Getty Images and AARP present the Disrupt Aging Collection, a searchable photo collection that redefines what it means to get older. Take a look.

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
323
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

323 Views
Message 11 of 31

@Richva wrote:

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

I keep telling the left this but it doesn't seem to sink in (yet): the "energy distribution infrastructure" is NOT owned by the federal government but by investor held utilities.  Get it yet?  The government has not "regressed" to Venezuela standards (yet)!

 

All Progressives (that's what you call yourself) are regressive by nature.  That is, you desire to make this into a third world country (pretty regressive, don't you think)?


And yet, looking back on my comments, I mentioned the costs but not the sources of funding. In a Capitalist society, a private utility is expected to make a profit and that would imply the costs will be passed to their consumers. 

 

Government does NOT fund public utilities.  I assume you don't know this by your beating around the bush.

 

Much as Trump is trying to make us a state supported Socialist country, we are not yet. 

 

Trump is trying to keep this a free country while the left (all the candidates) have onerous laws that they are trying to foist on the public without concern for the people.

 

I would also point out that modernizing the electrical grid across the United States could cost as much as $476 billion,

 

You don't seem to get it - the government does NOT own the utility companies.  Only in places where socialism has taken place is that seen (like Venezuela).

 

yet reap $2 trillion in benefits, according to a 2011 study issued by the Electric Power Research Institute.

 

Private companies always strive to make a profit. That's what the stockholders expect.  Only when government runs something is money lost, there is shoddy performance, and usually the taxes go UP!

 

Once again, the Regressives are refusing to maintain our infrastructure because they only see the costs, not the return on investment. 

 

We (you and I) don't own the utility companies (if you own stock in them, you do and write their CEO to get some results).

 

Progressive regressives seem to misunderstand who owns these utilities, wants them to change because THEY SAY SO, and even are free with the money (that all must pay).


 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
323
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
284
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

284 Views
Message 12 of 31

@Olderscout66 wrote:

@Richva wrote:

@jfpinlvn wrote:

@Richva wrote:

So, I guess that means the Regressive argument that America should not do anything about climate change because countries like India and China will not do their fair share is bogus. 


Do you mean their fair share of coal fired power plants?

 

Forget Paris: 1600 New Coal Power Plants Built Around The World

 

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/07/03/forget-paris-1600-new-coal-power-plants-built-around-the-worl...

 

About 16 percent of the U.S. coal fleet has retired in the past five years, but don't expect major new coal-fired plants to fill that void.

 

The federal government counts four new coal projects on a list of planned power plants nationwide. Three of those face long odds, and none will be able to replace the millions of tons in lost coal demand resulting from recent retirements, even as the Trump administration has vowed to revive the ailing industry.

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-the-u-s-ever-build-another-big-coal-plant/


So, it would seem that a massive infrastructure project to convert from coal fired to solar and wind energy sources must begin right now.  The Regressives have no such plans but the Green New Deal proposal gives a nice starting point for these discussions. Now, we just need the Regressives to come to the table. Don't hold your breath. 


Nope. The MASSIVE effort needs to be in building 140 Nuclear plants to replace the 1146 Tera-watt-hours we now get from coal. All existing solar generators produce 66.6 TWH, Wind produces 275TWH and Hydro 292TWH. That means using the "other" clean energy sources would require DOUBLING everything that's been built so far, including projects like the Grand Cooley and Hoover Dams. WE NO LONGER HAVE TIME FOR A "PC" SOLUTION.


In my most humble opinion, if we build 140 nuclear power plants, they dang well better use salt reactors !!!!!!!!!


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
284
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
424
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

424 Views
Message 13 of 31

@Richva wrote:

@jfpinlvn wrote:

@Richva wrote:

So, I guess that means the Regressive argument that America should not do anything about climate change because countries like India and China will not do their fair share is bogus. 


Do you mean their fair share of coal fired power plants?

 

Forget Paris: 1600 New Coal Power Plants Built Around The World

 

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/07/03/forget-paris-1600-new-coal-power-plants-built-around-the-worl...

 

About 16 percent of the U.S. coal fleet has retired in the past five years, but don't expect major new coal-fired plants to fill that void.

 

The federal government counts four new coal projects on a list of planned power plants nationwide. Three of those face long odds, and none will be able to replace the millions of tons in lost coal demand resulting from recent retirements, even as the Trump administration has vowed to revive the ailing industry.

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-the-u-s-ever-build-another-big-coal-plant/


So, it would seem that a massive infrastructure project to convert from coal fired to solar and wind energy sources must begin right now.  The Regressives have no such plans but the Green New Deal proposal gives a nice starting point for these discussions. Now, we just need the Regressives to come to the table. Don't hold your breath. 


Nope. The MASSIVE effort needs to be in building 140 Nuclear plants to replace the 1146 Tera-watt-hours we now get from coal. All existing solar generators produce 66.6 TWH, Wind produces 275TWH and Hydro 292TWH. That means using the "other" clean energy sources would require DOUBLING everything that's been built so far, including projects like the Grand Cooley and Hoover Dams. WE NO LONGER HAVE TIME FOR A "PC" SOLUTION.

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
424
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
421
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

421 Views
Message 14 of 31

@jfpinlvn wrote:

@williamb39198 wrote:

Let’s talk color, and it is not about race. 

Once again, trump supporters and the right do not think big picture and also try to distract from other real issues. 

More greenery is good, but is that really a fact, or media opinion? But, green is a darker color which absorbs 

heat / radiation. 

What is not being honestly brought forward is our loss of white!...snow, ice, ice fields, glaciers. These help reflect 

heat / radiation back into space, which has previously helped moderate the temperatures on our planet...now we are losing white reflectivity, and temperatures are increasing. And melting permafrost is not good. 

To trump supporters and right wingers, present the overall big picture, not just a partial picture to support your political aims!


Reflectivity is surely a factor, but doesn't the ice absorb heat/radiation energy as it is converted from a solid to a liquid form? I'm not sure it is so simple.


It's pretty simple. When water freezes, it "ABSORBS" heat energy, "locking" it in the crystal structure of the ice, called the "latent heat of freezing".  This is why Ice never cools below 0 C, it's structure has given up all the energy possible. When the ice melts, that latent energy is released back into the water, warming the water.

 

As ice, the sunlight striking the surface is reflected back into space. As water, the heat energy from the sunlight is absorbed and stored in the water, heating the water and the air above the water. Ice only absorbs about 30% of the energy from the sunlight striking its surface. Water absorbs 94% of such energy.

 

In short, once the water begins to warm, the same amount of sunlight will melt MORE ice each summer because the warm water heats from below as the sunlight heats from above. The warmer water is less dense, that is, it contains a smaller quantity of salt, which makes it easier to freeze (freezing point elevation) which is why the AREA covered by ice does not change nearly as much as the VOLUME of ice produced each winter - the cold air freezes a thinner sheet of ice each year until the decreased density (amount of dissolved salt) and the increased temperature of the water makes it impossible for any ice to form.

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
421
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
425
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

425 Views
Message 15 of 31

@jfpinlvn wrote:

@Richva wrote:

So, I guess that means the Regressive argument that America should not do anything about climate change because countries like India and China will not do their fair share is bogus. 


Do you mean their fair share of coal fired power plants?

 

Forget Paris: 1600 New Coal Power Plants Built Around The World

 

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/07/03/forget-paris-1600-new-coal-power-plants-built-around-the-worl...

 

About 16 percent of the U.S. coal fleet has retired in the past five years, but don't expect major new coal-fired plants to fill that void.

 

The federal government counts four new coal projects on a list of planned power plants nationwide. Three of those face long odds, and none will be able to replace the millions of tons in lost coal demand resulting from recent retirements, even as the Trump administration has vowed to revive the ailing industry.

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-the-u-s-ever-build-another-big-coal-plant/


So, it would seem that a massive infrastructure project to convert from coal fired to solar and wind energy sources must begin right now.  The Regressives have no such plans but the Green New Deal proposal gives a nice starting point for these discussions. Now, we just need the Regressives to come to the table. Don't hold your breath. 

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
425
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
417
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

417 Views
Message 16 of 31

@williamb39198 wrote:

Let’s talk color, and it is not about race. 

Once again, trump supporters and the right do not think big picture and also try to distract from other real issues. 

More greenery is good, but is that really a fact, or media opinion? But, green is a darker color which absorbs 

heat / radiation. 

What is not being honestly brought forward is our loss of white!...snow, ice, ice fields, glaciers. These help reflect 

heat / radiation back into space, which has previously helped moderate the temperatures on our planet...now we are losing white reflectivity, and temperatures are increasing. And melting permafrost is not good. 

To trump supporters and right wingers, present the overall big picture, not just a partial picture to support your political aims!


Reflectivity is surely a factor, but doesn't the ice absorb heat/radiation energy as it is converted from a solid to a liquid form? I'm not sure it is so simple.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
417
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
4
Kudos
418
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

418 Views
Message 17 of 31

Let’s talk color, and it is not about race. 

Once again, trump supporters and the right do not think big picture and also try to distract from other real issues. 

More greenery is good, but is that really a fact, or media opinion? But, green is a darker color which absorbs 

heat / radiation. 

What is not being honestly brought forward is our loss of white!...snow, ice, ice fields, glaciers. These help reflect 

heat / radiation back into space, which has previously helped moderate the temperatures on our planet...now we are losing white reflectivity, and temperatures are increasing. And melting permafrost is not good. 

To trump supporters and right wingers, present the overall big picture, not just a partial picture to support your political aims!

Report Inappropriate Content
4
Kudos
418
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
415
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

415 Views
Message 18 of 31

While massive tree planting in China and India is good news, the lack of such a program in the Americas and the EU is not. On a global level, Earth is LESS green now than it was 20 years ago, mostly due to the deforestation of the tropical rain forests, which once destroyed, are proving extremely difficult to revive. The apparent increase in vegitation was a result of the "greening" of the Arctic, and the replacement of ice with vegitation INCREASES Global warming because less heat energy is being reflected back into space.

 

We need build Nuclear reactors to replace donny's coal fired disasters - the switch to NG is a move in the right direction, but why go for a 50-60% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions when we can get 100% in complete safety? Every Nuclear plant is worth the conversion of 2 coal plants to NG, so a carbon tax would make the cost for Nuclear LOWER.

 

We currently have 99 Nuclear Plants producing 19% of our total electric power output. There are 241 coal fired plants producing 27% of total electric capacity. Simple math shows the much more "productive" Nuclear generation could replace all the coal using less than 140 additional Nuclear Plants, all of them 100% fail-safe from meltdowns experienced at Three Mile Island and Fukuyama.

 

Wind and hydro are great, but we can't replace the energy from coal fast enough to avert the coming environmental disaster. Since 1955, there have been 12 fatalities at Nuclear power plants in the US, and NONE of the deaths was from RADIATION. Compare that with the 14,400 Americans we kill each year with COAL.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
415
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
421
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

421 Views
Message 19 of 31

@Richva wrote:

So, I guess that means the Regressive argument that America should not do anything about climate change because countries like India and China will not do their fair share is bogus. 


Do you mean their fair share of coal fired power plants?

 

Forget Paris: 1600 New Coal Power Plants Built Around The World

 

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/07/03/forget-paris-1600-new-coal-power-plants-built-around-the-worl...

 

About 16 percent of the U.S. coal fleet has retired in the past five years, but don't expect major new coal-fired plants to fill that void.

 

The federal government counts four new coal projects on a list of planned power plants nationwide. Three of those face long odds, and none will be able to replace the millions of tons in lost coal demand resulting from recent retirements, even as the Trump administration has vowed to revive the ailing industry.

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-the-u-s-ever-build-another-big-coal-plant/

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
421
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
423
Views

Re: Good News: The Earth Is Getting Greener per NASA

423 Views
Message 20 of 31

@MsStretch wrote:

One source says the earth is greener than it was 20 years ago and the other source says it stopped getting greener 20 years ago and both reference NASA satellite imagery.  Certainly a conundrum to ponder.

 


HA! As the saying goes, the first liar doesn't have chance.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
423
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Are you new to the online community? Say Hi and tell us a bit about yourself, your interests, and how we can help make this community a great experience for you!


close-up group of seniors smiling at camera

Top Authors