.

There are ways to prevent all of these from happening and the "toxic materials" brought up are dealt with accordingly on surface. H2S would be one toxic material but that is dealt with accordingly as long as bactericides are used.

Not going to sit here and act like all the chemicals we use are "household materials" but you're not telling the truth.

[Hawker]

the problem with fracking isnt the fracking itself, but things like leaky well casings and waste water disposal.

This. Nanners gets it.

And companies don't want leaky well casings. These can be detected by doing a pressure test prior to any fracturing. Pressure test is done with salt water. If the pressure holds, you're good, if it drops so many psi/min, you've got a leaky casing.

[Nanners]

This. Nanners gets it.

And companies don't want leaky well casings. These can be detected by doing a pressure test prior to any fracturing. Pressure test is done with salt water. If the pressure holds, you're good, if it drops so many psi/min, you've got a leaky casing.

Sure companies dont want leaky casings, but some amount of leaky casings are inevitable.

From what i can tell after 30 seconds on google (http://www.fractracker.org/2014/03/active-gas-and-oil-wells-in-us/), there were approx 1.1 million fracked wells in operation in the US in 2014. Even if only 0.01% of those wells leak (1% of 1%), that means there are still ~11k leaky wells spread all over the country.

[NumberSix]

So what exactly is your energy plan? I'm listening.. I told you mine in the last section of my previous post.
Nuclear.

[DonDadda59]

Nobody wants to live like it's 1954 technologically. :oldlol:

Just socially and demographically.

You can't have it both ways, homie. Can't have your cake and eat it too. The only thing you're 'conserving' is yourself in a time warp as the World passes you by and you become obsolete. Time... keeps on slipping, slipping, slipping (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnlTrq6wLf0) into the future. Welcome to the world of tomorrow. :cheers:


Nuclear.

It's pronounced 'Nuculer' (https://youtu.be/OoASZyihalc?t=7s)

[Akrazotile]

You can't have it both ways, homie. Can't have your cake and eat it too. The only thing you're 'conserving' is yourself in a time warp as the World passes you by and you become obsolete. Time... keeps on slipping, slipping, slipping (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnlTrq6wLf0) into the future. Welcome to the world of tomorrow. :cheers:




:confusedshrug:

I guess we'll see.

[gigantes]

my quick read of this paris deal is that it proposes some nice goals and promises, but lacks delivery details and mechanisms to penalise and enforce the slacker nations (of which there will probably be many).

in fact i could see the whole thing turning out to be highly counterproductive, since it would spread far too much false hope around. i mean, given that the time to act on this stuff was years ago, i still see the world coming down to a period of desperation in which some kind of weather / GH gas-altering technology gets rushed in to place to the great displeasure of several key nations with nuclear weapons and that sort of thing.

has anybody done a good read on the agreement and can possibly correct me on my thoughts in paragraph one?

[Nick Young]

Have scientists figured out how the five major ice ages began and ended yet?:confusedshrug:
http://www.wow247.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Ben-Stein-Ferris-Bueller-gif.gif

[Akrazotile]

http://www.wow247.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Ben-Stein-Ferris-Bueller-gif.gif


Has peucewallace givin you an explaination? He proclaims himself to be a scientist :oldlol:

[gigantes]

hold on-- you two geniuses are asking one specific poster on ISH to explain how a whole series of ice ages both began and ended?


like, wow, duderinos... is it that your internet ONLY connects when you have time to propose stupidass questions, but ALWAYS fails when you could actually use it to do your own research and not waste other peoples' time?

[Nick Young]

hold on-- you two geniuses are asking one specific poster on ISH to explain how a whole series of ice ages both began and ended?


like, wow, duderinos... is it that your internet ONLY connects when you have time to propose stupidass questions, but ALWAYS fails when you could actually use it to do your own research and not waste other peoples' time?

No. I'm not asking that. I cannot speak for Akrozotle. Please refrain from your emotion based argument built on logical fallacy and strawmanning.



I'm asking if anyone can explain in simple terms how the ice ages began and ended, because I would like to know.

That's the only thing I've asked in here. There is no reason to tack on all of the extra things you've pulled out of the air just now.




Can you please explain to me how the five major ice ages began and ended?

What is "stupidass" about this question?

[Nick Young]

Can any one please explain to me how the five major ice ages began and ended?

:confusedshrug:

[gigantes]

idunno, maybe it's that you two piss me off sometimes. i mean you're both above-average, curious dudes who have the capacity to entertain wildly divergent ideas from the norm (which is cool to me) and propose interesting solutions to many things, but the thing that sort of ties you together in my mind is the lack of ability to vet your own proposals.

CONSIDER one example you've mentioned-- mister deuce wallace, who i recall you both jumping on, recently. well... granted he tends to me to be arrogant and grouchy, and he does seem to especially avoid agreeing with people saying similar things as his lordship... and YES he especially seems to eschew trying to convince laypeople with knowledge, access and experience other than brief bursts.

but ask yourselves this, muvvlefluffles-- how do you think most scientists feel about the public's opinion, and more specifically, how do you think climate scientists feel about our opinion...? can you imagine how people who've dedicated their lives to a field, who've given everything to a certain discipline and who essentially speak a special language in their field (not from trying to hide it from anyone, however) would feel about the average man in the street or donald trump calling them frauds for zero practical reasons...?

you want to talk about some grouchy people who actually know what the f-ck they're talking about... who would typically need decades of attention to explain the vagaries of AGCC (anthropomorphic global climate change) to the man in the street?

maybe one day you ISH bros will be able to turn the critical eye inwards. i can pretty much guarantee you that there will be whole regions to learn upon and become more enriched upon. then again, maybe i'm just an old blowhard farting in to the wind upon ISH. :D

[Nick Young]

idunno, maybe it's that you two piss me off sometimes. i mean you're both above-average, curious dudes who have the capacity to entertain wildly divergent ideas from the norm (which is cool to me) and propose interesting solutions to many things, but the thing that sort of ties you together in my mind is the lack of ability to vet your own proposals.

CONSIDER one example you've mentioned-- mister deuce wallace, who i recall you both jumping on, recently. well... granted he tends to me to be arrogant and grouchy, and he does seem to especially avoid agreeing with people saying similar things as his lordship... and YES he especially seems to eschew trying to convince laypeople with knowledge, access and experience other than brief bursts.

but ask yourselves this, muvvlefluffles-- how do you think most scientists feel about the public's opinion, and more specifically, how do you think climate scientists feel about our opinion...? can you imagine how people who've dedicated their lives to a field, who've given everything to a certain discipline and who essentially speak a special language in their field (not from trying to hide it from anyone, however) would feel about the average man in the street or donald trump calling them frauds for zero practical reasons...?

you want to talk about some grouchy people who actually know what the f-ck they're talking about... who would typically need decades of attention to explain the vagaries of AGCC (anthropomorphic global climate change) to the man in the street?

maybe one day you ISH bros will be able to turn the critical eye inwards. i can pretty much guarantee you that there will be whole regions to learn upon and become more enriched upon. then again, maybe i'm just an old blowhard farting in to the wind upon ISH. :D

Ok, good for you. Stop projecting though. I did not mention any poster by name anywhere in this thread, let alone DeucesWallace. You are projecting and creating strawman arguments. I am not calling anyone a fraud. You are arguing only with your own invented projection against arguments that you created in your own head.

Let's get straight to the point.


I am asking a simple question.


Can you please explain to me in simple terms how the five major ice ages began and ended?

[GIF REACTION]

Has peucewallace givin you an explaination? He proclaims himself to be a scientist :oldlol:
They'll give anyone a degree and license these days :oldlol:

[gigantes]

of COURSE i can't, matey.

you're talking about a ridiculous amount of data and theory, which is what deuce was trying to tell you in the first place, no?

[gigantes]

nick young-- what are you really worried about at this point?

you're a pretty interesting dude... the world is your oyster so to speak.

so WHAT if some of us are a-holes towards you? so WHAT if some of us don't understand you very well. but isn't that the very test we all go through to be a decent human being in the end?

[Bosnian Sajo]

Did you know that as our climate warms, we are actually returning to a more typical weather pattern for the Earth? We are living in an ice age, which means the temperatures and ice caps we think of as "normal" are actually extreme aberrations in the history of our planet.

Earth has been ice-free, even in the high latitudes, for about 85% of its history. The last Snowball Earth, where polar ice sheets grow and meet at the equator, occurred about 800Ma and ended with increasing CO2 caused by volcanism. The change into an ice age occurs gradually, when more snow falls than melts, rather than a sudden cold snap. The end of the current ice age will occur when the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets melt. This will happen whether or not humans accelerate it.

[Bosnian Sajo]

Nick asks same question 10 times, and once answered disappears. Ooooook :lol

[Nick Young]

of COURSE i can't, matey.

you're talking about a ridiculous amount of data and theory, which is what deuce was trying to tell you in the first place, no?
No one told me anything.

DeucesWallace never responded to this question. I don't know why you're constantly talking about him.


Do you, or do you not, understand how the five major ice ages began and ended?


There is no reason to keep deflecting and avoiding the question. If you don't know the answer, it's ok to say "I don't know."

[Nick Young]

Did you know that as our climate warms, we are actually returning to a more typical weather pattern for the Earth? We are living in an ice age, which means the temperatures and ice caps we think of as "normal" are actually extreme aberrations in the history of our planet.

Earth has been ice-free, even in the high latitudes, for about 85% of its history. The last Snowball Earth, where polar ice sheets grow and meet at the equator, occurred about 800Ma and ended with increasing CO2 caused by volcanism. The change into an ice age occurs gradually, when more snow falls than melts, rather than a sudden cold snap. The end of the current ice age will occur when the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets melt. This will happen whether or not humans accelerate it.
Do you have a source with proof to back this theory up?


Do you know how the other four ice ages began and ended? Can you please explain to me in simple terms?

[Akrazotile]

Did you know that as our climate warms, we are actually returning to a more typical weather pattern for the Earth? We are living in an ice age, which means the temperatures and ice caps we think of as "normal" are actually extreme aberrations in the history of our planet.

Earth has been ice-free, even in the high latitudes, for about 85% of its history. The last Snowball Earth, where polar ice sheets grow and meet at the equator, occurred about 800Ma and ended with increasing CO2 caused by volcanism. The change into an ice age occurs gradually, when more snow falls than melts, rather than a sudden cold snap. The end of the current ice age will occur when the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets melt. This will happen whether or not humans accelerate it.


Yeah, the issue isn't about whether the Earth is warming up or not. It's done that before and it'll do it again. The much more pressing issue is what our human activity is DOING to the environment. People are obsessing over temperature changes of a degree. :facepalm That's not the issue, people. The issue is how much habitat we're irreversibly destroying. And for the most part that has nothing to do with global warming.

[Nick Young]

Yeah, the issue isn't about whether the Earth is warming up or not. It's done that before and it'll do it again. The much more pressing issue is what our human activity is DOING to the environment. People are obsessing over temperature changes of a degree. :facepalm That's not the issue, people. The issue is how much habitat we're irreversibly destroying. And for the most part that has nothing to do with global warming.
This seems like a very solipsistic assumption that we humans are making, considering the fact that there have been 5 major ice ages in Earth's history, many of them occurring before humans even existed.


Does anyone know if species went extinct before homo sapiens existed?