Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #530784 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-11-06 14:17 -0600 |
| Last post | 2015-11-07 14:50 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 89 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 14:17 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Puppet_Sock <puppet_sock@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-06 13:26 -0800
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-06 22:28 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-06 22:31 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 17:55 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-06 23:07 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 18:09 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 18:16 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 00:57 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 19:44 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution "Ringer" <byoung@peoplestel.net> - 2015-11-06 20:02 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 21:37 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-11-06 20:59 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 22:03 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-11-06 23:20 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 00:56 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-11-07 10:46 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 18:17 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-11-08 19:06 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-07 16:09 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Trawley Trash <trash@invalid.invalid> - 2015-11-07 05:42 -0800
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-06 17:56 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 09:33 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-07 10:22 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 00:58 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 22:27 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 23:40 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 00:20 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 01:00 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 07:10 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 08:23 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 10:31 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 10:00 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 11:16 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 10:21 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 11:29 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 10:35 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 11:48 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:39 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:11 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 20:17 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:42 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 21:17 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:37 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:12 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 20:19 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:43 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 21:18 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:37 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:12 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 20:20 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:44 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 21:18 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 09:43 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 07:08 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Edgardo Alcantara <edgardoalcantara@carosseryrepair.org> - 2015-11-07 14:16 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:42 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Edgardo Alcantara <edgardoalcantara@carosseryrepair.org> - 2015-11-08 00:50 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 08:45 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 17:56 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-11 23:58 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 08:02 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 16:09 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 19:47 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 19:38 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 19:58 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 19:52 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 20:07 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 21:28 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 21:32 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 22:20 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 23:02 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 21:59 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 21:26 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-11-12 16:05 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 21:40 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-11-12 18:01 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 23:29 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-11-12 20:20 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-13 01:49 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-11-12 22:35 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-13 04:39 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 13:10 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-08 17:30 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-11-07 09:37 -0800
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 12:43 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:43 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-08 16:52 -0800
US climate trolling militants infecting sci.physics 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2015-11-07 14:50 +0000
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | Trawley Trash <trash@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 05:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4nb1hc-1fl.ln1@jebus.gnet> |
| In reply to | #530820 |
On Fri, 06 Nov 2015 19:44:28 -0500 Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: > An eloquent and intelligent post. > > Sammy's link: > > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > > Beware, greenies, the cogent reply could make your head 'splode: Cogent? Not hardly. ! One candidate solution is to derive energy from biomass, which ! already provides 10 percent of the energy people use. Biomass is a ! widespread resource and can easily be converted to provide energy ! services. Unfortunately, biomass is already over-harvested—people ! use 16 percent of the energy that plants produce each year. Further ! harvesting will only exacerbate the ugly environmental gashes on the ! planet that biomass extraction, through deforestation and other land ! use changes, has already caused. Yes, but... Biomass puts carbon into the atmosphere just like any other carbon-based fuel. The widespread misconception above is a major problem in finding solutions. It should not be reinforced. Fortunately the dangers of climate change over the next century are greatly overblown. Hopefully by that time our politics will no longer be controlled by windbag politicos who ignore basic chemistry. If it were not for fossil fuel, we have no forests. We have long since outstripped the ability of our environment to replenish biomass. That is why the world switched to fossil fuels a century ago. As a result we have been able to preserve at least some of our natural environment. -- I'm Trawley Trash, and you haven't heard the last of me yet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 17:56 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n1jeoc$66j$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #530784 |
On 11/6/2015 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: > Technology's role in a climate solution >> http://thebullrg/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > > >> A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the >> most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. the problem is that one has to REPLACE the solar cells, windmills, and other "green" power generation things every *THIRTY YEARS* stated by the US Government. Germany has not solved that problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 09:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n1kcsi$q30$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #530815 |
Dne 07/11/2015 v 00:56 gilber34 napsal(a): > On 11/6/2015 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: >> Technology's role in a climate solution >>> http://thebullrg/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 >> >> >>> A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the >>> most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > > > the problem is that one has to REPLACE the solar cells, windmills, and > other "green" power generation things every *THIRTY YEARS* stated by > the US Government. It is not a problem specific for green sources, either commanded by the government or not. -- Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 10:22 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n1l8gs$lop$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #530851 |
On 11/7/2015 2:33 AM, Poutnik wrote: > Dne 07/11/2015 v 00:56 gilber34 napsal(a): >> On 11/6/2015 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: >>> Technology's role in a climate solution >>>> http://thebullrg/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 >>> >>> >>>> A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the >>>> most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. >> >> >> the problem is that one has to REPLACE the solar cells, windmills, and >> other "green" power generation things every *THIRTY YEARS* stated by >> the US Government. > > It is not a problem specific for green sources, > either commanded by the government or not. > Hawaii has had a wind power generator farm on South point for the last 40 years. the maintance costs were too high, and most were rusted out 20 years ago. It is located in an excellent place, wind is high there all the time, but most metals do not last long. Solar panels are made with dismillar materials, which have different expansion rates with heat cycling, and many will develop shearing after 15 years. Also the surface becomes pitted...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 00:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <utuvgc-72a.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530784 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > Technology's role in a climate solution >> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > > >> A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the >> most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. >> Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. >> Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which >> conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of >> farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The >> German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in >> developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator >> owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such >> entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in >> renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to >> replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial >> cropping. >> >> For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift >> from fossil fuels to solar energy?despite the technical problems. And >> investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. >> But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by >> something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of >> profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established >> among the world's nations?people in wealthy countries should not, as >> they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the >> poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in >> favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global >> economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain >> maximization for a few." A steady-state economy?a sustainable economy >> that maintains nature?s balance?must be established. >> >> The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and >> Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; >> Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities >> must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and >> rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and >> governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must >> be implemented for everyone. >> Fucking alarmist nonsense. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 22:27 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <ec2dnafV67oh4KDLnZ2dnUU7-dOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530784 |
On 11/6/15 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Technology's role in a climate solution
>> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815
For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift
from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems.
--
sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 23:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <050r3bpdbict5thrkf4dlav2pptotpbrdb@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #530833 |
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 22:27:40 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote: >On 11/6/15 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: >> Technology's role in a climate solution >>> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings How many? >must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 00:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mSf%x.8870$KK.5738@fx29.iad> |
| In reply to | #530835 |
On 11/06/2015 11:40 PM, Wally W. wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 22:27:40 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote:
>
>> On 11/6/15 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>>> Technology's role in a climate solution
>>>> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815
>>
>>
>> For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings
>
> How many?
>
>
>> must shift
>> from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems.
Sam Says our only hope is to return to the middle ages. I presume he
means that number of people who can sustainably live under feudalism also.
Since Solar is stupid beyond measure except for certain specialized
needs (weather station on mountain etc.) Obviously is an "idea man" who
let "others" work out the details of his stooopidity.
The truth Wally, (and I kid you not here) is for government to disclose
what it knows about "free energy". All this doom and gloom gone in a
flash! But without political pressure nobody is willing to give up the
control that fossil fuels give them over the population of the planet.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 01:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bn4r3bd4rj9s5qekf3pf082blr76geps0i@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #530835 |
On Fri, 06 Nov 2015 23:40:15 -0500, Wally W. wrote: >On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 22:27:40 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote: > >>On 11/6/15 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: >>> Technology's role in a climate solution >>>> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 >> >> >> For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings > >How many? BTW: "All of them" is not an acceptable answer. What is the total population of your utopia, Sam? How many will be "more equal than others?" Where is your participation in the discussion you *say* you want? >>must shift >> from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 07:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hnk0hc-r2c.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530844 |
Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> wrote: > On Fri, 06 Nov 2015 23:40:15 -0500, Wally W. wrote: > >>On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 22:27:40 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote: >> >>>On 11/6/15 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: >>>> Technology's role in a climate solution >>>>> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 >>> >>> >>> For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings >> >>How many? > > BTW: "All of them" is not an acceptable answer. > > What is the total population of your utopia, Sam? > > How many will be "more equal than others?" > > Where is your participation in the discussion you *say* you want? The spamming shit head's "discussion" is to rehash arm waving buzzwords like "sustainably" that he obtained from cut and pastes. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 08:23 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <L6ydneh2VK3HlKPLnZ2dnUU7-WWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530863 |
On 11/7/15 1:10 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > The spamming shit head's "discussion" is to rehash arm waving buzzwords > like "sustainably" that he obtained from cut and pastes. > Now, now, jimp, your jealousy is obvious, your language inappropriate, and your absolute contempt and total disgust are addressed in these Anger Management classes. You, jimp, need these services: > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. > -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 10:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dv5s3b9dmcj4o1m8gnk6bt0lgv7cocbrdk@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #530868 |
On Sat, 7 Nov 2015 08:23:21 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote: >On 11/7/15 1:10 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> The spamming shit head's "discussion" is to rehash arm waving buzzwords >> like "sustainably" that he obtained from cut and pastes. >> > > > Now, now, jimp, your jealousy is obvious, Jealousy of what? Where is your ongoing contribution to this discussion? What do you have to say, pro or con, about the the excellent statement by Pupput_Sock? :> The warmistas are not just wrong. They are festeringly evil. :> They are giggling malevolent monsters, perching and waiting :> to feast on the bodies of the people, by the billion, they :> hope to kill. <snip OT> You started the thread with this copy and paste. At this time in the thread, it doesn't count as "discussion": > Technology's role in a climate solution > > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > > > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the <snip remainder of previous copy-and-paste> From your sig: "sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics" So *discuss* already.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 10:00 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <gtidnczpWbGXvaPLnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530901 |
On 11/7/15 9:31 AM, Wally W. wrote: > So*discuss* already. What aspect of this article would you like to discuss with me? Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 11:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <7n8s3b18og0hs0pqm7tvsht2amtdb7107n@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #530909 |
On Sat, 7 Nov 2015 10:00:09 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote: >On 11/7/15 9:31 AM, Wally W. wrote: >> So*discuss* already. > > What aspect of this article would you like to discuss with me? There are already several replies to your OP. You don't find any of them worthy of reply, except your usual OT reply to jimp? If you have not intitiated discussion that you find to be engaging, then you are not doing a good job of starting "discussion" as you claim in your sig. What would Uncle Al say about your success in that regard? <snip repeat of previous copy and paste>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 10:21 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <gtidnc_pWbGDuKPLnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530912 |
What aspect of this article would you like to discuss with me, Wally? Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 11:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3k9s3bturv4lkn2ake56bdc962kus71d29@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #530914 |
On Sat, 7 Nov 2015 10:21:50 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote: > > What aspect of this article would you like to discuss with me, Wally? What did you find to be most interesting about the article, and why? On the larger topic addressed by the article, why do you agree or disagree with Puppet_Sock's summary: >The warmistas are not just wrong. They are festeringly evil. >They are giggling malevolent monsters, perching and waiting >to feast on the bodies of the people, by the billion, they >hope to kill.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 10:35 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <gtidncjpWbGltaPLnZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530919 |
On 11/7/15 10:29 AM, Wally W. wrote: > > What did you find to be most interesting about the article, and why? > The data tells the story. Fossil fuel burning ==> increased GHG concentration ==> rapidly warming the planet. And technology has a roll in helping us move off fossil fuels. I'd be interested in your take on the article, Wally. Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 11:48 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <6mas3b9glbtnk09vlm4g1aj9s480a65ieg@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #530921 |
On Sat, 7 Nov 2015 10:35:04 -0600, Sam Wormley wrote: >On 11/7/15 10:29 AM, Wally W. wrote: >> >> What did you find to be most interesting about the article, and why? >> > > The data tells the story. Fossil fuel burning ==> increased GHG > concentration ==> rapidly warming the planet. This is new information to you, gleaned only from this article? Or is this the a fundamental of the faith in your religion? > And technology has > a roll in helping us move off fossil fuels. Again, this is new information to you, gleaned only from this article? Methinks you didn't reply to the question: What did you find to be most interesting about ***this*** article, and why? Why did you think other people needed to see ***this*** article?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 18:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <a3t1hc-f7g.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530914 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > > What aspect of this article would you like to discuss with me, Wally? Pull your head out of your ass, shit head. It was already stated and it certainly wasn't a request for a repeat of the original cut and paste. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 14:11 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <HNedneEIQe9ox6PLnZ2dnUU7-Y3OydjZ@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530951 |
On 11/7/15 12:39 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Pull your head out of your ass, shit head. Now, now, jimp, you're slipping again, your language inappropriate, and your absolute contempt and total disgust are addressed in these Anger Management classes. You, jimp, need these services: > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web