Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

Want to learn more about climate change in Mexico?


MtnMama
 Share

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, gringohombre said:

50 years ago the US DID do something and most of the other "developed" countries followed. 

The enactment of the Clean Air Act of 1970 (1970 CAA) resulted in a major shift in the federal government's role in air pollution control. This legislation authorized the development of comprehensive federal and state regulations to limit emissions from both stationary (industrial) sources and mobile sources.

 

What was a result of the Clean Air Act?
 
For more than forty-five years the Clean Air Act has cut pollution as the U.S. economy has grown. ... Clean Air Act programs have lowered levels of six common pollutants -- particles, ozone, lead, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide -- as well as numerous toxic pollutants.

Why do not the "woke" crowd focus on the REAL culprit's...China, India, Russia and all of thier comrades who did not even bother to show up in Scotland for the Green Energy thing just completed. They are too busy creating oil and gas, building coal fired plants, and making money building windmills and solar panels for the "developed" countries who are already the much less polluted countries...UNBELIEAVABLE!!!  

Yes I agree with you when it comes to the "woke" crowd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if I'm gonna believe 'anybody', I'm gonna stick with the scientists and even those duds at NASA long before I follow the suggestions from some bloke from Lake Chapala.  😇

P.S.  The first graph on the NASA site I quoted says it all for me. Millennia history vs the last 'few' years....

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct  measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased  since the Industrial Revolution.  (Source: [[LINK||http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/||NOAA]])

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, RickS said:

Well, if I'm gonna believe 'anybody', I'm gonna stick with the scientists and even those duds at NASA long before I follow the suggestions from some bloke from Lake Chapala.  😇

P.S.  The first graph on the NASA site I quoted says it all for me. Millennia history vs the last 'few' years....

This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct  measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased  since the Industrial Revolution.  (Source: [[LINK||http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/||NOAA]])

Very interesting chart for carbon dioxide levels.  Odd that it does not corelate to past climate temperature changes over the last 11,000 years. Nor past predictions by NASA. Possibly there are natural factors other than carbon dioxide that cause climate temperature changes??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, RickS said:

... or just not read it at all considering the source.

This and most of the other posts here are just a sideshow. As a lifelong businessman I have learned to look at the BIG picture, identify the problems and go to work solving the LARGEST first:

CHINA, INDIA, RUSSA AND OTHERS!!! 

This is the reality that most are shielding thier eyes from and advocating punishing those countries and thier populations that have done the most real work in addressing this situation:

The U.S. used to have the "Big Stick", but sadly now it has become a twig. When is someone with the HUEVOS going to step up to to address the REAL PROBLEMS???

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the more serious side, consider these questions:

1.  Does it make sense to handicap the cleanest economies in favor of the most dirty?  China, the world's #1 polluter, didn't even attend the climate conference.  Almost as dirty Russia also didn't attend.

2.  Would money and effort be better spent on addressing the driving force behind this, excessive global population?  World population has doubled just since I was in my teens.  The quality of life everywhere, including here, is going down as population continues to increase.  It seems to me this is a more addressable problem than trying to modify climate after the fact.

3.  Looking at the track record of government everywhere in solving anything, is it realistic to think they could solve something this big?  In history, when have they ever done so?

4.  When the wind doesn't blow or the sun doesn't shine, how do you provide energy baseload so people don't freeze.  Burning wood is many times dirtier than natural gas.  Environmentalists have rejected nuclear, which has its own set of problems mainly related to waste handling.  Now what?

5.  Could a warmer, wetter planet actually be better for us?  Geologic history suggests that when the climate was warmer and wetter, deserts were much smaller.  http://www.co2science.org/subject/d/summaries/desertification.php

6.  Do you think people are going to follow grossly rich "leaders" whose carbon footprints are truly obscene and who operate on the basis of , "don't do as we do, do as we say?"

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mainecoons said:

 

5.  Could a warmer, wetter planet actually be better for us?  Geologic history suggests that when the climate was warmer and wetter, deserts were much smaller.  

 

 

 

I'm sure the people living in coastal states would just love it. We're already seeing record number of storms, properties damaged, people being forced to move. I've got some desert property I'd be happy to sell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, dcstroker said:

I'm sure the people living in coastal states would just love it. We're already seeing record number of storms, properties damaged, people being forced to move. I've got some desert property I'd be happy to sell you.

We are?  Where and your supporting information?

Record damage have anything to do with record numbers of people trying to live in the most storm vulnerable locations?

Storm Dangers Highlight Florida Growth | immigration-fueled population growth | Limits to Growth

https://www.climate-policy-watcher.org/hurricane-research/factors-that-influence-hurricane-damage-costs.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mainecoons said:

We are on the same page as your 6 point outline above proves since most of these points I have already made here, most strongly about China. The politician in MY cartoon is shown corking an oil pipeline...that in my opinion is causing just about as much damage to a certain country as YOUR cartoon politician is doing to his (and the world). Just my opinion!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mainecoons said:

  Does it make sense to handicap the cleanest economies in favor of the most dirty?  China, the world's #1 polluter, didn't even attend the climate conference.  Almost as dirty Russia also didn't attend.

You seem unaware that the US is number 2 on the list of carbon emissions, second only to China.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, mudgirl said:

You seem unaware that the US is number 2 on the list of carbon emissions, second only to China.

Yes, but China's is DOUBLE the US!!! Plus the US volume has been diminishing while China's has been increasing exponentially and continues at an alarming rate. Please try to see the see the full picture before posting a single irrelevant statistic that adds nothing to the REAL STORY!!!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...