I found it hilarious that one of the driving forces (heh) in green technology in the U.S. was the U.S. Air Force (most recently I believe it was the chicken oil fuel experiment). Turns out that military isn't such a bad investment after all.
I found it hilarious that one of the driving forces (heh) in green technology in the U.S. was the U.S. Air Force (most recently I believe it was the chicken oil fuel experiment). Turns out that military isn't such a bad investment after all.
UNDER THE PROUD PATRONAGE OF ABBEWS
According to this poll, 80%* of TGW fans agree that "The mod team is devilishly handsome" *as of 12/10
Military is a good investment in certain things... obviously a lot of good things have come from military tech... but I doubt the Republicans want the military to invest in the green technology... they just want the pork projects that go to their lobbyists.
Still, this is one of those cases where I would argue the intent is not half as important as the consequences, especially since - I am willing to bet - lobbyism occurs on both sides of the coin.
You have to admit that a wind-powered Abrams tank sounds absolutely awesome. Maybe the Navy could try sails, again.
UNDER THE PROUD PATRONAGE OF ABBEWS
According to this poll, 80%* of TGW fans agree that "The mod team is devilishly handsome" *as of 12/10
... Starting with China. There appears to be a deadlock. The super-growth nations with the huge industries don't want to take their share of the burden.
UNDER THE PROUD PATRONAGE OF ABBEWS
According to this poll, 80%* of TGW fans agree that "The mod team is devilishly handsome" *as of 12/10
Dude we're all about it... Anything to cut down costs or turn costs to more important things -- which might make one wonder how the defense budget could be so outrageously high, but the answer is politics, the aforementioned pork projects, the ripoff contracts, all that BS. The Marine Corps is primed for green technology, our entire tradition is about getting things done with the bare minimum of resources. With the way things are going I'm amazed we don't have a compost pile outside.
قرطاج يجب ان تدمر
Why isn't it porkbarrel spending when the Navy spends 29$ per dollars for biofuel instead of the 10£ they would normally ?
Also lets not forget that Biofuel production is causing a food shortage globally and increasing prices for Third World people ... but if the USA military goal is solely to kill people then doing it by refueling might be a the way to do it too.
« Le courage est toujours quelque chose de saint, un jugement divin entre deux idées. Défendre notre cause de plus en plus vigoureusement est conforme à la nature humaine. Notre suprême raison d’être est donc de lutter ; on ne possède vraiment que ce qu’on acquiert en combattant. »Ernst Jünger
La Guerre notre Mère (Der Kampf als inneres Erlebnis), 1922, trad. Jean Dahel, éditions Albin Michel, 1934
To both motiv-8 and Menelik:
We could call it... Green Warfare. That would probably sell to the media, too.
UNDER THE PROUD PATRONAGE OF ABBEWS
According to this poll, 80%* of TGW fans agree that "The mod team is devilishly handsome" *as of 12/10
Last edited by Col. Tartleton; January 09, 2013 at 03:46 AM.
The Earth is inhabited by billions of idiots.
The search for intelligent life continues...
Bold: Says the expert
As far as the thread title goes (i admit, i didn't bother to read the 1st post though), we are talking about greenhouse gas and emission. CO2 qualifies as greenhouse gas.
Substances from on a certain concentration qualify as pollutant.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pollutant
CO2 belongs to those substances, of course.
Not only carbondioxide is the stuff that is necessary for the photosynthesis, it is also necessary for the greenhouse effect, that is in the first place a cause for our life on earth, the necessary atmosphere for biological life which we know.
Nonetheless CO2 from on a certain concentration is deadly for biological life, there are certain areas on earth with a CO2 concentration that would kill you.
Nonetheless CO2 is an emitter, and from on a certain concentration in the atmosphere influences the temperature-balance, that is healthy and necessary for the "earth-mechanics" (term used as summary of all according processes, as this a wide theme, of course), and with this influences the life-balance on earth.
As we humans cause CO2 emissions in significant amount with our civilisation since the industrial age, we speak of a human caused global warming effect - which is a present process and is not stoppable anymore, we can only do something to reduce the expected peak, and rationality obliges to it.
So far our current respective science in which the overwhelming majority of scientists agree, including governments, and even industries cannot seriously oppose to it anymore, which they did in the past.
It has nothing to do with "green lobbyism" or even "eco-terrorism" on the poor citizen, that's .
But it has to do with lobbyism, when certain industries and their representants (lobbyists, partly incl. their "scientists") still say, that this science is not science but (pure) speculation, just because they speak against physical laws, which we are able to measure todays, and we can observe the impacts.
Last edited by DaVinci; January 09, 2013 at 05:10 AM.
#Anthropocene #not just Global Warming but Global Disaster, NASA #Deforestation #Plastic Emission #The Blob #Uninhabitable Earth #Savest Place On Earth #AMOC #ICAN #MIT study "Falsehoods Win" #Engineers of Chaos
#"there can be no doubt about it: the enemy stands on the Right!" 1922, by Joseph Wirth.
Rightwingers, like in the past the epitome of incompetence, except for evilness where they own the mastership.
Iirc., already 2013 i spoke of "Renaissance of Fascism", it was accurate.
#"Humanity is in ‘final exam’ as to whether or not it qualifies for continuance in universe." Buckminster Fuller
Any chance for this exam? Very low, the established Anthropocentrism destroys the basis of existence.
#My Modding #The Witcher 3: Lore Friendly Tweaks (LFT)
#End, A diary of the Third World War (A.-A. Guha, 1983) - now, it started on 24th February 2022.
Yeah, but it's not a pollutant. It's a central part of the air.
Seems semi logical so far.Substances from on a certain concentration qualify as pollutant.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pollutant
CO2 belongs to those substances, of course.
Not only carbondioxide is the stuff that is necessary for the photosynthesis, it is also necessary for the greenhouse effect, that is in the first place a cause for our life on earth, the necessary atmosphere for biological life which we know.
Problem is the CO2 concentration doesn't kill you. The lack of O2 concentration does. Solution? Plants.Nonetheless CO2 from on a certain concentration is deadly for biological life, there are certain areas on earth with a CO2 concentration that would kill you.
Nonetheless CO2 is an emitter, and from on a certain concentration in the atmosphere influences the temperature-balance, that is healthy and necessary for the "earth-mechanics" (term used as summary of all according processes, as this a wide theme, of course), and with this influences the life-balance on earth.
Except the anthropogenic CO2 contribution is actually not statistically significant according to experts who bother to ask that question. Whatever is/was making it warmer is/was not humans.As we humans cause CO2 emissions in significant amount with our civilisation since the industrial age, we speak of a human caused global warming effect - which is a present process and is not stoppable anymore, we can only do something to reduce the expected peak, and rationality obliges to it.
So far our current respective science in which the overwhelming majority of scientists agree, including governments, and even industries cannot seriously oppose to it anymore, which they did in the past.
http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/3/17...3-173-2012.pdf
Enjoy this cluster .
The only reason "green" is being accepted is because it's good for marketing. Green = Money.It has nothing to do with "green lobbyism" or even "eco-terrorism" on the poor citizen, that's .
But it has to do with lobbyism, when certain industries and their representants (lobbyists, partly incl. their "scientists") still say, that this science is not science but (pure) speculation, just because they speak against physical laws, which we are able to measure todays, and we can observe the impacts.
Companies want to be viewed as green whether it's actually beneficial or not. It moves product. The counter argument doesn't make a lot of sense. Energy companies aren't married to carbon fuels. They're married to money. If you're willing to pay for solar Exxon Mobil will sell you solar. If you're willing to pay for wind, Shell will build you a wind turbine. They don't ing care. They'll drill for oil where they can and sell it to whoever will buy it. They're trying to make a profit. That's their bottom line.
There's no money in fighting against cultural trends. The money is always being ahead of the curve in supplying that demand.
As far as I'm concerned the big money, private and government both, is in green energy and the general consensus of mainstream scientists, pundits, media, teachers, and popular science has been singing of AGW from the minarets ("singing from the minarets" is a brand new idiom I just coined for this occasion.) As such I'm more inclined to listen to the counter arguments because they're not benefiting a lot from being on the losing side of the argument, yet they're still arguing against the grain.
Last edited by Col. Tartleton; January 09, 2013 at 09:33 AM.
The Earth is inhabited by billions of idiots.
The search for intelligent life continues...
They call them "Green Hawks" and they exist in the Pentagon. My brother worked there for around two years and they are just as ravenous about this as they were about preventative war.
Sadly (and worryingly) it is about the only significant area of advancement for the US outside of private enterprise. But this is often where it starts in this country. The military has consistently jump started private innovation.
And a positive is that it also cannot be directly tampered with by countries like China - unless the steal. Which of course they do.The government has been doing a quiet audit on all Chinese manufactured components for years now. This is after other components were found to be used in theft of information. Before that it was confined mostly to industrial espionage due to it being easily traced back to China. But they are getting more brazen as this government shows no interest in outing them.
But it cannot be a situation where this administration invests and China counters with a significantly larger investment. Or China flat out buying those businesses through shadowy 3rd party ownership.
And of course the GOP doesn't target it publicly because it is there people driving it. Republicans who have quietly accepted global warming and the huge risks it will present. And the few that hold office are insulated from conservative groups who would toss large sums of money into races to unseat them for a Tea Party nutjob.
Last edited by mrmouth; January 09, 2013 at 02:41 PM.
The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascistsThe best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity
No? China has the largest CO2 output. In fact, Germany and the US are the only countries in the world that have managed to reduce their CO2 emissions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...xide_emissions
But per capita US still way ahead, almost double EU level. China is not even reached Japan level yet, the cleanest of developed country. It's going to be hard sell for China government to tell china citizen that they need to get their act about CO2 when ordinary USA still pollutes 3x more...
And um, China has strict control over the economy. The Government powering everything off of coal is what causes the pollution. Or did the Chinese all start driving SUVs suddenly?
Chinese Government doesn't need to tell anyone to do anything, its not at all like the US. The Chinese Government is the group that needs to change all they have to do is say "hey, we're not doing coal anymore" and buy some other .
Do you know what a pollutant is? Many pollutants occur in natural in ecosystems as well.
There you go, going against what people better qualified have to say about the matter. It isn't statistically insignificant. In fact, there is no other statistically significant source of carbon dioxide contributing to atmospheric build up.
They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.
And yet US still emit more carbon emission than any other country per capita. Until US can really reach EU level per capita, they can't preach anything.
Or are you saying US way is the right one? spam as more as carbon emission, later you just need to reduce a little and say, hey i'm better now, i reduce 0,5% of my carbon emission, but please don't mind that per capita i produced way more than any other country
@I Wub PUG
Coal is cheapest energy, stop using coal to reduce carbon emission = more costly energy for ordinary citizen = more grumble. Although China is controled economy, the government still doing some pretense that they are hearing people protest and they act on it as long as it don't disturb China stability.