global warming

[IowaBayDog]

Iowa:

Isn't there a saying that came from Iowa--don't try to teach a pig to sing, it just frustrates the teacher and infuriates the student.

Something like that, I'm not a native Iowan to verify its roots....good advice nonetheless!

[Steve Amrein]

How long does it take to break even in cost savings with that prius compairde to my car that gets 24 mpg and cost much less? BTW where does that power to charge those batteries come from?

With gas cost falling I have been able to use the boat much, much more in an effort to increase my carbon footprint and offset all the work you guys are doing to make smaller "footprints"

The power for the electric car is free just plug it in the wall.

[Marvin S]

Iowa:

Isn't there a saying that came from Iowa--don't try to teach a pig to sing, it just frustrates the teacher and infuriates the student.

I don't think it was about pigs - didn't it originate in MD, said by a guy training chessies?

[IowaBayDog]

I don't think it was about pigs - didn't it originate in MD, said by a guy training chessies?

HEY! oh wait, yah you're probably right.

[Henry V]

I am more informed about diesel cars and batteries than you will ever be, those are things your fellow environmentalist wackos say about the batteries and diesel cars.

Here's some info for you from that right wing conspiracy at Berkeley. Gas wise they pollute less but there overall environment impact is substantial. At 100K your about ready to pollute by replacing the batteries.

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~coreyp/hybridenvimp.html

"The greatest environmental impact comes from the pollution caused by the elaborate battery system that powers the electric engine. The battery pollution is substantial because the creation of the batteries requires destructive mining to produce the batteries and the caustic substances that power the batteries must later be disposed of. The caustic substances that power the batteries are very poisonous and when released into the environment leech into the waterways and poison groundwater."

Wow, must have been painful to click on a link to Berkeley. It looks like you survived though. Talk about cherry picking. What about the other two paragraph at that link? What about a comparison of total impacts among various types of cars? You act as if all other cars don't need a lead battery or that your car battery never needs to be replaced. I totally admit that car batteries have an environmental impact and never said otherwise. I also know that batteries get recycled to mitigate some of their impacts. Please keep in mind that this discussion was about GW/climate and carbon before you tried to divert it to learn about my life and car batteries.

Nice graph and analysis. To be clear, this is not "cherry picking". All the available climate data for the state are on that graph. You may want to look up this definition whenever you get around to looking up definitions of weather and climate.

I'll take your comments one by one from left to right.
1) There is no comparable data in the past for Minnesota. You can speculate it was warmer all you want.
2 & 3) You see a 30 year cold period around the turn of the century and assume what folks would say about it. OK, maybe. Without a bunch of earlier temperature data it is hard to say. Yes, look what the earth has done all on its own. For 130 years there has been a clear overall trend of increasing temperatures.
4) The dotted line was put there by the state climatologist, not me. Take it up with him. If you want to ignore the 130 year trend and only pay attention to short term deviations from the long term trend, that's you prerogative. Let's see, what else happened during this time period, a dramatic increase in CO2 emissions. I know, its just a coincidence. Lastly, please post the link for that data past 2000.

[T. Mac]

2 & 3) You see a 30 year cold period around the turn of the century and assume what folks would say about it. OK, maybe. Without a bunch of earlier temperature data it is hard to say. Yes, look what the earth has done all on its own. For 130 years there has been a clear overall trend of increasing temperatures.

And yet the world is not as warm as it was 2000 years ago.

Having listened to this debate here and elsewhere, can someone please tell me what the temperature goal is that the GW protagonists are trying to achieve? Are we trying to mimic the climate of the 1600's? Even though this period is in what is called the little ice age? Or are we trying to get back to the biblical periods of 2-3,000 years ago? But weren't those temperatures warmer than now? And if global warming is caused by the release of CO2 stored in fossil fuels, what was the climate before that carbon was removed from the atmosphere?

It seems that trying to make a non static entity like earth into a steady state model is futility in the making.

[Henry V]

IBD,
In the interest of providing one last bit of information, a whole bunch more climate related graphs for Minnesota are available at:http://climate.umn.edu/climateChange...ObservedNu.htm. There is also a good link to a stream flow paper where you can view an abstract.

The complete temperature record for the northern and southern parts of the state through 2007 is at http://climate.umn.edu/climateChange...orthSouthO.gif . There is no drop in temperatures from 2000 to 2007 unless I am looking at the graph upside down.

You can count on this all being bunk. I will take a different view and, for now, believe things are changing and that CO2 has something to do with it.

T Mac
Check out http://www.newscientist.com/article/...perplexed.html and scroll down the page to the articles under “what happened in the past”.

[IowaBayDog]

Henry,

Your right and thank you for falling into the trap, there is no valid historical data to make any predictions on Global Climate Change. Using 150 years of data to speculate on what the earth has done for hundreds of thousands of years or will do in the next thousand years is just as statistically insignificant as looking at the ALL TIME record lows today across the midwest and making assumptions of 100 year trends. There is NO SIGNIFICANT data that backs up global warming claims only speculation fueled by the need for research money and profiteering snake oil salesmen. They are happy to have you as a customer. Thank you for falling into the trap and proving the point.

[Pete]

What is so bad about batteries for the environment besides the lead and acis which is contained?
Am I missing something?

[JDogger]

What is so bad about batteries for the environment besides the lead and acis which is contained?
Am I missing something?

No more so than anybody else here, Pete.

JD