Letter to the Editor Asks: Should Humboldt County Sue Big Oil?
Welcome to our letters to the editor/opinion section. To submit yours for consideration, please send to [email protected]. Please consider including an image to be used–either a photograph of you or something applicable to the letter. However, an image is not necessary for publication.
Remember opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect that of Redheaded Blackbelt nor have we checked the letters for accuracy.
Should Humboldt County Sue Big Oil?
The long, winding, seaboard highway connecting Eureka to Arcata is the road most at risk from global warming in the entire state of California. It’ll cost an estimated $31 million to patch up that stretch of Highway 101 until about 2030 or so, at which point those patches will probably need replaced.
Experts estimate that Humboldt County will need to spend a total of about $2.5 BILLION dollars to stop large, populated parts of Humboldt County from being flooded.
Several cities and counties in California have filed suit in the past two years against Big Gas / Big Oil. Richmond, Santa Cruz, San Francisco, Oakland, Marin, and San Mateo Counties. And that’s just in California.
You can find a list here: http://www.payupclimatepolluters.org/cases/
Some places brought their lawsuits solely via the city or county government, like San Francisco.Others were assisted in their efforts by a law firm focusing on this kind of work.
The law firm probably is doing the work on contingency, as they ask for attorney’s fees under California Code of Civil Procedure 1021.5 in their complaint. [“A court may award attorneys’ fees to a successful party against one or more opposing parties in any action which has resulted in the enforcement of an important right affecting the public interest…”]
Marin County sued Big Oil with the help of the Bay Area firm, and they anticipate half as much destruction as we do, with a larger budget to boot. Maybe Humboldt County should sue Big Oil to help it offset the cost of preparing for global warming?
Sean DeVries
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
Of all the childish behavior even seen from supposed adults, this is the worst. It’s a toddler having a temper tantrum and kicking mom because turns out sticking their hand on a hot stove after she said no really did hurt. Calling it “big oil” because that sounds sinister and framing it as a villain for supplying us what we demanded is about the stupidest example of political correctness theater overriding good sense in a long line of stupid ideas. What a misuse of a very flawed system for forcing other people to be more agreeable.
We should- and inevitably will pay- do the paying ourselves because we fly on vacations, don’t grow our own food, live far from where we work, buy more sheer crap to entertain ourself than is healthy for us, etc. We chose this. No one imposed it. Grow up and stop sticking your hand on the stove.
Without reading the letter, no one can say it better than Guest.
Her… Are you suggesting I don’t read before commenting? Well sometimes I don’t and get caught for being wrong in my biases. Not often though. People usually repeat the same crap endlessly and the stink is enough to identify it without having to get too close.
In the long run most of us who are over 50 will not have to pay much. Except for the cancers and other related diseases that we will die from pesticides herbicides and other industrial pollutants. The blunt of the Industrial Revolution will be put on are children and whether their children have a future at all. Sea level rise is just a small portion what will be doled out. And don’t think your government didn’t have a hand in this. As most governments are in it for the money and back by corporate greed still to this day.
The blind leading the blind turning our planet into the pits of hell.
Yes we’ve all been drinking the Kool-Aid, some of us have been forced, and most seem that they don’t even care to know.
Exactly. Left to his own devices, trump’s doing his best to dismantle the EPA. Our grand kids and their kids will be spitting on our graves!
“In the year 2525 (make that 2025), if man is still alive, if woman can survive . ..” survivors will spit on our graves because of man-made climate collapse – the Big elephant in the sky.
“Are you suggesting I don’t read before commenting? ”
No, no, no. I didn’t word that right. Sorry.
I meant, Me.
drink much kool-aid?
Please change your name to something more bearable…It’s a little more hostile in its cute way, than fits my comfort zone.
Sorry Kym. Have a great weekend!
Thank you very much!
Guest…right on,fucking liberals have to cry about something, seemingly they never get their way, but when they do look out, guns are gone,your right to protect your home and life gone, violent criminals getting out early,drug use openly on the streets, shitting in the streets and needles laying around to infect anyone that’s not careful. Pure bliss…
We chose this. No one imposed it.
Seriously? I don’t have time to list the reasons that we are still driving gas guzzling cars, fighting wars in foreign countries (no, it’s not about Democracy) pollution is rampant, the oil lobby has a stranglehold on Washington, plastics are polluting the earth etc etc. I’m sure someone with more time will have a lengthy rebuttal to that lame comment of yours.
Some with more time or simply someone with more perspicacity to be able to articulate better?
Yes, because that is what is important. Articulation.
Too bad your savior and hero Trump is so lacking in that department.
~i’m detecting another “ism”.
Trumpism.
IT’S NOT ABOUT THE ISMS!
It IS about Corporatism!!
~well, okay. Can you keep it at Corporatism and avoid the party-line pitfalls?
Yeah,sure
~i get your point . . . the BIGGER picture.
Guest is talking local, responding to the letter. You’re saying, “Did we buy the lie”? or, “Have we been sold the lie”?
Worse- not even buying or being sold. We (the group) demanded all the benefits of easy, cheap energy but only are sticking at the consequences now. I had a misspent youth of canning jars, raise garden beds stuck on postage stamp yards, walking to walk, parsimonious water use, etc. I still use 100 year old canning jars and my mother’s Tupperware. I did it out of a great distaste for frittering away resources. But even frequenting second hand shops, I still collected way too much unnecessary junk. I think it’s a compensation for a modern lack of community- this thingness that is so wasteful.
Yes, it is worse. Few will look. I lose it when it’s about animals -our brothers and sisters, and i can’t look. I just can’t. I can only wish that my not stopping in at Miranda’s and hoarding candles, would make any difference at this late date, in this space, at this time.
***” I think it’s a compensation for a modern lack of community-“***
Profound.
~if it wasn’t for this ‘in here’ community, we’d be in extra-poor shape.
Plastic you say?
https://youtu.be/rld0KDcan_w
This guy’s letters to the editor are starting to sound a lot like late night drunk dial calls, but instead of using the phone , he writes a letter to the editor on any stream of so called consciousness topics that come to his mind.
Please, Sean DeVries, do our community a favor. Put the liquids and the joint down now, get in your car and move back down to Bernal Heights where you are from but had to run away from because of your failed dispensary that had its funds embezzled.
SoHum does not need another pontificating City transplant.
Move on,
“This guy’s letters to the editor are starting to sound a lot like late night drunk dial calls”
~that’s just funnier than funny.
Lol, hilarious!
Oil has allowed this civilization to exist. We have no alternative. Every other energy resource we can think of needs oil to come into fruition. And none of those provide the energy density and versatility of oil. We’d be in better shape if nuclear energy wasn’t so taboo to explore the possibilities.
Here’s the holy grail of energy production:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_Compact_Fusion_Reactor1
Wikipedia is far from the holy grail. I’ve often thought of oil as Mother Earth’s feces, that we bring to the surface and slather all over us –in one form or another.
Tesla was over a hundred years ago. To say we have no alternatives is like sex without love, or body without soul.
Release the damn patents, Pilot!
You do know I was referring to the compact fusion reactor, right? If you have an aversion to Wikipedia, her are a few other sources:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Lockheed_Martin_Compact_Fusion_Reactor&oq=Lockheed_Martin_Compact_Fusion_Reactor&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60.4402j1j7&client=tablet-android-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/capabilities/directed-energy.html
Why am I having such a hard time getting comments to post? I’m pretty sure I know how to do this…
If you want to cut pollution stop buying shit from overseas.
“… in one year, a single large container ship can emit cancer and asthma-causing pollutants equivalent to that of 50 million cars. The low grade bunker fuel used by the worlds 90,000 cargo ships contains up to 2,000 times the amount of sulfur compared to diesel fuel used in automobiles.”
It won’t let me post a link to attribute my quote. Search the quote if you’re interested.
There’s an issue with posts being put into a file and reappearing later. Usually after the timeframe for editing or deleting. It is a PITA especially when on rare occasions it never reappears at all.
(Aside) Without pointing fingers, the user interface on RHBB has gotten clunky, lately… Myself, I blame Communist Malware…
My suggestion, donate some funds to your favorite Star Reporter, and do it today, right now!
New hardware, hmmm, $10,000! C’mon, let’s all pitch in!
Support your news blog! Donate, subscribe, and make sure your associates all do too!
Kym doesn’t get a lot from me, but she gets it every month. One of two online sites I volunteer to pay. The other is SomaFM…. Boot Liquor, specifically.
That is brave. I can’t bring myself to donate as a subscriber lest I be unable to stop paying for something I now find objectionable. So more money donated at one time which is certainly not as useful.
Just cancel the payment when you don’t want to support the website any more. It’s easy.
” So more money donated at one time which is certainly not as useful.”
~i disagree.
As well, IMHumboldtO, many, if not most of the comments, are priceless (excluding the “isms” of course).
Aside; when i send the value placed on money thru the mail, i get a United States Postal money order. It’s backed by the United States Post Office, in commerce.
The value of Kym’s local information far outweigh any objections I may have with regard to my own bias.
Not to mention a hub where the local monkeys can sling their shit. If only she served coffee.
That would be a great idea to raise money–my mom’s homemade cookies, some coffee…If only I could figure out how to dispense them through the internet.
Kym Kemps redheaded Blackbelt comment section internet Cafe drive-thru are come on Inn hostel where you can purchase Mom’s homemade cookies hot coffee in the morning and iced coffee in the evening apple turnovers crumpets with local news that’s been changing the world one comment at a time coming to a town near you
There we go. Now we just have to figure out the delivery method.
Amazon drone.
Uh, if the abilities of my son’s drone are indicative….not a lot of successful dropoffs.
Go old school, go Trebuchet.
https://youtu.be/qC6RJxFEMfY
Billy,
~pretty much, awake people realize the doll-ears are just pieces of green paper we pass between us that sucks our soul from the first breath we take, to our last breath. Hence, harder and harder to buy quality with something so worthless and demonic.
Surely the ones who purchase DNA-cell-phones on a continuing basis, can see this?
Two cents.
I think there should be lawsuits, yes, especially seeking damages from people who drive huge pickups with gigantic wheels and tires and Diesel Engines…
Also against anyone who takes a bulldozer, clears trees, and redirects runoff, streams, creeks and rivers for their own plastic water tanks and pot farms.
Hell, sue anyone for any reason! Attorneys need new BMW’s, trophy wives, and cabins in Aspen… Hey, sue Aspen! Why not?
Humboldt County, the model for society run-amok, should be the pioneer for the “new-accountability”, after all!
Remember, Tesla vehicles are so poorly made that a German Electric Vehicle Rental outfit recently cancelled their order for Teslas!
https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-model-3-bulk-order-canceled-by-nextmove-repair-issues-2019-8
So, keep in mind, that you may need some gasoline/diesel to continue to fuel your insane desire to farm marijuana in a forest, to kill off the environment for personal gain, and to drive your special butt down to the Logger Bar, over to Shop Smart, or into Garberville to score some Organic Spring MIx at Chataqua…
Super-entitled Millennials and Cowboy pot-farmers agree, get out of our way or we will take you to court!
And if you sue the oil companies for destroying the planet, how about the car companies? Why not sue the Baby Boomers for driving those Land-Yachts back in the 50’s and 60’s? Hell, sue Brazil for clearing and burning the rain-forest!
Go for it! Thousands of Lawyers standing by to take your call and work contingent!
Gibberish
Did Kelley Lincoln or did Sean Devries write this piece? Sounds like Sean.
Looks like the Green No Deal is getting worse as time moves along.
Dumb.
It’s credited to Sean DeVries.
We’re just getting warmed up!
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/usa-cities-of-san-francisco-oakland-sue-5-oil-companies-over-their-alleged-contribution-to-current-furture-impacts-of-sea-level-rise-in-california-linked-to-climate-change
“Francisco, Oakland Appeal Dismissal of Climate Lawsuits”, 13 Mar 2019
San Francisco and Oakland have filed an appeal of a federal judge’s decision to throw out their climate liability lawsuits against five major oil companies. The lawsuits, dismissed last year, demanded the companies pay for the costs of sea walls and other infrastructure necessary to protect the cities from ongoing and future consequences of climate change…
In the appeal, which was filed Wednesday in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, San Francisco and Oakland contend that U.S. District Judge William Alsup mischaracterized their public nuisance claims. Alsup claimed the cities were seeking to regulate greenhouse gas emissions…
In the suit, initially filed in California state court in 2017, the cities allege that “production and promotion of massive quantities of fossil fuels” by BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Exxon and Shell has caused—and is continuing to worsen—climate change-driven sea level rise, which endangers the lives of their residents…
In his dismissal, Alsup said the problem of climate change is too vast in scope to hold just five companies liable and said solving the climate crisis is best left to the executive and legislative branches of government…
Too bad they didn’t stick to the common law suits filed.
~more than likely, law forms were mixed on the public side of the ledger <<<dangerous and stupid.
Just getting warmed up? Was that a pun? lol.
Man made “Climate change” is a hoax. The earth changes. So what? Get a life.
“Man made “Climate change” is a hoax.”
~like the moon landing?
We stole all the wetland between Arcata and Eureka from the ducks anyway.
It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature
“Look at Mother Nature on the run . . .”
Cracking the whip so sad everything is so back-assward maybe someday soon we’ll see Mother Natures true value. Sacred ground is not a Casino and parking lot most of us have lost our way. The best we can do is give ourselves away. In the service of taking care of each other, and the planet we live on, that includes Mother Nature and all of her little ones!
Sue them, [edit] whatever we can get away with.
It’s not big oil that will ultimately pay, they will just pass the legislation cost off to the consumers over a fixed number of years to recoup their losses. It would basically be taxing yourself. The same thing just happened with the fires and pge. Pge has to pay for it but Brown allowed them to pass the cost off to you the consumer. So anyone who is saying sue the (edit) is actually just “saying tax all of us we want to pay for it” all that will happen is that the price of fuel will continue to go up and oil companies will make the same if not more profit. And anyone who thinks any different get ready to hear the term “too big to fail” again. So the real question is do you want to pay more for fuel so government bureaucrats can have jobs squandering the money on massive overpriced construction that boarders on fraud (caltrans) and only to have the funds run out half way through the project aka bullet train, and then the government will have to impose another tax to finish the project.
The Fall of Rome The how, when, and why of Rome’s fall is complex and oft-debated by historians. “The Fall of Rome” generally refers to the way in which the imperial nation changed over the course of hundreds of years until its form was unrecognizable.
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-was-the-fall-of-rome-112688
The U.S. Inc., is overdue.
i want to sue big spoon. because big spoon has made americans obese
~uh huh. Just like inanimate guns kill.
Not that it hasn’t been tried. Not surprising, California, the Home of the Sued, does not bar it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/05/28/these-26-states-wont-let-you-sue-mcdonalds-for-making-you-fat-the-surprising-consequence-of-banning-obesity-lawsuits/?noredirect=on
Lawyers will sue anyone for anything as long as someone pays. Much of california’s woes are due to our high rate of excess attorneys. http://arbatlaw.com/u-s-lawyers-per-capita-by-state/
Shouldn’t that read “Sue the consumers?” It’s the consumers who end up paying the bill that the sued companies pass along to us through ‘higher rates’.
“Sue the Consumers” would be like Dorothy wearing the gold slippers, as originally planned, down the yellow brick road to Oz/Ounces.
We, the peeps, are the source of all currency – no matter how we be labeled. (shareholder is the one that gets me).
T.H.E.Y. are trying distract us, in a futile attempt to throw us off the trail of their putrid scent, while they ride our backs for all we’re worth.
maybe instead of sueing big oil then younger generations should sue the older ones. sue the baby boomerz, the most wasteful generation ever, also the the one that complains the most, the one that costs the goverment the most etc. sue them. take their pensions their profit shares as it is the baby boomers whos wild reckless wastefulness has placed us in this mess hell it is mainly the baby boomers who generally point fingers at everyone else time the finger gets pointed at them.
~nah. The generation prior to the boomers gave us Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Down with the X’s
Down with the Z’s
Milllennials too, why not?
I actually think they should be sued, it will be like suing ourselves, because they will just pass the buck back to the consumer.. However, it’s not only a concern of using gasoline, but also, the refinement of gasoline and diesel produces a lot of carbon pollution. This could be produced cleaner, if the oil companies just improved thier refinement technology, which they pretty much refused to do… So sue them into improving the refinement and extraction processes, to hold them to better accountability on those ends.. it might not be the end all be all… But it will help..
And yeah, release the cars that run off Hydrogen already, the military has the capabilities. The technology exists.. it does.. why they don’t release it… Big Money Adgenda’s.. obviously…
There was a Canadian company 15 years ago (or so) that sold hydrogen conversion kits for petrol vehicles. It had great promise with commercial rigs moving thousand of miles on water fill ups. … and then, after about 20k miles things went wrong. The hydrogen bonded with the iron in the block and changed the characteristics of the cast iron from flexible to brittle and the blocks started cracking.
Ouch.. No Bueno! You’d think after 15 years they may have figured this problem out.. who knows, but thanks for the info. I knew the tech existed.. It seems fairly ridiculous to me that the techies of the world can create driverless vehicles, but still some how have not cracked the code to alternative fuels..
~what about the two hippies (a hundred years ago), who traveled cross country on vegetation (for lack of a better word). Someone else must remember this?
Better yet, let’s get to the sauce – teleportation.
If bits are only zeroes and ones, and qubits can exist anywhere in between the zeroes and ones, then a qutrit exists in a three-dimensional sphere in what the scientists are calling a “two.” A qutrit is able to hold the superposition of three states at the same time, meaning it overlaps three different waves at the same time. The photon that the scientists were able to transport went from one qutrit location to another. August 23rd.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/a28798458/quantum-teleportation/
^^^^that’s not the kind i’m talking about – the quantification of how to mechanically do it. More closer to a flying carpet =^.^= pyramid building levitation type of the mind.
The tech is there. It’s the monetizing of the most plentiful resource in the universe (literally). And then the industrial change over in both production and infrastructure. Ceramic or stainless steel blocks would work but nobody has those… or new motors every 20k miles or so.
You would be right, Ull Rover.
~you’re more adept at the detail part of monetizing evidence.
Content of the universe: 99% hydrogen, 1% helium, with the rest of the 118 elements making up minutiae.
~minutiae. That’s a cute description..
Not of the “Junk” DNA, tho, right? Once you realize the mainstream has lied to you about one issue, the next logical question to ask yourself is: “I wonder what else they’ve lied about”?
But that doesn’t mean you should disbelieve everything as a matter of principle. Just that you try to sort out what is good information from what is bad.
Do you blame the oil companies or the politicians? Who passes the laws?
Its good to remember that some of the best scientists in the world work for the US govt. James Hanson did until he was fired. He’s the guy who’s credited with bringing the concept of global warming to light. He was ignored and pushed out. Our government politicians can’t ignore that they were and have been presented with this data for decades. This is all public information.
The DNC just voted to not have a climate debate: the amazon, and the arctic north are both burning.
No, can’t blame the oil companies but you can and should blame the corrupt politicians ( local, state and country) who take their money and then their bidding.
Any politician who takes any oil or gas money, don’t vote for them.!
To sue the oil companies is a waste of time and money. We need that money to install renewable energy, energy efficiency and new policies.
Please someone explain to me; if oil companies are responsible for climate change and the increased sea level rise,
why would President Barack Obama, highly educated, brilliant politician, very high IQ, is in the process of buying beach front property, 29 acres in Matha’s Vineyard? The house is sitting at near sea level., Should we warn him?
I suspect that Obama does not believe all his own rhetoric anymore than Trump does. If politicians, especially Presidents, spoke absolute truth it would be that most everyone else is stupid and only should be given what information promotes certain goals they want. Although Trump is probably the first businessman, non career politician to be President, there has yet to be a President-scientist elected.
The stupidity of this whole project is so large it hurts. The author should go back under his rock and wait for the sky to fall.
After really looking hard at the science it’s become very clear to me (and a growing number of other rational people) that so called global warming is a lie wrapped in a lie. The true “science deniers” are the ones pimping the global warming hoax. Follow the damn money and look at who’s going to be in power if the hoax is successfully carried to fruition and you have a good idea of the who and the why of it.
The “green new deal” and other similar initiatives is the how. Plain and simple, it’s a road map for political tyranny and economic control.
Dear Not PC. And your evidence is what exactly about climate change denial? That you know better than people who actually study this stuff? Record temps all over the world, Alaska, Siberia, Greenland on fire, you know all normal stuff, nothing to see here.
Who do you think has more money to try to influence anti climate views, the oil and gas companies or a few scientists?
So if you’re going to say its not real then give us the peer reviewed published studies that refute the current 2018 IPCC report.
We’ll wait.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/06/still-epic-fail-73-climate-models-vs-measurements-running-5-year-means/
“…the models and observations have been plotted so that their respective 1979-2012 trend lines all intersect in 1979, which we believe is the most meaningful way to simultaneously plot the models’ results for comparison to the observations.
In my opinion, the day of reckoning has arrived. The modellers and the IPCC have willingly ignored the evidence for low climate sensitivity for many years, despite the fact that some of us have shown that simply confusing cause and effect when examining cloud and temperature variations can totally mislead you on cloud feedbacks (e.g. Spencer & Braswell, 2010). The discrepancy between models and observations is not a new issue…just one that is becoming more glaring over time.
It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out in the coming years. I frankly don’t see how the IPCC can keep claiming that the models are “not inconsistent with” the observations. Any sane person can see otherwise.”
And the long view…
I specified peer reviewed specifically as it’s too easy to cherry pick things, giving misleading and false looking information.
I’m taking that you believe that the thousands of scientists who worked on the IPCC reports, all the government bureaucrats from all the different countries and their scientists who review each paragraph ( each paragraph is numbered for easier review, and if any government doesn’t like anything in a paragraph it is changed or removed, the whole report is consensus based) are all on the take and in on this false global warming deal? Which means your saying that the trump administration is in on it?
Here is just an example of what’s easily available. Noice the number of foot notes, and nations involved in the data.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/world-of-change/DecadalTemp
You want to refute this, your gonna need better data.
Climate changes. Anyone with any sense knows that. The cause of and the best course of action are very much up for debate.
Look at the graph above (yes peer reviewed) that shows the last 5 million years of global temps and CO2 levels. Now look at the part that you and most other chicken Littles are focused on. Captured here… a very myopic view.
Though I can’t see your graph, I think I have seen similar pieces before.
Here’s what NASA has to say about climate change: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
The link has some fairly impressive reports on climate and weather changes.
But Kym, those graphs show carbon levels. You’d have to assume that carbon in the atmosphere equals temperature increase. As to cause or cure, https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2639/nasa-pinpoints-cause-of-earths-recent-record-carbon-dioxide-spike/, that’s not so easy. ” In some years, natural processes remove as little as 20 percent of human emissions, while in other years they scrub as much as 80 percent. ”
With so many people, who pays the price? Who does with less food or transportation, or any of the myriad things that contribute to it? https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060036287 . Heck, people apparently will not give up pot for the sake of climate change, who will give up food? ” If these trends continue, the double whammy of population growth and richer diets will require us to roughly double the amount of crops we grow by 2050.” Some like to blame meat production, but nutrients for plants for so many mouths either come from animals or are mined, which increases carbon in the atmosphere too. This is a political problem like holding the human population down. What good is it if some place does it but the places that don’t do it move to take up the space? You just can’t have it all ways.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/feeding-9-billion/
It problem is like that person who said using rain barrels to reduce demand on with surface water. The trouble is that, while you can do a lot of small things to improve the release of carbon, but like even paving the land with water barrels isn’t enough, it isn’t enough to buy an electric car or stop growing pot. People will just increase their population until every savings is literally eaten up.
Here are some ideas about what you can do to reduce your climate impact.
Lower your income- the top ten percent of the population do 50% of creating climate impacts. True for each country; true world wide. So if you’re above about$100k in the US you are probably participating in a huge amount of the US contribution to greenhouse gasses. Get as many of your fellow 10%ers to cut back with you.
Don’t buy a Tesla- turns out they are selling your carbon credits to Detroit to offset the greenhouse gas effects of the SUV overproduction, so the virtue of having a Tesla has already been sold before you bought it.
Get off the damn airplane. One round trip Arcata to Denver produces more carbon dioxide than the average yearly greenhouse gas production of a Bangladeshi family. If you don’t need to fly, don’t. And if that feels futile, talk to all your friends about it
Stop acting like “believing in climate change” and voting for Democrats is doing something about climate change. That especially includes the corporatist sloganeering Democratic Leadership Council folks like the Clintons and their good buddies (who also support the Pharmaceutical Companies pretty consistently- so you’d possibly help out with the next version of the Opioid epidemic). Biden’s on that team.
Cut down on streaming video- the “cloud” isn’t any such thing. It’s a bunch of fossil fuel consuming server farms in Utah that have to be air conditioned to counteract the heat built up doing massive calculations so we can watch that Hollywood schlock or the latest nothing on our phones, flat screens and work computers. These facilities produce so much heat that they have to consume twice the energy to keep from melting. Almost like a wood burning stove for the planet- warms it twice.
Participate in transportation systems that help other people to avoid producing climate impacts: walk, bike, ride share, take public transit.
You forgot about the sweaty Farticles.
And what about the melting and burning of rubber bike tires and tenny runners.
NASA admits that climate change occurs because of changes in Earth’s solar orbit, and NOT because of SUVs and fossil fuels.
https://www.dcclothesline.com/2019/09/02/nasa-admits-that-climate-change-occurs-because-of-changes-in-earths-solar-orbit-and-not-because-of-suvs-and-fossil-fuels/
NASA’s own website–a simple site for children–explicitly explains the process. “Human activities are changing Earth’s natural greenhouse effect. Burning fossil fuels like coal and oil puts more carbon dioxide into our atmosphere…NASA has observed increases in the amount of carbon dioxide and some other greenhouse gases in our atmosphere. Too much of these greenhouse gases can cause Earth’s atmosphere to trap more and more heat. This causes Earth to warm up.” https://climatekids.nasa.gov/greenhouse-effect/
However, you could choose to ignore NASA’s own words and believe a website that Media Bias Fact Check states “appears to be a satire website. If this is not satire, then we are left speechless as virtually every story is unbelievable.” https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-d-c-clothesline/
I think it is important to make sure you aren’t looking for sites to confirm your own biases. You can still believe NASA is wrong, but make sure you are getting your facts right–NASA’s own words shows that they are promoting the idea that burning fossil fuels leads to climate change.
“NASA’s own website…” (the same NASA that spoofed the moon landing)
” you could choose to ignore NASA’s own words…”
“NASA’s own words shows that they are promoting the idea that burning fossil fuels leads to climate change.”
~NASA’s own words are in the box.
“A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth.” ― Albert Einstein
Like I said…You don’t have to believe they are right…And I certainly didn’t expect you or shak to say, “Whoops, made a mistake. NASA clearly stated this.” But, I do have hopes that by modeling looking up information and thinking just slightly critically that most of readers can see the logic.
It’s satire that the earth is more on the side of being egg shaped than perfectly round? It’s satire that the orbiting is slightly egg shaped instead of perfectly round? To each their own, but, each does have their own. No need to insult to protect your own own.
Check out the not so perfect ‘spheres’ on the NASA site.
“Even though our planet is a sphere, it is not a perfect sphere. Because of the force caused when Earth rotates, the North and South Poles are slightly flat. Earth’s rotation, wobbly motion and other forces are making the planet change shape very slowly, but it is still round.”
https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-is-earth-58.htmlk
P.S. Mediabiasfactcheck is not a very respectable site due to it’s bias leaning.
I’m not insulting. I’m stating a fact. The site you chose is not reputable. I showed you in NASA’s own words what they believe and you still want to deflect onto something else. One sign of a good thinker is being able to say, “Hey, I was wrong.”
Try it. Once I started just clearly acknowledging where I was wrong, I became a better thinker and a happier person.
Right back atcha
Deflecting NASA with NASA is a deflection?
Not by any stretch of the word.
But, the insult sure enough is and remains to be.
Cute.
edited to add:
Regarding the ‘bias’ deflections, here’s a food for thought article. https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2013/05/28/study-finds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans
The mediafactbias site started out with great intentions, by incorporating 3 fact checkers… one from each spectrum.. one right, one left, one libertarian. They did pretty good, so they built an app around that… and then refined it… and then refined it some more… and then refined that some more…
That’s all I’m going to say about that.
If you want to discuss the NASA site v the NASA site, then, way cool. If not… cya.
I don’t know why I am trying but…
You said, “NASA admits that climate change occurs because of changes in Earth’s solar orbit, and NOT because of SUVs and fossil fuels.” I showed you that on their own website they say climate change is in part because of fossil fuels. Then you ignore that statement backed up by a link and start going on to other subjects. I don’t want to discuss NASA with you. I doubt it will be productive but I do hope to show people that can be misled by your statement that, contrary to what you said, NASA supports the theory that climate change is caused by fossil fuel use.
This isn’t a war between who’s right or who’s not… at least to me it’s not.
It’s an honest attempt (by me at least) to decipher the contrary that is found even from the ‘experts’. THAT nasa page v THAT OTHER nasa page.
Here, I’ll post that other nasa page again, so you don’t have to scroll all the way back to find it. https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-is-earth-58.htmlk
Orbit is not perfectly round.
The earth is not perfectly round.
The…
And just like that it’s gone.
“404 The cosmic object you are looking for has disappeared beyond the event horizon. ”
Surprise surprise.
From my earlier post @10:38 that ‘went on to talk about other things’ you said.
—– “Check out the not so perfect ‘spheres’ on the NASA site.
“Even though our planet is a sphere, it is not a perfect sphere. Because of the force caused when Earth rotates, the North and South Poles are slightly flat. Earth’s rotation, wobbly motion and other forces are making the planet change shape very slowly, but it is still round.”
https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-is-earth-58.htmlk
and now the page is gone, (except in archives around the world lol).
I know that this is also probably futile but there was no conspiracy in NASA’s page disappearing—you had added a “k” to the address. If you remove the “k”…voila…the page returns:
https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-is-earth-58.html
Like many of your fears…the problem was of your own making.
Good catch, that ‘k’. I don’t know how that happened, but it did. Way cool.
But, still no discussion about the wobbly spheres?
Fears? LOL, I’m not the one so feared up I’d rather attack the messengers instead of addressing the ‘issues’. But, hey, that was really really ultra cute.
BTW, that news blurb article was not satire.
THIS is satire: https://babylonbee.com/news/walmart-discontinues-sale-of-auto-parts-to-prevent-car-accidents
See the difference?
Thanks Kym. But but we have to go back over 5 million years….. which of course is just trying to throw more worthless data to somehow make his other data accurate.
We wont change the deniers whatever they are currently denying about. But to me it’s to try and make sure that those that might be persuaded are shown what is the truth, proven by the best scientists of our day.
As to Ullr, the cause of our current spike in CO2 nor that there is a spike is not in debate. Nor is the disappearance of: glaciers, sea ice, sea temp rise, air temp rise, destruction of the Great Barrier Reef, the frequent flooding of coastal Florida, Lack of ice and snow in Alaska, etc etc etc which all are consistent with the models of ACC.
I encourage the deniers to listen to darr Jamal, who’s written a book called the “end of Ice”. He talks to the scientists on the ground who have nothing to do with getting money for or against climate change. But all give compelling science and insight into the change that has,is and will occur.
I hate the term “deniers”. It’s what people use to blame other people while they themselves refuse to even talk about the hard choices that believing humans cause climate change neccessitates. What’s the difference if a person refuses to believe in it or simply refuses to do the things needing doing if they do believe in it?
R. Kelly doesn’t want to be called a pedophile, neither did M. Jackson or Jeff Epstein.
Racists dont want to be called racists, they’re just fighting for “white civil rights”.
Flat earthers dont like being called idiots. Neither do laser beam theorists.
But, none of that is a problem if you arent a pedophile, aren’t racist and arent an idiot….
I’ll tell you, I dont kind what people call me because I’m smart enough to know better….And I’m not being duped by any belief system.
Maybe you should examine that people don’t call you because they spend more time examining issues than belittling people… Maybe they simple are not as obsessed that other people think differently. I hate the term because it is used in mean, self righteous way by people who think in terms of black and white. Apparently faith is what is important – having faith in one belief system means condemning with utmost virulence any opposing one even if the adherent understands neither.
The surety of your self annoited crusade against conspiracy theorists (at least of one sort but certainly not of the Russian Election Control Conspiracy sort for example,) is equally frightening. First you make war against what is not a serious threat to anyone rather than take on the harder issues that are as if you can fix problems by fixing the way a very, very few people believe. If you believe your own rhetoric, then you would be more outraged at people who believe that human generated carbon emission will result in mass extinction yet do nothing effective about it. You go on and on and on taking easy pot shots than addressing even one of the issues that could make a difference. You chose easy but useless rather than hard but effective. The word that comes to mind for that is “dilettante”- a Universal Dilettante.
Why do you still ignore the Republican led Senate inquiry report on 2016 election meddling?
I didn’t. Anyone who thinks nothing happened in 2016 is still unaware of the facts.
https://www.google.com/search?ei=CfRvXcOuHI-uswX7k7qwDA&q=senate+investigation+into+russian+election+meddling&oq=senate+investigation+into+Russian+election+&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp.1.0.33i299l2j33i160.5537.28470..35479…1.1..4.7260.35899.6-1j9-6……18….1…….8..0i71j35i39j46i39.SBDjEH5GXDs
Your also, in your comment, ignoring that Trump and his base are right wing nationalist conspiracy fringe.
So, I disagree with your analysis of these people and conspiracies not being a problem.
The FBI agrees with me too, or I agree with them.
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/qanon-domestic-terrorism-threat-conspiracy-theory-866288/
Well said, Guest, as usual.
Speaking of theories, they’ve reopened the 911 investigations finally. Here is the draft: http://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7
PDF: http://ine.uaf.edu/media/222439/uaf_wtc7_draft_report_09-03-2019.pdf
I just hope they get to the bottom of it and hold the guilty accountable and restore our Rights, especially the 4th. “Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
I think we both agree that we need to treat the earth better. Where we diverge is I don’t think the UN IPCC is being used for that; rather it is being used to push policy which will, ultimately, hamstring normal people from living their lives while big corporations will simply buy their way out of their pollution.
Humans tend to take little bits of data and pretend they can see the big picture. With regards to climate and weather our short life spans against the earth’s climate tends to make us myopic. And to correlate single factors into the single most dynamic system we know and pretend we know what’s going on is absurd. To ignore the massive driver of our weather systems (the Sun) is idiotic. The fact is climate science is still in its infancy and the climate we are trying to map is ancient.
Also, as I posted above, if you want to curb global emissions then stop buying crap from overseas.
https://newatlas.com/shipping-pollution/11526/
One of the hard things that people who believe like it’s a religion in man made climate change also refuse to do.
Baloney.
~some people believe in fossil fuel. The ooh, ooh, scarcity “Peak Oil”.
Soon! Coming to a town near you; “Peak Water”.
Climate change. Soft language imagery crapola.
Climate collapse.
That’s known as being willing to extrapolate. If looking ahead while driving is wrong then, whether there is a cliff immediately in front of you or not, you are doomed when that inevitable cliff comes along. If you find belittling words offensive, why do you want to use them? I’d think that at least examining other view points without that would be appreciated since others have targeted you that way.
Do you think there is an infinite amount of oil? Do you think that the more and more extreme methods needed to extract oil such as fracking or oil sands mining are just a recreational choice for the entertainment of oil companies because easy extraction is boring? Of course you don’t. Truth is that oil extraction has become a challenge that can’t meet the increasing demands it created. And it personally is offensive to me to contaminate precious water- something all creatures need to survive- for these methods. I’d rather that development many different ways of generating energy than keeping on with pushing old ways just because they exist.
” If you find belittling words offensive, why do you want to use them? ”
~which words in my 10:45 post do you find belittling?
” I’d think that at least examining other view points without that would be appreciated since others have targeted you that way. ”
Ask me if i care about your conclusion, Guest, regarding your opinion on how “others have targeted” me.
Your next paragraph serves putting words in my mouth regarding oil extraction.
End of Transmission.
rather it is being used to push policy which will, ultimately, hamstring normal people from living their lives while big corporations will simply buy their way out of their pollution.
What’s an example of this?
I see a lot of over-worry regarding Agenda 21, and as I’ve shown, it’s kind of silly and overblown.
At least we all agree that there is pollution….
80 years ago, pollution was mostly dismissed, but there was no United Nations to point to in fear.
Tesla and carbon credits. Look it up.
It’s fair to point out that Tesla and CEO Elon Musk didn’t say anything about the additional credits when the company reported earnings. The sale did knock a nearly $1 billion loss down to a mere $700 million. It’s unfair to attribute some nefarious motive to the sale, however.
As I’ve argued before, Tesla can sell emission credits, ZEV or non-ZEV, whenever it wants. In fact, Musk has rightly maintained that Tesla gets a raw deal on credit sales because it can’t always move them for their full price: The existing credit regime in California, for example, discounts ZEV credits for Tesla because of buyers being able to control their own demand.
That aside, emission credits are baked into Tesla’s business. It’s the only automaker on the planet that produces electric vehicles and nothing else, so it consequently racks up a huge number of credits. Naysayers label this a subsidy, but of course it pales in comparison to the titanic handout traditional car companies get from the US government, which hasn’t raised the gas tax since the 1990s.
https://www.businessinsider.com/criticism-of-tesla-selling-emission-credits-proves-analysts-dont-understand-its-business-2019-5
Now what? What’s the UN / Agenda 21 connection?
I have never brought up anything about agenda 21. You are fishing.
Carbon credits are a scheme that will bilk the average person of their earnings.
I dont think I lost a penny from Carbon Credits, at least, not any more pennies than polluting freely has taken from us as a whole.
Not yet. And when it does cost you’ll never know because it will be built into the inflationary price.
Nickel and diming.
Sounds like financial fear, or just fear, is driving your cerebrum.
Hope it gets better buddy.
Life is awesome.
That’s sounds like a rude thing to say, reading it over.
I know your not fear driven.
Your an outdoorsman with incredible scenery pics of Trinity.
What I should have said is, “I think some fears are influencing your thoughts on this subject”.
I truly know that you love life and you know it’s awesome.
So, sorry about this last comment.
Fear is not a major player in my life. Emotion is not part of my rationale analysis of what goes on in the world around us. And you are right, life is awesome.
Ullr,
Notice the time on my apology comment to you.
It was not visible to you at your 7:44 comment because I’m a moderated commentor.
Or recycling as a cure for unnecessary product. ” Recycling’s main impact is to convince us that it’s okay to be wasteful in other areas, because we make up for it through recycling. It encourages consumption, rather than pointing out ways to reduce consumption overall.”
https://listverse.com/2013/01/27/10-ways-recycling-hurts-the-environment/
Truth is that few if any people on this site understand the complexities involved in determining whether global warming exists or not. Arguments here are all faith based- either you believe in what experts say or you don’t. And because the issues are complex, the science evolving and mass media resistant to being self critical, experts are continually given a pass on being honest and forthcoming. These experts are humans, capable of dishonesty, bluster and error just like anyone else. Only most of us, including journalists, are too poorly educated to judge. We need science translators (or better education which is my choice) to even glimpse what is being said and the public media is not the place to hear them.
No one commenting here should be so prideful that they abuse others because at some level we are all ignorant.
dear Ullr,
Here is good graph of the sun vs temp. Not that you’ll trust it, but others hopefully will.
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/14/is-the-sun-causing-global-warming/
Another climate denial myth busted by solid science, fun.
“Another climate denial myth busted…” what does that mean? Is there anyone who denies there is a climate?
Look at the 5 million year graph of temperature against co2. There is zero correlation based on the long term evidence.
Again, the single thing we can do is to stop buying shit from overseas. The pollutants from container ships burning bunker fuel far outweigh any combination of pollution sources you can imagine. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/apr/09/shipping-pollution
We are being bamboozled into trying to buy our way out of the mess we created. That isn’t going to happen. Carbon credits/ cap and trade, more wind, more solar, etc will not do anything… but people are buying into it and forcing others to buy into it.
If there is “zero correlation“, than why should people “stop buying shit from overseas“?
How can we “buy our way out of a mess we created” if there is “zero correlation“?
I’m confused if I really think about your position.
You really like to cherry pick your information to try to get a ‘gotcha’ . The pollutants from the ships are heavy pollutants like sulfur dioxide. The chart deals specifically with CO2.
If you bother to read carefully rather than with your preconceived assumptions you’ll understand that I am not okay with us humans trashing our earth. I am skeptical of the targeted offenders as laid out by the UN IPCC.
But your condemnation of alternative energy is connected to the UN IPCC, and I dont understand that.
I thought you’ve installed solar for people. I thought I remember a comment where you said something like that.
I’m a fan of solar. I’ve saved money and given less to big oil because of it.
If the UN IPCC recommends alternative energies production, why would you not agree? Simply because it’s the UN?
I’ve made a good living engineering microhydro and PV systems both on and off grid. The selling to the masses of ‘green’ solar fails to take into account the energy of panel production and subsequent waste stream. It is not environmentally friendly, but since they don’t emit co2s while producing electricity it’s supposed to be ok…. and that is bullshit. If we had pushed solar when bell labs made the first one in 1952 we might be well into a pv infrastructure now. We aren’t and it’s too late to play catch up. 25 million barrels of oil per day in the USA is not an energy threshold solar can touch or even dent.
No one could afford solar as it was priced in the 60s.
Certainly batteries were not as efficient or affordable either.
It was not smart then.
It’s now 30cents a watt before batteries.
The production takes resources, surely, but over time the savings on the environment are not bullshit.
An alternative energy revolution, if already late, should not be discouraged simply because….
The most reliable and recyclable battery technology is more than 100 years old . Pb acid . Consumer prices for panels are closer to a dollar/watt depending on panel origin. And panel efficiency isn’t much better than those original bell panels… they went from 15% to 25-27% now.
15% efficiency to 30% efficiency is 100% increase in efficiency, correct?
I buy 2nd hand leftovers from jobsite online. They’re like new and untouched, 30cents per.
Many people may be more interested in buying from a store brand new which could easily be .80 to 1.00 per.
All this aside, you do support alternatives in energy but you dont like the UN.
Is that a summation of our discussion?
That’s your price for a deal on panels. That is not the price on panels. Someone bought them new.
Your summation is intentionally or ignorantly myopic.
I’m still confused by your position.
You dont trust the UN for promoting alternative energies.
You yourself made money and installed alternative energies.
You also have not been robbed by the UN, so your distrust is a choice, not a result.
Your unhappy that we didnt go full solar in ’58, but dont support promoting any solar in 2019 ( at least when promoted by UN).
Your trying to say theres 2 options;
Our current method of oil consumption or powering all cars only by solar; that’s myopic!
My question of who’s oil to take next is not moot. That’s the way it will work.
Last year 4% of our oil came from Iraq. This year 11% from Saudi.
Yes, Canada gives us the most currently, until they cant.
I have just been trying to nail down your position and I find it hard to.
Sorry for the bother.
We are being sold a solution that is politically expedient and financially lucrative that doesn’t solve the problem.
I pointed out the single biggest polluters. Why is this not the focus by the UN? Because it impedes the global commerce scheme and would interrupt the flow of transnational goods.
You don’t think that shipping will improve through technology to help itself not pollute more?
The alternative is isolationism by all, and we know that’s not going to happen.
Theres no going back.
There is only improving our forward movement.
Not with how cheap it is to burn bunker fuel. The alternative is nuclear reactors.
And anti-globalism is not, necessarily, isolationism.
Here’s the best consumer pricing on panels I know of:
https://www.wholesalesolar.com/shop/solar-panels
Also, here’s a fun equation: how many panels do you need to power any electric car for a year…. say 10k miles with the best solar exposure in California? Now multiply that by 30 million… and that will give very conservative numbers.
Do you vote to rape Alaskans or Iraqis for the oil energy continuation?
Why the hyperbole?
Most of our domestically consumed oil comes from Canada.
Probably none from Iraq.
“I agree with Ullr, carbon credits are a scam, but that is much longer topic.”
Does this mean you stopped agreeing?
Of course the climate changes.. Actually there is evidence that the Sahara, was once lush and green. Climate models indicate over about a period of about 20,000 years, the forest turned to desert. This has to do with cycles of the earth and sun, and actually has little to do with man made“climate change”… The theory, it wasn’t noticed each generation, but a gradual effect over generations… Much of the West Coast was once a shallow sea that extended very far inland….
However, I think it’s also denial to coin that humans don’t have an impact..
Man can alter the environment, not just for the worse, but also for the better. In Ethiopia, and China.. mass over grazing had left a barren landscape, however through mass regreening understanding and working with nature, and allowing the water to filter into the earth instead of roll across the surface, along with massive reforestation, and better grazing practices, Barren parched Desert land was transformed once again into a lush landscape.. Amazing..
Be the climate change you want to see on the planet…
Wage peace!
https://phys.org/news/2019-01-sahara-swung-lush-conditions-years.html
John Dennis Liu Regreening Deserts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ok0USXvO364
https://www.ecosystemrestorationcamps.org/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WMMxvrlftA
Ethiopia regreening
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIlyz2-cixs