Basically, I guess all the candidates are closet Global Warming Freaks. Good read.
Robins and Global Warming
Robins and Global Warming
McCain, and Global Warming, Whoops
- Thread starter Wade
- Start date
Yup. Thats a negative in my book. To me the question is, which canidate would take the more drastic action to try and combat the myth?
Last edited:
Don't worry, I'm not voting for the other four candidates.
Hilary, Husein, Gore, or Nater. Their completely unbalanced. Watch Gore, he's got a trick brewing. How many people know the history how Lincoln got elected?
Hilary, Husein, Gore, or Nater. Their completely unbalanced. Watch Gore, he's got a trick brewing. How many people know the history how Lincoln got elected?
W
wildcard
RIP Brian
I do, crafty super smart, poltical kind of a guy he was. The last book I read on him was, aww crap, ummm. CRAP CRAP CRAP......The band of .....??? It will come to me at 3am and I will post it then
Gore is out. He was convicted of fraud in Euorpe for his latest film.. The only reason no one shot clinton is because algore would have be next in line.
Gore is out. He was convicted of fraud in Euorpe for his latest film.. The only reason no one shot clinton is because algore would have be next in line.
Giobal warming
If you vote for a Dem.Your snowmobile and your area you ride are in Jeprody. Clinton and 2-strokes think about it Dough Heads.
If you vote for a Dem.Your snowmobile and your area you ride are in Jeprody. Clinton and 2-strokes think about it Dough Heads.
So does that mean my 4 stroke is ok?
This stuff doesn't matter to me, as long as the result is less pollution and cleaner water, air, and land I am all for it.
Unfortunatley, they all have to be that way these days ..
God forbid they trounce on somone elses' relegion
So does that mean my 4 stroke is ok?
This stuff doesn't matter to me, as long as the result is less pollution and cleaner water, air, and land I am all for it.
Exactly what stuff doesn't matter to you?
The fact that people believe in global warming/change blah blah blah. If everyone would just focus on pollution it would make more sense!
You're right about focusing on pollution. My concern it how painful the switch to new energy technology will be if the urgency of bad global warming data is use. One example: We have more coal than Saudi Arabia has oil, and we now have the ability to burn this coal clean, but it does put out co2. My electric bill is going up 18% this next year because Rocky Mountain Power will not accept power from new coal powerplants because the general public thinks it is killing them. The new coal powerplants are tied up in litigation from the enviro-kooks, not because they pollute, but because they emit co2.
There is a reason the senate voted 95-0 not to sign the Kyoto protocol. It's because It will hurt our economy. The more hysteria global warming creates, the more apt our representatives will be to vote for bad bills.
Last edited:
I am not sure about the not buying power thing.... sounds like the new coal is not in operation?.. You electricity bill is mostly increasing to pay for infrastructure that has been put off for the last 20-30 years and also since most of the new generation in that area has been from natural gas, which is getting expensive......
- Rocky mountain has said publicaly that it will not buy power from coal fired plants. Why? Because they want to cater to the global warmers who are now the majority. There is litigation stoping a clean coal plant in Northern Nevada as I write. When the supply is restricted, what happens to the price? If price is raised in the name of global warming, the public accepts it. Look at how many companies advertise "green products" now.
-I will agree that part of the rate increase is due to infrastructure, but not "most" of it, and I have no problem paying that part.
-The price of natural gas is down this year.
If the global warming hysteria is not a threat to the USA economy, why did the senate (liberals & all) vote 95-0 not to sign Kyoto?
Because no Senator wants to be told what he/she is going to do? If it is not our idea, it surely must not be good!
Also, most SW utilities are summer peaking loads, that time period is when there natural gas price is large. The price that the utilities pay is high, but they spread the costs to the consumer over the whole year.
Last edited:
In my opinion, I think that the senate understood what negative effects it would have on our economy.
ha ha ha, I think if you look at countries like Norway, Germany, and Denmark, that it is not a doom and gloom story with respect to reducing emissions.
I find it funny how when someone agrees with a governmental decision, it is because the government is smart and knowledgeable, yet when they disagree with the government it is because the government is greedy and in the pocket books of big business, special interest, ...... blah
-Never said they were "smart and knowladgeable", but I know they're not suicidal. Never said they are greedy and in the pockets of big business either so that "someone" you speek of must not be me.
-If you look at those countries, they had low emissions compaired to ours in the first place. Not much pain to reduce emissions there.
They were always lower. There economies are a fraction of ours.
Try again!
Try again!
They were always lower. There economies are a fraction of ours.
Try again!
I'm trying......
I would think the fact that their economies are smaller would make it more difficult, as economies of scale are smaller, therefore things are more expensive. America has a lot of power behind it and is a huge market for energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other forms of technology that rise from an increase in control over pollutants. People are so afraid that it will hurt the economy..... I see opportunity and the ability for America to be a world provider in this technology.
Yes those countries were lower from a total standpoint, ask why?
Most of the heat comes from combined heat and electricity units, where the waste heat is used in homes, instead of natural gas or electricity like we use here. Also, there heavy gasoline taxes resulted in the country using less fuel and therefore less emissions.
America can do it, and prosper from it....... but it is easier to do nothing.
You want a "heavy gasoline tax"? Do you think that will help us prosper?
The botom line is if we refuse to use OUR resources (Coal, oil in ANWR & offshore) because of bunk science, we are tying a hand behind our back in competing in the world. Again, I'm not saying not to develop new energy tech, but I want the transition to be painless and done for the right reason. (Energy Independance)
The botom line is if we refuse to use OUR resources (Coal, oil in ANWR & offshore) because of bunk science, we are tying a hand behind our back in competing in the world. Again, I'm not saying not to develop new energy tech, but I want the transition to be painless and done for the right reason. (Energy Independance)
Similar threads
