Climate Change & Global Warming

[ArabiaTerra]

thats just weather AT and as you have pointed out all winter weather is not climate unless of course it backs up your crackpot ideas.

Wow, bob, you read that whole web page in less than a minute! I'm impressed, you must be some reader.

 

Wait, you did read it, didn't you?.... didn't you?

[ArabiaTerra]

Another analysis of the current situation for bob and unlinked:

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6782DU20100809

 

Devastating floods in Pakistan and Russia's heatwave match predictions of extremes caused by global warming even though it is impossible to blame mankind for single severe weather events, scientists say.

(emphasis mine)

[Guest Anonymous]

looked at it closely enough to make the comment I did it is just a localised weather event and not proof of manmade climate change, just as the coldest winter in how many years was not proof that global warming is not happening according to you AT, now it has been followed by the coldest summer in many many years it is still not enough to convince you just as warm spell in russia is not going to convince me that the end of the world is nigh, just as a drop of rain durring monsoon seaon is not going to convince me either.

You strike me as a gloomy sort AT maybe you should get a hobby that does not involve sitting at a computer all day wringing your hands and prophesising armagedon or whatever.

Try getting outside a bit more maybe even switching off your computer at the wall and saving some electric go for a walk round the banks and then you will mabe realise it is no bloody warmer now than when you were a kid and did actually get out of the house for a spell every day.

Little did mam and dad know what they were getting you into when they bought you your first comodore 64.

[ArabiaTerra]

^^^ It was a spectrum actually.

 

It's not "a localised weather event". See here:

 

http://climateprogress.org/2010/08/02/tom-zeller-errors-heat-wave-global-warming/

[Guest Anonymous]

spectrum, comadore 64, whatever the lasting effect is still the same

[ArabiaTerra]

What's really going on:

 

http://climateprogress.org/2010/08/10/merchants-of-doubt-distorting-science-while-invoking-science/

[Guest Anonymous]

I see your letter in the shetland news has been shot down in flames AT maybe if you paid attention to the reply's on here and elsewhere you wouldn't come out looking like such a muppet

[Carlos]

To be fair, it is the case that the carbon payback is being looked as part of the planning application at for the VE application while it was not for the Total application.

Regardless of how folk may feel on the individual merits of each application, is it reasonable to treat similar issues differently depending on the project?

[ArabiaTerra]

I see your letter in the shetland news has been shot down in flames AT maybe if you paid attention to the reply's on here and elsewhere you wouldn't come out looking like such a muppet

On the contrary, bob. I think Billy's response has highlighted "sustainable" Shetlands hypocrisy in excruciating detail.

 

VE gets dragged over the coals for every single step they take, move they make, while the oil industry gets a free pass, move along, nothing to see.

 

It's pathetic.

[Pooks]

To take things along a slightly different line, here is a rather one-sided but sensible article:-

 

The Nuclear Option

 

Opinions?

[Snaz]

I don't think Billy Fox's rambling reply really answers the question why its one rule for Total and another for VE.

[Carlos]

I can't see how we will not end up with more nuclear power once energy prices go up, so for now I'd like to see us getting the research done into the best design for lithium reactors, which should be able to be built with better failsafes and there's the bonus that there's about 100 times as much fuel as uranium.

[Guest Anonymous]

the main differance between the 2 is that total are not claiming to be saving the planet and ve are. ve are claiming a carbon payback time total are not. ve will be extracting 1,000,000 tonnes of peat from virgin hill total will be extracting 350,000 tonne of peat from an already industrial area. ve want to spend our money destroying our island total will be asking for no financial support from us.

quite simple really snaz.

[shetlandpeat]

There may be a time when your children and grankids will get systems forced upon them without discussion.

Would it be best to end up relying purely on Nuclear?

 

I believe the roads will "float" on the peat. They will only be used by service vehicles.

 

How many tonnes of carbon have be produced getting your luxuries on the the Thule, so you can throw them in the landfill when your done with them.

[Carlos]

the main differance between the 2 is that total are not claiming to be saving the planet and ve are.

If VE's revised EIA also made no claims to CO2 reductions you be happy that no assessment was then needed?