ADK climate change

[Snowballs]

http://www.poststar.com/news/local/a...cc4c002e0.html

whether you agree with Global Warming or not, you pretty much got to agree we are putting way too much pollution in the enviroment. recent years have seen Lake George not freezing over, a rarity. we have not been getting that protracted period of sub zero weather we used to yearly get not so long ago. Summers are tending to get washed out with rain, a new developement according to long time locals and this news article suggests changing precipation patterns.

Here's something you've not heard before. I think it needs to be brought up.

ALSO, all the mega tons of CO2 we emit each year are removing mega tons of Oxygen from the respiratory cycle. Yep. We are losing Oxygen. Don't say Mother Nature will simply reconvert the excess CO2 to Oxygen. If that were so, we would not have this vast increase in CO2. Ma Nature is not keeping up with our CO2 pollution. in fact She's falling WAAAY behind. As more people breathe in O2 and exhale CO2, as more people burn fossil fuels, as more livestock is raised to feed more people, as more Rainforests are destroyed - more Oxygen is locked into carbon dioxide. As Oxygen levels fall, they will become the new alarm bell rung against pollution.

The planet simply has never had 6 billion+ people and all the neccessary livestock to feed them, steadily, daily, constantly converting Oxygen to CO2. Automobile use will double in the near decade as more Asians join the consumer age and buy cars. Asian company TATA motors has intro'ed a $2,500 car that many Asians will buy thus increasing CO2 levels. All the fire/flame you've ever seen converted Oxygen to CO2. That traffic jam you see daily, converts Oxygen to CO2. Your family, your dog, your furnace, your grill, your stove or industrial fires at work, planes, trains... all multiplied by a Gazzilion are steadily, consistently, daily converting Oxygen to CO2. Plankton, the major producer of Oxygen, is a very small organizism. As such, it is very susceptible to pollution. How much more pollution in the oceans would it take to limit or destroy Plankton?

We seriously need to get moving on this pollution issue. Obama shoulda had a Billion dollar or so reward/purse for the first all electric, commercially viable car design. when the price of gas goes way north of $4.00-$5.00 it's going to absolutely wreck America's economy. Absolutely wreck it! Gas prices WILL raise substantially either thru demand OR inflation/devalueation of the Dollar. this last week saw gas prices rise despite low demand due to devalueation of the Dollar. Oil producers are starting to grumble about the weak dollar costing them millions. they may soon switch from the Dollar to another currency for trading oil. That will be a true " kick in the sack " for the American economy.

[nyspnypd]

You are exactly right obama did pass a bill for renewable energy but it is more toward the tax credit end but if you plan on installing wind turbines or solar panels usually 70-80% of the cost is covered by state govt. and federal govt. I have always said whiteface and Gore should have Wind turbines on site to produce the electricity and they will be off the grid as far as their energy bill. There are Cars which run on Hydrogen which only byproduct is water. The Chevy Volt will be coming out on the market. There are types of renewable energy which cover every area two factors limit this and one is the cost turns people away and the fact on how these whack jobs that think it is an govt. conspiracy get their word out and it causes support to dwindle down. You are also correct on how Mother Nature cant handle it and its response to make itself better is doing what ever it takes and it will not spare humans earth will renew itself it will just no spare us in the process.

[Snowballs]

good post NYPD. thanks for your interest.

the Chevy Volt and others have a ways to go to be commercially viable. It's a start, but the hour is getting late and we need much more. $25,000 electric vehicles getting 500 miles + and speeds of 70mph are what's needed. Photovoltaic roofs, hoods, glass all must be combined with regenerative braking to charge batteries. moving cars have many rotating parts similar to electrical generators. can we use that to generate electricity? can a magnetised drive shaft or one with magnets on it be used to generate current? same with the wheels. although normal generators have the wire spinning on the perimeter and the magnets inside, such a set up would cause braking problems IN CARS as too much rotating weight (the wire) would make it difficult to stop/go. BUT if just the magnets rotated around a conductor perhaps it would work. Magnets inside the wheel rim rotating around a nearby static conductor, or a nearby static, nonmoving bundle of wire? OR take the gas engine out, replace with a generator to cycle on/off to recharge the battery. Generators are gas sippers compared to car engines. can we combine things like this to get an electric car that runs a long time at highway speeds? that is what we need to save our economy and the planet. the price of gas IS going to go way up. It WILL wreck our economy. WE NEED ELECTRIC CARS!!!

Please don't anyone take this next part personally.

Hydrogen cars are stupid. sheer folly. fuels cell aren't much better. HERE'S WHY..... they consume/destroy WATER!!! That's right. the proponents of Hydrogen technology always fail to mention the fact that it consumes/destroys water to get the Hydrogen. we must never destroy water the way we do oil. water is far, far too valuable. i saw a Remote control hydrogen powered toy car once. a half gallon of water was placed in a base station which used solar power to quickly electrolysize the water to decompose it into hydrogen and oxygen. The toy car was "gassed up' and it ran around the driveway for a few minutes. Everyone was " Oh, it's so cool! just get fuel from your tap!"

HELLO!!!?

The half gallon of water DISAPPEARRED!!! VANISHED!!! DESTROYED!!! GONE FOREVER!!! absolute insanity. we do not have extra water to destroy! how much water could one destroy before it messes with cloud formation and rainfall....how much water can people destoy before the mineral content of the oceans rises to a non life sustaining level...on and on!!! Before anyone says " WE GOT PLENTY OF WATER!" i would like to remind them that it was only 50 years or so ago that people also said that about oil and other natural resouces. It was incorrect then. It's incorrect now.

Water....very good !!! Destroying water....very, very bad !!!

[nyspnypd]

good post NYPD. thanks for your interest.

the Chevy Volt and others have a ways to go to be commercially viable. It's a start, but the hour is getting late and we need much more. $25,000 electric vehicles getting 500 miles + and speeds of 70mph are what's needed. Photovoltaic roofs, hoods, glass all must be combined with regenerative braking to charge batteries. moving cars have many rotating parts similar to electrical generators. can we use that to generate electricity? can a magnetised drive shaft or one with magnets on it be used to generate current? same with the wheels. although normal generators have the wire spinning on the perimeter and the magnets inside, such a set up would cause braking problems IN CARS as too much rotating weight (the wire) would make it difficult to stop/go. BUT if just the magnets rotated around a conductor perhaps it would work. Magnets inside the wheel rim rotating around a nearby static conductor, or a nearby static, nonmoving bundle of wire? OR take the gas engine out, replace with a generator to cycle on/off to recharge the battery. Generators are gas sippers compared to car engines. can we combine things like this to get an electric car that runs a long time at highway speeds? that is what we need to save our economy and the planet. the price of gas IS going to go way up. It WILL wreck our economy. WE NEED ELECTRIC CARS!!!

Please don't anyone take this next part personally.

Hydrogen cars are stupid. sheer folly. fuels cell aren't much better. HERE'S WHY..... they consume/destroy WATER!!! That's right. the proponents of Hydrogen technology always fail to mention the fact that it consumes/destroys water to get the Hydrogen. we must never destroy water the way we do oil. water is far, far too valuable. i saw a Remote control hydrogen powered toy car once. a half gallon of water was placed in a base station which used solar power to quickly electrolysize the water to decompose it into hydrogen and oxygen. The toy car was "gassed up' and it ran around the driveway for a few minutes. Everyone was " Oh, it's so cool! just get fuel from your tap!"

HELLO!!!?

The half gallon of water DISAPPEARRED!!! VANISHED!!! DESTROYED!!! GONE FOREVER!!! absolute insanity. we do not have extra water to destroy! how much water could one destroy before it messes with cloud formation and rainfall....how much water can people destoy before the mineral content of the oceans rises to a non life sustaining level...on and on!!! Before anyone says " WE GOT PLENTY OF WATER!" i would like to remind them that it was only 50 years or so ago that people also said that about oil and other natural resouces. It was incorrect then. It's incorrect now.

Water....very good !!! Destroying water....very, very bad !!!

Yeah I know what you are saying about hydrogen water is one of the fuels used but there are other solutions that can be used and are environmentally friendly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell

[Harvey44]

whether you agree with Global Warming or not, you pretty much got to agree we are putting way too much pollution in the environment.

To me this is the real rub.

Every action that I can think of, that is listed as a cause of global warming, has some other proven negative effect on our environment. If you don't believe warming exists there are plenty of other reasons to try to reduce consumption.

Which of your routine activities have the biggest positive and negative impact on your carbon/pollution output?

For me the best thing I've done to reduce my consumption has probably been walking to work for 20 years.

The worst things are probably driving to the Adirondacks regularly and heating the cabin with wood.

[nyspnypd]

whether you agree with Global Warming or not, you pretty much got to agree we are putting way too much pollution in the environment.

To me this is the real rub.

Every action that I can think of, that is listed as a cause of global warming, has some other proven negative effect on our environment. If you don't believe warming exists there are plenty of other reasons to try to reduce consumption.

Which of your routine activities have the biggest positive and negative impact on your carbon/pollution output?

For me the best thing I've done to reduce my consumption has probably been walking to work for 20 years.

The worst things are probably driving to the Adirondacks regularly and heating the cabin with wood.

eh wood is usually better than oil but I think propane is the cleanest? correct me if i am wrong.

[Snowballs]

all it takes is insightful smarts...and a can do, no dipsticks allowed, spirit. i posted some ideas above. Ya see, i'm full of it! here's more......

Maximizing Hydro power.

Many of our dams are bottom release dams. even those that aren't, could may be retrofitted for this to work. All Hydro electric stations are bottom release by necessity, thus we can tap into and use their existing " head ".

hydroelectric Dams at the head of rivers exist in our nation. their "harnessed" water power should be exploited the whole way to the Seacoast and NOT simple released at the bottom of the dam. That's dumb. Once we have the river harnessed with a dam, the Horses should not be unharnessed until they've ran the whole way to the sea. Two pipelines should be extended from such dams to the sea with as many intermittent turbine stations as the physics will carry. Kinzua dam in northwest Pennsylvania is one such dam. it's hydro horsepower is currently merely spewed lose back into the Allegheney river after it passes thru the turbines. A waste. I say make those ponies run through pipelines the whole way to New Orleans. along the way, splice in alot more water pressure from the other vast amounts of dams along the way or on the tributary streams and gain even more generating capacity. Because the initial "head" would be higher than downstream obstacles the water will travel up/over/around/under said obstacles without losing power - just like on the science show! we have plenty of pipeline building expertise-PLENTY! Because water is incompressible and exerts pressure equally in all directions, very little power is lost going thru the turbines once they're up to speed. go downstream a little, power regained! We are wasting MASSIVE, MASSIVE amounts of clean hydro power from already existing dams thru premature release! yuck yuck yuck!

wanna hear some more legit clean energy ideas? like i said, i'm full of it.

tHANKS hARV FoR dOInG MY sPELlINg ChEcK.

[nyspnypd]

all it takes is insightful smarts...and a can do, no dipsticks allowed, spirit. i posted some ideas above. Ya see, i'm full of it! here's more......

Maximizing Hydro power.

Many of our dams are bottom release dams. even those that aren't, could may be retrofitted for this to work. All Hydro electric stations are bottom release by necessity, thus we can tap into and use their existing " head ".

hydroelectric Dams at the head of rivers exist in our nation. their "harnessed" water power should be exploited the whole way to the Seacoast and NOT simple released at the bottom of the dam. That's dumb. Once we have the river harnessed with a dam, the Horses should not be unharnessed until they've ran the whole way to the sea. a pipeline should be extended from such dams to the sea with as many intermittent turbine stations as the physics will carry. Kinzua dam in northwest Pennsylvania is one such dam. it's hydro horsepower is currently merely spewed lose back into the Allegheney river. A waste. I say make those ponies run through a pipeline the whole way to New Orleans. along the way, splice in alot of other water pressure from the other vast amounts of dams along the way or on the tributary streams and gain even more generating capacity. Because the initial "head" would be higher than downstream obstacles the water will travel up/over/around/under said obstacles without losing power - just like on the science show! we have plenty of pipeline building expertise-PLENTY! Because water is incompressible and exerts pressure equally in all directions, very little power is lost going thru the turbines once they're up to speed. once you're downstream a little, power regained! We are wasting MASSIVE, MASSIVE amounts of clean hydro power from already existing dams thru premature release! yuck yuck yuck!

wanna hear some more legit clean energy ideas? like i said, i'm full of it.

tHANKS hARV FoR dOInG MY sPELlINg ChEcK.

Wind and solar are very viable. Wind is the better choice for the Adirondacks.

[Denison]

I have not read the whole thread yet, but i saw electric car mentioned: In reducing pollution, Chevy Volt is only as good as method by which electricity is takes is produced, and most of it is made by burning fuels.

[nyspnypd]

I have not read the whole thread yet, but i saw electric car mentioned: In reducing pollution, Chevy Volt is only as good as method by which electricity is takes is produced, and most of it is made by burning fuels.

Yeah the hope is to charge it with renewable energy like wind or have a charging station at your house with some solar panels mounted on top. But atleast getting the car and technology out there first should help with the fueling part.