Being properly informed, not propagandized, DOES help.
Various "agreements" and other such, left the biggest polluters, China and India, totally out of any controls until 2030. And if you think they're going to cooperate after that, you are not living in the world of realpolitik.
I'm separating the wheat from the chaff. That's all.
CONGRESSMAN BROOKS: BIPARTISAN PANEL OF SCIENTISTS CONFIRMS HUMANS ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR PAST 20,000 YEARS OF GLOBAL WARMING
July 11, 2019 Press Release
Washington, DC— Thursday, in a House Science, Space, and Technology Committee hearing on climate change, under questioning by Congressman Mo Brooks (AL-05), four members of a bipartisan panel of climate science experts all admitted that humans are NOT responsible for the Earth’s global warming that has occurred over the past 20,000 years (since the Earth’s last glacial maximum).
By way of background, during the last glacial maximum of roughly 20,000 years ago:
Average global temperatures were roughly 11 degrees Fahrenheit COLDER than they are today (per Zurich University of Applied Science). Stated differently, global temperatures have risen, on average, roughly 0.5 degrees Fahrenheit per century over the past 20,000 years.
Sea levels were roughly 410 feet LOWER 20,000 years ago than they are today (per the United States Geological Survey). Stated differently, sea levels have risen, on average, roughly two feet per century over the past 20,000 years (roughly double the global warming enthusiasts’ claimed average sea level rise rate of one foot per century since 1993).
Almost all of Canada, Northern Europe, and America (north of the Missouri and Ohio Rivers, east to New York City) was under glacial ice and uninhabitable.
The gist of the experts’ opinions is that the earth was too lightly populated by humans to make humanity responsible for the Earth’s global warming that began 20,000 years ago.
BTW I don't know Mo Brooks, I found this on a quick search.
I guess the Chinese don’t know global warming is a hoax they created, or maybe that’s what they want us to believe
Because if they are right, no amount of going back to 1950s America would help us compete in the future
They're making a big gamble that some breakthrough will be made, that creating H can somehow become a net energy plus instead of it taking more energy to create your H energy than the H energy that's produced. They can afford it because they loot us to the tune on hundreds of billion$ per year.
We made them rich and tekky, our misguided or worse POTUSs and "diplomats" who are put on pedestals for putting us at grave risk.
They know it's a hoax, they have absolutely no intentions of complying with Kyoto or any other idiocy created by hucksters and bought hook, line, and sinker by guilt-riddled control freaks.
If there’s money to be made from a hoax, America should be making it. It is no more of a snake oil than literal snake oil enterpenaurs used to sell
Real long term answer is Natural Gas Fuel Cells that are very close to the efficiencies of Hydrogen Fuel Cells with a glut of resources available TODAY.
The U.S. is the largest Natural Gas producer in the world and natural gas is essentially FREE due to the excess amount available and most producers simply Flare it off at the well instead of selling it since the supply far outstrips demand. This is also true of all other major producers and while the U.S. flares a lot of Nat Gas off, it is ranked as the 4th largest in the World but will soon become Number 1 and of course that is when the idiots will blame the U.S. for flaring off Nat Gas when it has been done in the Middle East for decades.
Natural Gas burns clean and can be used in ICE vehicles, Hybrid Vehicles and Fuel Cell vehicles and would be perfect for large vehicles like Class 4 to 8 Trucks, Buses and Trains.
The infrastructure is over 80% "built out" and only requires retail distribution stations for public use and most of today's gas stations could install Natural Gas "pumps" and new competitors could do the same.
Makes far more sense to use Natural Gas then Hydrogen but since the U.S. would be the dominant provider it doesn't fit the agenda and is not promoted.
This is why the U.S. needs to focus on a energy/transportation model that will actually reduce pollution drastically, could be implemented immediately, benefit the U.S.A. and be cost effective.
First off, most future vehicles are likely to be powered by ICE engines but most supplemented by Hybrid systems that eliminates any range issues, has established infrastructure but will be far more efficient and cleaner than today's ICE powertrains.
Secondly large vehicles that use a lot of fuel and create a more emissions per mile need to be converted to Natural Gas (CNG/LPG) fuel and transition to Natural Gas/Methane Fuel Cells that will drastically reduce emissions.
The U.S. is the largest producer of Natural Gas and Methane can be generated in Land Fills and by several other methods for a new unlimited source of domestically available fuel.
Third, this allows more flexibility in designs and end user preferences and lowers the overall demand for Copper and other resources that the U.S. is not the dominant supplier of - it also allows change to be implemented at the speed of innovation.
The U.S. can easily be the Dominant Player in Natural Gas/Methane Fuel Cells and their use for not only transportation but residential power and or/backups for solar powered homes that augments water heater efficiency AND produce gallons of Clean Water that can be used for many uses.
Mazda also tried it with the Wankel Rotary engine.
Beijing set to end subsidies for fuel cell vehicles next year
These puppies are taking off like a Falcon Heavy on its way to Mars with Elon and Cher.
Another decade, another plan.
The greenies will be furious if people can still drive vehicles and not pollute.
Last edited by jpd80; 10-19-2019 at 08:43 PM.
Current: Hidden Content Hidden Content
Past: '17 Cruze; '15 F150; '14 Volt; '13 MKX; '13 Silverado; '13 Fusion; '11 Ram; '10 Commander; '08 Sierra; '07 Rendezvous; '05 Ram; '04 Grand Cherokee; '03 F150; '01 Silverado; '00 Jimmy; '99 Sierra; '97 Ram; '96 Mustang GT; '96 Jimmy; '90 Escort GT; '89 Ranger; '84 Omni; '76 Malibu; '78 LeMans; '85 Escort; '82 Lynx; '75 Sierra
Me thinks the Chinese Communists play the capitalist game
a little to well for the West's liking......
BMW used to sell H2 fuelled 7 series
and in Canada when I was younger MOST cars were GAS powered (LPG) and CNG was a close second for years
I have owned CNG nat-gas cars
you used to be able to buy a "fuelmaker phill" and fill your car at home overnight or pull into a petrol station and "fast fill" your car and drive for 300 kms and do it again - most stations could get 3000 PSI in 5 - 7 minutes
That said, the Environment is what is important and what the Chinese have been destroying since the 1980's all while the "Global Warming Greenies" push for even more manufacturing to move there so it can destroy the environment even faster, all while trying to shut down manufacturing in the only country who can effectively manufacture AND reduce production emissions.
I am all for a cleaner environment and have actually done things like installing solar in my house, changed lighting to LED and improved insulation and windows to more efficient ones.
What we need is a viable way to get there, and one that is not going to require a mandated change that is not going to happen so that a technology that is not even close to the "Right Answer" be implemented.
Natural Gas Fuel Cells are far more viable than Hydrogen powered ones that BTW will have most of the Hydrogen produced by our old friends Coal, Oil and Natural Gas since they are HYDROCarbons with the "Hydro" coming from the Hydrogen that make them up along with Carbon.
Why on Earth should we be using Natural Gas to make Hydrogen to power a Fuel Cell when we can just use the Natural Gas to begin with?
Same goes for using Natural Gas to make Electricity that must be distributed through a non-existent infrastructure in order to Charge Batteries in a Car the have to transform that power to an Electric Motor - not the most efficient process OR just use the Natural Gas to create the power without the need for a battery pack and power the car directly.
Fuel Cells can also be powered by good old Gasoline although they are not as efficient (today anyway).
Using Natural Gas also allows a vehicle to retain it's ICE power if desired that will burn quite cleanly and can be augmented with a Fuel Cell if desired and creating a "Voltec" powertrain using a Fuel Cell in place of batteries which allows the Fuel Cell to be "Sized" as either a "power adder" or propel the vehicle alone, albeit at lower performance levels,or upsized to handle most of the propulsion of the vehicle.
Far more viable solution that can use existing infrastructure/vehicle architectures AND vastly reduce emissions that with improve the Environment (which should be the ultimate goal).
1. Power the House
2. "Backup" Solar Power System (this would be a 100% Backup system, unlike current Battery Backups with substantial limitations)
3. Charge a Car or replenish the Fuel Cell
4. Augment the Water Heating System
5. Heat/Cool the House more effectively.
Meanwhile we continue the madness of trying to go the very inefficient and Environmental Unfriendly Batteries, trying to produce a very inefficient Hydrogen Fuel and Electrical infrastructure that is just not needed.
Because Natural Gas is a HydroCARBON.
Nevermind that it can be used far more effectively, far sooner (like immediately) and will have a very positive effect on the Environment (the primary Goal).
Even Natural Gas ICE engines burn very cleanly and would improve the Environment alone using the current vehicle fleet (New and Used) with the required modifications.
Not sure if we will ever do the obvious - seems we are too busy chasing rainbows to look down at the earth and see that it has already provided a viable answer to the problem.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)