RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea?

RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

jlf1961 -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/21/2014 7:30:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Who told you climate change was a myth? I have heard a lot of people say that st gore and his cronies were less than honest and I have even heard a few suggest they are crooks, but I have never heard anyone claim climate change was a myth. And what difference does it make in any case. Isn't it common sense to find cheaper and more efficient ways of creating energy? And isn't it also common sense to take care of the planet we call home? But then again I suppose just talking about spomething without taking a swipe at someone wouldn't be any fun, would it? Maybe the next thread could be on vegetarians and their obsession with cow farts and chicken fetuses. Um, you can see the GOP politicians list here Or FOX news stand denying climate change I could go on, but you really want to take the stand that nobody says that climate change is a myth? The links I looked at had a lot of people who argue how much man plays a role in climate change but I didn't see any that said there was no climate change. And that was your claim. That they are denying climate change. So who said that? 1. “It could just be a shift on the axis.” —Congressman Bill Cassidy (R-LA) 2. “[Climate Change] led to the Vikings dominating Europe for several hundred years.” —Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) 3. “Every cow in the world, you know, when they do what they do, you’ve got more carbon dioxide.” —Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) 4. “The ice caps are melting, which we see over and over again. Yeah, they’re melting on Mars, too!” — Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) 5. “The new fad thing that’s going through America and around the world. It’s called global warming.” —Congressman Steve Stockman (R-TX) 6. “The government can’t change the weather.” —Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) 7. “It is not proven, it’s not science. It’s more of a religion than a science.” —Congressman Steve King (R-IA) 8. “…The idea that manmade gases, CO2, are causing catastrophic global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.” —Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) 9. “All voodoo, nonsense, hokum, a hoax.” —Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) Rep. Joe Barton “You’re not just off a little, you’re totally wrong,” Barton said as he challenged Gore’s conclusion that carbon dioxide emissions cause rising global temperatures. [source] Rep. Dan Benishek Despite overwhelming scientific evidence that humans are contributing to climate change, Rep. Benishek has said that climate change is “all baloney” and “just some scheme.” Pointing to his background as a general surgeon, Benishek claims he’s “a scientist” who has the expertise to know that climate change is “unproven science stuff.” Rep. Paul Broun In June 2009, Broun received a standing ovation when he said that global warming is a 'hoax'. He said 'Scientists all over this world say that the idea of human induced global climate change is one of the greatest hoaxes perpetrated out of the scientific community. It is a hoax. There is no scientific consensus.' Rep. Dave Camp What is the science of climate change? What can it definitively tell us? Can it say who is responsible for it? Can it tell us what impact we can have on it, and if we can, what are the resultsboth positive and negative? From what I have read, there remains a great deal of uncertainty with regard to the scientific evidence about climate change.' Rep. John Carter “Global warming is simply a chicken-little scheme to use mass media and government propaganda to convince the world that destruction of individual liberties and national sovereignty is necessary to save mankind, and that the unwashed masses would destroy themselves without the enlightened global dictatorship of these frauds.” Rep. Steve Chabot Climategate is “just another example of many in the press, and many in the academic/scientific community having bought into the whole global warming/climate change ‘religion,’ no matter what the facts are.” Rep. Michael Conaway Science is never settled…they changed the phraseology because the climate isn’t warming. Rep. Rodney Davis During an interview with Illinois Public Media radio, a constituent asked Representative Rodney Davis what he planned to do to combat climate change, and he responded that “global warming has stopped 16 years ago.” He then went on the say that climate change is real but the debate is over whether or not it is manmade or natural. Jeez, google climate change denial quotes and bingo. FYI, as for the "man is not impacting climate change" if you look at the climate shifts for the past million or so years, you would see that at this point the Earth should be entering a cooling period, with the potential for an ice age in the next couple thousand years. In stead we have had record setting hot years for the past 15 or so years.

DesideriScuri -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/21/2014 7:53:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Who told you climate change was a myth? I have heard a lot of people say that st gore and his cronies were less than honest and I have even heard a few suggest they are crooks, but I have never heard anyone claim climate change was a myth. And what difference does it make in any case. Isn't it common sense to find cheaper and more efficient ways of creating energy? And isn't it also common sense to take care of the planet we call home? But then again I suppose just talking about spomething without taking a swipe at someone wouldn't be any fun, would it? Maybe the next thread could be on vegetarians and their obsession with cow farts and chicken fetuses. Um, you can see the GOP politicians list here Or FOX news stand denying climate change I could go on, but you really want to take the stand that nobody says that climate change is a myth? Come on, Jeff. No one is saying the climate isn't changing. Some people don't agree that Man is the driver of that change. You know that.

tweakabelle -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 12:57:12 AM)
The real question is what does it take for the deniers to accept that they are in the wrong. There appears to be a mountain of evidence to support the human-caused AGW. There is a scientific consensus that humans cause AGW. Studies set up by sceptical scientists with the sole aim of disproving human-caused AGW ended up, much to denier's chagrin, confirming the thesis. Deniers are unable to offer any credible reasons why the scientific consensus exists if human-caused AGW thesis is false as they claim. So what evidence is convincing in their eyes? What does it take to convince them? I'm afraid that nothing will ever convince them because, as far as I can make out, their reasons for disputing the thesis are ideological, not related to the science and therefore not open to scientific validation or invalidation. It's not a coincidence that deniers tend to be based in countries with large fossil fuel industries and are almost always found on right or the extreme right of the political spectrum.

crazyml -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 1:03:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux If you raise the cost of electricity high enough .. you can make solar competitive.. but then your industry and consumers dependent thereon are not. And if you artificially deflate the cost of electricity, by deferring the costs of decommissioning and clean-up, you can make some forms of electricity generation appear a lot less costly than they are, ensuring that you shut out more viable alternatives, make healthy profits for your shareholders, and leave the taxpayer to pick up the remainder of the bill!

thishereboi -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 5:47:06 AM)
Still waiting for the quote that says climate change does not happen.

Phydeaux -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 6:28:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 FYI, as for the "man is not impacting climate change" if you look at the climate shifts for the past million or so years, you would see that at this point the Earth should be entering a cooling period, with the potential for an ice age in the next couple thousand years. In stead we have had record setting hot years for the past 15 or so years. Do you not realize that "record setting hot years" is in fact NOT TRUE. That the temperatures that we are experience now are below the temperatures experienced before the last Ice Age? Here's the temperature history.. again... [image]local://upfiles/11137/36E9163403C74B46952902018F2BAA71.gif[/image]

Phydeaux -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 6:34:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux If you raise the cost of electricity high enough .. you can make solar competitive.. but then your industry and consumers dependent thereon are not. And if you artificially deflate the cost of electricity, by deferring the costs of decommissioning and clean-up, you can make some forms of electricity generation appear a lot less costly than they are, ensuring that you shut out more viable alternatives, make healthy profits for your shareholders, and leave the taxpayer to pick up the remainder of the bill! Nice try. Law in the US is that decommissioning costs are planned for from the inception of the nuclear reactor, and that company must have financial resources for the decommissioning. AND that they are not allowed to defer the costs. Rather those costs, by law are required to be accrued. So rather than being deferred, in fact they are paid forward.

DomKen -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 6:39:19 AM)
Funny thing, human civilization has adapted exclusively for and can survive only in a band where our staple food crops will grow and those staple crops are all temperate zone plants so yes we do need to keep the temp at or near zero on that chart. We're already looking at centuries of war as populations are displaced as coastal cities flood. Can we maybe keep the global starvation to a minimum?

DomKen -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 6:40:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux If you raise the cost of electricity high enough .. you can make solar competitive.. but then your industry and consumers dependent thereon are not. And if you artificially deflate the cost of electricity, by deferring the costs of decommissioning and clean-up, you can make some forms of electricity generation appear a lot less costly than they are, ensuring that you shut out more viable alternatives, make healthy profits for your shareholders, and leave the taxpayer to pick up the remainder of the bill! Nice try. Law in the US is that decommissioning costs are planned for from the inception of the nuclear reactor, and that company must have financial resources for the decommissioning. AND that they are not allowed to defer the costs. Rather those costs, by law are required to be accrued. So rather than being deferred, in fact they are paid forward. You do know there are other electrical generation plants besides nuclear right? You might look into coal ash disposal costs for instance.

thompsonx -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 6:55:53 AM)
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Nice try. Law in the US is that decommissioning costs are planned for from the inception of the nuclear reactor, and that company must have financial resources for the decommissioning. What a crock of pure unmitigated shit. First: nuclear represents but a fraction of the power gernerators so to confine your argument to this sector is dishonest on it's face. Next: there is no way anyone knows the cost to decomission a nuclear plant as no one has found a safe way to store nuclear waste thus there can be no accounting for how much it will eventually cost. AND that they are not allowed to defer the costs. Rather those costs, by law are required to be accrued. So rather than being deferred, in fact they are paid forward. Talking out of both sides of ones mouth usually results in a dislocated jaw...doesn't that hurt?[8\|]

Phydeaux -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 6:59:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Funny thing, human civilization has adapted exclusively for and can survive only in a band where our staple food crops will grow and those staple crops are all temperate zone plants so yes we do need to keep the temp at or near zero on that chart. We're already looking at centuries of war as populations are displaced as coastal cities flood. Can we maybe keep the global starvation to a minimum? Alarmist bullshit as usual. Food production increased dramatically during the last medieval warming period with temperatures warmer than today. There were farms on Greenland - remember? And regarding your alarmist bullshit about 'centuries of war'. Do you not even understand how ridiculous you sound. Even IF your theories of global warming were right (they're not) we're talking ONE FOOT of water by 2050. You wanna look at a serious climate problem - global cooling..

Phydeaux -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 7:02:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux If you raise the cost of electricity high enough .. you can make solar competitive.. but then your industry and consumers dependent thereon are not. And if you artificially deflate the cost of electricity, by deferring the costs of decommissioning and clean-up, you can make some forms of electricity generation appear a lot less costly than they are, ensuring that you shut out more viable alternatives, make healthy profits for your shareholders, and leave the taxpayer to pick up the remainder of the bill! Nice try. Law in the US is that decommissioning costs are planned for from the inception of the nuclear reactor, and that company must have financial resources for the decommissioning. AND that they are not allowed to defer the costs. Rather those costs, by law are required to be accrued. So rather than being deferred, in fact they are paid forward. You do know there are other electrical generation plants besides nuclear right? You might look into coal ash disposal costs for instance. Or you might come up with an article that shows actual 'coal ash disposal cost' and how it isn't ALREADY FACTORED into the cost of electricity. Oh yeah. You can't.

MercTech -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 8:53:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Nice try. Law in the US is that decommissioning costs are planned for from the inception of the nuclear reactor, and that company must have financial resources for the decommissioning. What a crock of pure unmitigated shit. First: nuclear represents but a fraction of the power gernerators so to confine your argument to this sector is dishonest on it's face. Next: there is no way anyone knows the cost to decomission a nuclear plant as no one has found a safe way to store nuclear waste thus there can be no accounting for how much it will eventually cost. AND that they are not allowed to defer the costs. Rather those costs, by law are required to be accrued. So rather than being deferred, in fact they are paid forward. Talking out of both sides of ones mouth usually results in a dislocated jaw...doesn't that hurt?[8\|] I bed to differ. As part of the recurring licensing fees a nuclear power reactor owner pays into a decommissioning fund and a fuel processing fund. The projected life of a core barrel is 40 years and may be extended based on testing of metal samples. After 40 years, the cost of decommissioning has been paid into the fund. There are several workable methods for reprocessing and recycling spent commercial fuel and have been tested in other countries than the U.S. The best method would be re-cycling the fuel and vitrification of the small volume on unusable leftovers. The WIPP project on New Mexico was to be the pilot for long term disposal of the small volume of leftovers. To date, all they have there is a high volume of LSA crap from old bomb factories and container upon container of intermediate waste from bomb production. In the U.S., by the Atomic Energy Act of 1972; only the Department of Energy may re-cycle spent commercial fuel. The DOE was mandated by the Atomic Energy Act of 1972 to take custody of spent commercial nuclear fuel by fiscal year 1998. The DOE has yet to take custody of a single stick of spent fuel despite the various utilities paying into the recycling and disposal fund since the inception of their license. The huge cost of nuclear disposal comes from waffling and not living up to commitments on the part of the federal bureaucracy. The methods are there, have been there, but are not implemented because every few years someone gets the ear of a clueless elected official and things go into "stop, stop, we need to study this more" mode. There are multiple viable ways to skin that cat. Let's get it out of DOE hands and into licensed private faculties where someone can pick a way and follow it through.

DomKen -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 9:12:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux If you raise the cost of electricity high enough .. you can make solar competitive.. but then your industry and consumers dependent thereon are not. And if you artificially deflate the cost of electricity, by deferring the costs of decommissioning and clean-up, you can make some forms of electricity generation appear a lot less costly than they are, ensuring that you shut out more viable alternatives, make healthy profits for your shareholders, and leave the taxpayer to pick up the remainder of the bill! Nice try. Law in the US is that decommissioning costs are planned for from the inception of the nuclear reactor, and that company must have financial resources for the decommissioning. AND that they are not allowed to defer the costs. Rather those costs, by law are required to be accrued. So rather than being deferred, in fact they are paid forward. You do know there are other electrical generation plants besides nuclear right? You might look into coal ash disposal costs for instance. Or you might come up with an article that shows actual 'coal ash disposal cost' and how it isn't ALREADY FACTORED into the cost of electricity. Oh yeah. You can't. Oh yeah I can http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2014/03/05/unlined-and-dangerous-duke-energys-32-coal-ash-ponds-in-north-carolina-pose-a-threat-to-groundwater/ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-22/duke-says-coal-ash-disposal-may-cost-up-to-10-billion.html http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/2014/04/28/question-dukes-numbers-cost-cleanup/8350057/ http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/7/duke-quarterly-report.html http://www.utilitydive.com/news/duke-energy-coal-ash-clean-up-may-cost-10b/255068/

DomKen -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 9:17:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Funny thing, human civilization has adapted exclusively for and can survive only in a band where our staple food crops will grow and those staple crops are all temperate zone plants so yes we do need to keep the temp at or near zero on that chart. We're already looking at centuries of war as populations are displaced as coastal cities flood. Can we maybe keep the global starvation to a minimum? Alarmist bullshit as usual. Food production increased dramatically during the last medieval warming period with temperatures warmer than today. There were farms on Greenland - remember? And regarding your alarmist bullshit about 'centuries of war'. Do you not even understand how ridiculous you sound. Even IF your theories of global warming were right (they're not) we're talking ONE FOOT of water by 2050. You wanna look at a serious climate problem - global cooling.. We're no longer talking about one foot. We've lost the entire western Antarctica ice sheet and Greenland. That means roughly, factoring in thermal increase, a 21m sea level rise over the next several centuries. that means the loss of every coastal city and huge swaths of near costal land. That means huge displacements of populations and loss of farm land. That inevitably means wars.

Phydeaux -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 9:17:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux If you raise the cost of electricity high enough .. you can make solar competitive.. but then your industry and consumers dependent thereon are not. And if you artificially deflate the cost of electricity, by deferring the costs of decommissioning and clean-up, you can make some forms of electricity generation appear a lot less costly than they are, ensuring that you shut out more viable alternatives, make healthy profits for your shareholders, and leave the taxpayer to pick up the remainder of the bill! Nice try. Law in the US is that decommissioning costs are planned for from the inception of the nuclear reactor, and that company must have financial resources for the decommissioning. AND that they are not allowed to defer the costs. Rather those costs, by law are required to be accrued. So rather than being deferred, in fact they are paid forward. You do know there are other electrical generation plants besides nuclear right? You might look into coal ash disposal costs for instance. Or you might come up with an article that shows actual 'coal ash disposal cost' and how it isn't ALREADY FACTORED into the cost of electricity. Oh yeah. You can't. Oh yeah I can http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2014/03/05/unlined-and-dangerous-duke-energys-32-coal-ash-ponds-in-north-carolina-pose-a-threat-to-groundwater/ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-22/duke-says-coal-ash-disposal-may-cost-up-to-10-billion.html http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/2014/04/28/question-dukes-numbers-cost-cleanup/8350057/ http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/7/duke-quarterly-report.html http://www.utilitydive.com/news/duke-energy-coal-ash-clean-up-may-cost-10b/255068/ Nice try. Epic fail. State law (in a state that has predominantly been dimocratic over the last 100 years) allowed utilities to dispose of ash in manner x, manner y, manner z. Those costs were accrued to the costs of electricity. The fact that there is an additional cost due to an accident which will STILL be paid by Duke Power does not in any way support your allegation that the costs of coal ash disposal are not already incorporated into the costs of electricity.

mnottertail -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 9:19:30 AM)
quote: The fact that there is an additional cost due to an accident which will STILL be paid by Duke Power does not in any way support your allegation that the costs of coal ash disposal are not already incorporated into the costs of electricity. Don't talk so fuckin dumb. The externality falls on the taxpayer.

Phydeaux -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 9:20:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Funny thing, human civilization has adapted exclusively for and can survive only in a band where our staple food crops will grow and those staple crops are all temperate zone plants so yes we do need to keep the temp at or near zero on that chart. We're already looking at centuries of war as populations are displaced as coastal cities flood. Can we maybe keep the global starvation to a minimum? Alarmist bullshit as usual. Food production increased dramatically during the last medieval warming period with temperatures warmer than today. There were farms on Greenland - remember? And regarding your alarmist bullshit about 'centuries of war'. Do you not even understand how ridiculous you sound. Even IF your theories of global warming were right (they're not) we're talking ONE FOOT of water by 2050. You wanna look at a serious climate problem - global cooling.. We're no longer talking about one foot. We've lost the entire western Antarctica ice sheet and Greenland. That means roughly, factoring in thermal increase, a 21m sea level rise over the next several centuries. that means the loss of every coastal city and huge swaths of near costal land. That means huge displacements of populations and loss of farm land. That inevitably means wars. Snicker. Yeah. The weatherman can't predict the temperatures one week out and you think you can over several centuries... The IPCC didn't correctly predict temperatures 10 years out. They have a demonstrated history of being wrong. And you think this is something we should make a 15 trillion dollar gamble on? Of course you do.

DomKen -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 9:35:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux If you raise the cost of electricity high enough .. you can make solar competitive.. but then your industry and consumers dependent thereon are not. And if you artificially deflate the cost of electricity, by deferring the costs of decommissioning and clean-up, you can make some forms of electricity generation appear a lot less costly than they are, ensuring that you shut out more viable alternatives, make healthy profits for your shareholders, and leave the taxpayer to pick up the remainder of the bill! Nice try. Law in the US is that decommissioning costs are planned for from the inception of the nuclear reactor, and that company must have financial resources for the decommissioning. AND that they are not allowed to defer the costs. Rather those costs, by law are required to be accrued. So rather than being deferred, in fact they are paid forward. You do know there are other electrical generation plants besides nuclear right? You might look into coal ash disposal costs for instance. Or you might come up with an article that shows actual 'coal ash disposal cost' and how it isn't ALREADY FACTORED into the cost of electricity. Oh yeah. You can't. Oh yeah I can http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2014/03/05/unlined-and-dangerous-duke-energys-32-coal-ash-ponds-in-north-carolina-pose-a-threat-to-groundwater/ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-22/duke-says-coal-ash-disposal-may-cost-up-to-10-billion.html http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/local/2014/04/28/question-dukes-numbers-cost-cleanup/8350057/ http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/7/duke-quarterly-report.html http://www.utilitydive.com/news/duke-energy-coal-ash-clean-up-may-cost-10b/255068/ Nice try. Epic fail. State law (in a state that has predominantly been dimocratic over the last 100 years) allowed utilities to dispose of ash in manner x, manner y, manner z. Those costs were accrued to the costs of electricity. The fact that there is an additional cost due to an accident which will STILL be paid by Duke Power does not in any way support your allegation that the costs of coal ash disposal are not already incorporated into the costs of electricity. Can't you read? quote: Duke Energy Corp. (DUK) said the total tab for cleaning up its North Carolina coal-ash dumps may reach $10 billion amid a call for national rules to regulate the disposal of the fossil-fuel byproduct quote: The North Carolina Utilities Commission will decide who pays for the cleanup, Holleman said. “Our position is that law-abiding citizens should not pay,” he said. Duke shareholders are liable for the cost because its ash ponds violate pollution laws, Holleman said. Some analysts disagree with that position. “The costs of cleaning up the waste from fuel from coal should be a ratepayer cost and not a shareholder cost,” said Kit Konolige, an analyst with BGC Partners LP in New York. “The traditional regulatory compact, the cost of fuel and cost of cleanup of fuel, should be passed through ratepayers. It really shouldn’t come out of shareholders pockets except to the extent that the company has done something wrong.” from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-22/duke-says-coal-ash-disposal-may-cost-up-to-10-billion.html So no liar it isn't factored in and it may well be dumped on to the rate payers.

jlf1961 -> RE: I guess since Climate Change is a myth, this is a dumb idea? (5/22/2014 9:37:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Do you not realize that "record setting hot years" is in fact NOT TRUE. That the temperatures that we are experience now are below the temperatures experienced before the last Ice Age? Here's the temperature history.. again... [image]local://upfiles/11137/36E9163403C74B46952902018F2BAA71.gif[/image] Would you mind giving the source for this chart, I would be interested in seeing where the facts came from. Of course there is this tidbit about CO2 levels Then there is this concerning CO2 and temp Or this any of these

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625