Chevron Gas Problems

[96Qowner]

You should have left your original rant intact. I note that someone has said that you are not from here?

Well if that is correct I am thinking GB or OZ??? since you use the term "bloody". No problem with either for me. I also think Mexicans are nice people.

Perhaps it's best he didn't leave it intact. I never saw the original post. But as he said ...

NFM ....I am a sleep deprived person....

We all post something we wish we hadn't, at times. I sure have.

Here's Petr, from Armenia, IIRC: How's your daughter doing, Petr?

zerothread?id=236048

[maxnix]

Uh. Global warming is real.

Perhaps, but what is misssing from the current discussion is data on contributing causes. The UN and everybody else assumes it is primarily human activity that is the main contributing factor, totally ignoring geo-physical events. Krakatoa in the 19th century had a much larger impact on climate change than human activity does today. That the earth has gone through warming and cooling cycles in previous millenia is known, but the causes are not, and there were no h0m0 sapiens present in significant numbers then if at all.

I was amused at HK's self assurance that there would be no neighbors around the fissionable materials dumping sites for the the next 100,000 years. Since recorded history is less than 5,000 years, it is a gift to be that prescient.

[96Qowner]

For a long time, I got caught up in the silly argument about whether it's getting warmer or not. Well it is. And, yes, it's because there are so many more people on the Earth with the need for energy and food, and yeah, gasoline for our wasteful cars. Cars are significant emitters of greenhouse gases.

What I never hear is how something is going to fix the problem. I hear that we have to make some small, incremental improvement, and that "will help". I never hear about changes that are cost-efficient. I hear that we have to use something more expensive because that "will help".

I don't know if the world might have gotten warmer or colder due to its own changes, like volcanoes and ocean currents, or if those things will magically balance our increasing CO2. If we're serious about making substantial reductions in our fossil fuel consumption, we simply need to produce as much additional electricity as we can, as fast as we can - from NON-FOSSIL sources - wind, solar, waves, geothermal, etc.. And we don't need any permission to use conservation - change our light bulbs, insulate our houses, etc.

But no one is prepared to say what will actually fix the problem. Better to spend our money adapting to higher temps, than to waste it on solution-less "new ideas". We'll burn gas as long as gas is a comparative value. Now that it's above $3.00/gal we'll start to see more efficient designs, like diesels, and most cars will probably end up as hybrids with electrical assist.

And the Earth will continue to warm until it stops.

[Haitian_King]

Perhaps, but what is misssing from the current discussion is data on contributing causes. The UN and everybody else assumes it is primarily human activity that is the main contributing factor, totally ignoring geo-physical events. Krakatoa in the 19th century had a much larger impact on climate change than human activity does today. That the earth has gone through warming and cooling cycles in previous millenia is known, but the causes are not, and there were no h0m0 sapiens present in significant numbers then if at all.

I was amused at HK's self assurance that there would be no neighbors around the fissionable materials dumping sites for the the next 100,000 years. Since recorded history is less than 5,000 years, it is a gift to be that prescient.

Why are you so concernedwith the next 100,000 years? You'll be long gone, and so will evryone you've ever met. We need to worry about now, adn the near future. Maybe as far as 100 years.

At the moment, Yucca Mountain is a fantastic storage site for spent fuel rods. It was chosen for it's isolation and more modifications have been made to ensure public safety. It's guarded, so it's not as if a civilian can inadvertently stuble into a nuclear fuel rod graveyard. If the powers that be would stop being so uptight about recycling the fuel rods, we'd be in even better shape.

As far as geo-physical events go, you have a point. But to say that human activity isn't making a significant contribution to the warming problem is quite silly. We may not have started the fire, but we're certainly not putting it out at the moment.

[maxnix]

Why are you so concernedwith the next 100,000 years? You'll be long gone, and so will evryone you've ever met. We need to worry about now, adn the near future. Maybe as far as 100 years.

Spoken like a true egalitarian, or a current Republican about public debt!

Eff our descendants! I got mine!

I personally am glad our predecessors didn't have that attitude about polio or medecine, manned flight, farming, ranching, the environment. Who needs progress? If the cave is good enough for me...?

[PANCAKES1]

I've used Chevron for as long as I've had my car!I refuse to use anything else! I feel it makes my car run better than other brands........

[Haitian_King]

Does it really make much of a difference? Say we plan something for the next 500 years, and some disaster happens and the plans are lost. We'd still be in the same boat when the time came right? No plan. The question is "Do we spend money, time, and other resources to come up with a plan that we will never live to see come to fruition?" or "Let's worry about the present and foreseeable future?"

I vote for the latter.

I do understand your point and it is well founded. I would just like to disagree.