GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

12 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Coral has survived with far higher levels of CO2 in ages past, as have hundreds of other species. 

Hundreds of other species??? That's all? That would be a mega extinction of the worst kind. 

The same data and same author that was used to show no correlation between CO2 and temperature found:

"A prominent 15 million-year CO₂ cycle coincides closely with identified mass extinctions of the past,"

"I report that the concentration of atmospheric CO₂ oscillated regularly during the Phanerozoic and peaks in CO₂ concentration closely match the peaks of mass extinctions identified by previous investigators."

Correlation does not mean causation but it is damn suspicious and can't be ignored without significant research.

Do you have evidence to support your claim?

 

Edited April 28, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[ronwagn + 6,290]

20 hours ago, turbguy said:

You think a CT, an HRSG, a Steamer, several generators, pumps, valves, all related moving parts and the lubricants don't degrade with use?  They don't require downtime, disassembly, inspection, repairs and unexpected failures? 

That ain't cheap either.

Why is it that wind tyurbine blades and motors are not replaced then? They are cut up and buried in Mother Earth, not made into metal. Turbines are rebuilt and most parts stay as original. The metal is reused because it is recyclable. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 minute ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The same data and same author that was used to show no correlation between CO2 and temperature found:

"A prominent 15 million-year CO₂ cycle coincides closely with identified mass extinctions of the past,"

Do you have evidence to support your claim?

 

Yes. It is common knowledge that mammoths and other animals died suddenly in Siberia from a fast freeze, not from hot weather. Their bodies still have viable DNA. The last ice age is the most reputable fact of geological time. There is no more credible fact that would threaten mankind. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

8 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Why is it that wind tyurbine blades and motors are not replaced then? They are cut up and buried in Mother Earth, not made into metal. Turbines are rebuilt and most parts stay as original. The metal is reused because it is recyclable. 

The turbines are recyclable, it takes time for industry to develop the value chain to implement it. In most part that comes from volume which is growing as more turbines reach the end of their life cycle. There just hasn't been enough turbine blade retirements to make recycling economically viable, that is rapidly changing.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

13 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Yes. It is common knowledge that mammoths and other animals died suddenly in Siberia from a fast freeze, not from hot weather. Their bodies still have viable DNA. The last ice age is the most reputable fact of geological time. There is no more credible fact that would threaten mankind. 

Huh? The report that we have been discussing identified a 15 million year carbon cycle correlation with mass extinctions. The last ice age ended just 12,000 years ago. 

Edited April 28, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

5 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The turbines are recyclable, it takes time for industry to develop the value chain to implement it. In most part that comes from volume which is growing as more turbines reach the end of their life cycle. There just hasn't been enough turbine blade retirements to make recycling economically viable, that is rapidly changing.

Feel good ideas and policies, you should take a trip to South Africa and other African countries where the feel good turbines have been dumped for years and years, destroying the environment. If you dont see it in your back yard then its OK. Have you ever been to "processing facilities" and "mines" and sites from where the REE's and other related minerals and metals required to make feel good turbines and batteries are made from?

Lot of loud noise and bluster , Green this Green that but very little actual achievements in terms of environmental benefits. And there is no Wind and Solar without fossil fuels.

 

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

Just now, ceo_energemsier said:

Feel good ideas and policies, you should take a trip to South Africa and other African countries where the feel good turbines have been dumped for years and years, destroying the environment. If you dont see it in your back yard then its OK. Have you ever been to "processing facilities" and "mines" and sites from where the REE's and other related minerals and metals required to make feel good turbines and batteries are made from?

Lot of loud noise and bluster , Green this Green that but very little actual achievements in terms of environmental benefits. And there is no Wind and Solar without fossil fuels.

 

 

I've also been to oil fields and seen the pollution, been around when oil refineries have major toxic gas releases, massive harm from oil spills, and oh yes, let's not forget the smog.

Sorry but the need for fossil fuel emissions to support wind and solar is transitory. In the not too distant future solar and wind will support themselves. Note I said emissions. To the degree petrochemicals remain a necessary ingredient then there will remain need of oil. So you guys get to keep that little part of the industry until substitutes are developed. Just a matter of time.

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

22 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Huh? The report that we have been discussing identified a 15 million year carbon cycle correlation with mass extinctions. The last ice age ended just 12,000 years ago. 

I am discussing more recent events because I think they are far more revelant.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/10-of-the-world-s-oldest-civilizations.htmly

See 1,358 notable climate stories on my topic. Global Warming AKA Climate Change and Just Plain Weather.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vHU2hHXebxpvExT7srNNnX-VM7Qn9Ak_ZmdKCIcUti8/edit

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

16 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

I am discussing more recent events because I think they are far more revelant.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/10-of-the-world-s-oldest-civilizations.htmly

See 1,358 notable climate stories on my topic. Global Warming AKA Climate Change and Just Plain Weather.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vHU2hHXebxpvExT7srNNnX-VM7Qn9Ak_ZmdKCIcUti8/edit

Earth's current ecologic system has been around for half a billion years. It shows repeated mass extinction events. The most recent mass extinction is called the holocene extinction and it is going on right now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

Edited April 29, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Have you found that evidence to show that returning to pre-industrial CO2 levels is harmful?

"Pre-industrial"? Like when we had less than a billion folks walking the planet? 

Where do you dream up this stuff, Jay? 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

11 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Earth's current ecologic cycle has been around for 2 billion years. It shows repeated mass extinction events. The most recent mass extinction is called the holocene extinction and it is going on right now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

The article is excellent and I agree with almost all of it, unlike the manmade global warming theory. The world population has grown, along with enabling technology. That same technology is also the greatest threat to mankind. Mankind is in control of all the land of the world and it is up to mankind to preserve and improve the land and environment. Each country is also responsible for maintaining and improving their environment. International organizations are responsible for offering assistance and advice. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

4 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

High oil prices will be tremendous for EV demand! 

Only if taxes on it are too high. IMHO Americans will not allow that to happen. It will take several decades to convert to very high proportion of "renewable" energy. 

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

54 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I've also been to oil fields and seen the pollution, been around when oil refineries have major toxic gas releases, massive harm from oil spills, and oh yes, let's not forget the smog.

Sorry but the need for fossil fuel emissions to support wind and solar is transitory. In the not too distant future solar and wind will support themselves. Note I said emissions. To the degree petrochemicals remain a necessary ingredient then there will remain need of oil. So you guys get to keep that little part of the industry until substitutes are developed. Just a matter of time.

 

Jay, if we eliminate CO2, you and I will have nothing to eat and nothing to breathe....and then all of our problems will be resolved for this life. Sound good?

Edited April 29, 2021 by Ecocharger

[surrept33 + 609]

1 hour ago, ronwagn said:

Coral has survived with far higher levels of CO2 in ages past, as have hundreds of other species. 

Yeah, but adaptation requires evolutionary pressures, and this only happens successfully over long periods of time.

Higher amounts of CO2 would likely preferentially select for things like blue green algae and similar plants that would bloom everywhere. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it may take a long time to recover biodiversity. As in tens of millions of years.

Most of the arctic ocean oil and other sequestrated carbon is hypothesized to be from this fern, which took us from the last greenhouse to the current climate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdfWFDcXut4

A very different earth indeed.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

There is no problem, Jay....unless you think that human beings eating and breathing is a problem.

I guess you do think that, judging from your other posts.

Humans need more than air and food. They need space, a beautiful environment, peace, and ethical societies that advance humanity over time. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

2 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Only if taxes on it are too high. IMHO Americans will not allow that to happen. It will take several decades to convert to very high proportion of "renewable" energy. 

There is a lot more to do with the price of oil than taxes. 

I think you will find it interesting then that renewables were the #2 source of electricity in the US last year. 

1. natural gas

2. renewables (hydro+solar+wind+biomass+geothermal+ etc)

3. nuclear

4. coal

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

6 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Jay, if we eliminate CO2, you and I will have nothing to eat and nothing to breathe....and then all of our problems will be resolved for this life. Sound good?

How thick can you be? No one is proposing eliminating co2. I have repeatedly said the goal is to revert to pre industrial levels of co2. Do you not understand what that means? 

Edited April 29, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

1 minute ago, Jay McKinsey said:

There is a lot more to do with the price of oil than taxes. 

I think you will find it interesting then that renewables were the #2 source of electricity in the US last year. 

1. natural gas

2. renewables (hydro+solar+wind+biomass+geothermal+ etc)

3. nuclear

4. coal

What proportion of "renewables" were hydro? 95%? 75%? Pretty high there.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 minute ago, Jay McKinsey said:

There is a lot more to do with the price of oil than taxes. 

I think you will find it interesting then that renewables were the #2 source of electricity in the US last year. 

1. natural gas

2. renewables (hydro+solar+wind+biomass+geothermal+ etc)

3. nuclear

4. coal

Renewables IMHO should not include hydro since it gives a false sense of importance to wind and especially solar. 

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

3 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

How thick can you be? No one is proposing eliminating co2. I have repeatedly said the goal is to revert to pre industrial levels of co2. Do you not understand what that means? 

Jay, "pre-industrial" means fewer than a billion people walking the planet....I already pointed that out to you.

How do you propose to get rid of billions of extra folks?

Edited April 29, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,554]

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

Renewables IMHO should not include hydro since it gives a false sense of importance to wind and especially solar. 

Agreed, look this green crowd will not let go of any tangible..even remotely tangible fact that favors the industry. I can assure you if the jet stream was interrupted it would be fossil fuels fault. There is a lot on the line inTX watch closely.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

2 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

What proportion of "renewables" were hydro? 95%? 75%? Pretty high there.

Wind was number one.

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=2,0,1&fuel=vtvv&geo=g&sec=g&linechart=ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.TSN-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.A~&columnchart=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.A&map=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.A&freq=A&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0

 

[Ecocharger + 1,470]

3 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Wind was number one.

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=2,0,1&fuel=vtvv&geo=g&sec=g&linechart=ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.TSN-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.A~&columnchart=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.A&map=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.A&freq=A&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0

 

Do you read your own stuff?  Hydro-electric was well in front...well ahead of wind.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Ecocharger

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I've also been to oil fields and seen the pollution, been around when oil refineries have major toxic gas releases, massive harm from oil spills, and oh yes, let's not forget the smog.

Sorry but the need for fossil fuel emissions to support wind and solar is transitory. In the not too distant future solar and wind will support themselves. Note I said emissions. To the degree petrochemicals remain a necessary ingredient then there will remain need of oil. So you guys get to keep that little part of the industry until substitutes are developed. Just a matter of time.

 

Everyone on this site will be dead before fossil fuels take second place to renewables. Even if a new invention popped up it would take decades to implement.

[surrept33 + 609]

10 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Jay, "pre-industrial" means fewer than a billion people walking the planet....I already pointed that out to you.

How do you propose to get rid of billions of extra folks?

What it takes is going carbon negative. At what pace and how? It depends on technology adoption.

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/going-carbon-negative-what-are-the-technology-options

Edited April 29, 2021 by surrept33