Tree growth rings disprove that the earth is warmer now than during Roman times and or even 1000 years ago.

Page 6 of 9  


Chicken little says it very well could be a problem. There is a lot of mass here, and a little warming is easily absorbed. The question may be whether there is a tipping point, and where that is. Little ice ages and warmer periods have occurred regularly (Pinatubo eruption had a small but measurable effect). The real Cassandras say that if the arctic thaws, so much methane may get released from frozen hydrates that we will get big warming on a global scale. Etc, etc.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 21:49:37 +0000, Han wrote:

Dammit Han, you're being reasonable - that never works with this group :-).
As I've pointed out, whether or not the increase in CO2 is the major factor in warming, there's little dispute that it is a major factor in ocean acidification. If the base of the global food chain is disrupted, we won't care how warm it gets!
--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Larry Blanchard" wrote:

<snip> --------------------------------- You buy them books, they eat the covers.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Larry Blanchard" wrote:

------------------------------------ You buy them books, they are still eating the covers.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Lew, English is my second language, can you explain what you mean in simpler language?
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Han" wrote:

------------------------------ If you buy somebody a book and instead of reading it they eat the book's cover, there is not much point in buying that person a book in the first place.
Same can be said for trying to explain an idea to some folks.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

If you give a hungry man a book, he can feed himself for a day. If you teach a hungry man to read, he's still hungry.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/18/2012 1:23 PM, Han wrote:

If there is a human contribution to global warming, it from all the hot air and flatulence being released by Congress.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Indeed, that doesn't help either ...
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/18/2012 1:23 PM, Han wrote:

On a global scale (which is the way one should consider global warming), a slightly warmer globe would not be a problem, it would be a good thing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That depends. If there is enough irrigation water around, perhaps no problem, but here in the US we are depleting aquifers already. If there is going to be less snow in the mountains, there will be less of a summertime reservoir of water (it will have run off the mountains before spring is finished).
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And if we continue to destroy aquifers with fracking, the USA will have little to no drinkable or farmable water available. I worry about that 1,000 times more than AGWK.
-- Win first, Fight later.
--martial principle of the Samurai
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I worry about that too, Larry. OTOH, that is an engineering and regulation problem. It can be done safely, I believe. But there needs to be oversight and punishment in case things go wrong. The main things are 4-fold (I'm a biochemist so I have absolutely no standing): First, the borehole should be warranteed to be free of defects, with the companies in charge responsible to the extent that they have to prove they are not responsible, rather than the "government" needing to prove they are. Second, the waste should be cleaned up and /properly/ disposed of. Again same conditions. Third, the fact that the water supply in the area was fine before fracking proves that fracking was responsible for it being fouled (if so) after fracking started, and again, same conditions. Fourth, any earthquakes and damage from them are the direct responsibility of the fracking companies.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 18:48:13 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote:

Well, that's a couple of things we agree on :-).
--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Jaques wrote:

Huh?
There are NO federal regulations on fracking and never have been. There was nothing to bypass, by Big Oil or anybody else. Licenses are not issued by anybody for fracking. In addition, Congress has never been involved in fracking, either in favor or in opposition.
Further, most fracking extractions are not owned or operated by Big Oil - they were developed by independent operators who sell the output to NG production companies, most of which have no connection to the seven major oil companies.
If you have any information to the contrary, I'd be really interested in seeing it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I believe there are federal regulations that apply to fracking, but mostly they are local (state or smaller entities). I believe that fracking in PA requires some permits, and that the companies are bypassing them by trucking their wastes to OH, or at least interstate between 2 states. It would be good to have federal regulations (if they were sufficient, reasonable, consistent, and intelligible), so that everyone everywhere would be subject to the same rules. Now it is too easy to circumvent the rules, or say, oh I diodn't know ...
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Han wrote:

You're sorta correct and I misspoke. There are STATE regulations on fracking but there are NO federal regulations on fracking. A lot of people in eastern Pennsylvania are getting rich from fracked natural gas while their neighbors, just across the state line in western New York are really pissed because New York doesn't allow the process.
In the early days of fracking, there was some waste; companies dumped the semi-polluted water anywhere they pleased. Now, however, all the water used is reclaimed. There is NO waste connected with fracking.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There was until recently at least a scarcity of effective regulation of waste disposal. I don't believe that there is no waste with fracking. You mean to say that all the drilling fluids and all the fracking fluids disappear into the earth? That I do not believe. I am hopeful that the wastes are disposed of in compliance with all regulations, but I am fearful that they still truck waste out of the state where it cannot be dumped to states where it IS "legal".
I am sure there are people who are jealous of the money made by others over in the next state. Just like there are people furious they signed contracts they didn't understand, and who are stiffed out of what they thought they were going to get. Legal and all that stuff, but still ...
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Han wrote:

Consider:
"Spent or used fracturing fluids are normally recovered at the initial stage of well production and recycled in a closed system for future use or disposed of under regulation, either by surface discharge where authorized under the Clean Water Act or by injection into Class II wells as authorized under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Regulation may also allow recovered fracturing fluids to be disposed of at appropriate commercial facilities. Not all fracturing fluid returns to the surface." http://www.energyfromshale.org/hydraulic-fracturing-fluid
There are many other references under fracking+fluid+recovery
I don't think anybody trucks tens of millions of gallons of water across state lines...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Exactly. Waste is generated and (supposedly) disposed of properly. Except when the loopholes allow disposal in a cheaper way that fulfills all legal requirements, except the spirit of the law.

The report I saw, as quoted in the New York Times - IIRC, mentioned trucking of waste water accross state borders. I don't recall the quantities. Large tanker trucks hold up to about 10,000 gallons. So ONLY about 100 truck loads is a million gallons ...
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.