all 19 comments

[–]sawboss 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Be sure to read the comments by Tessa Schlesinger. I quite agree that we have too many automobiles on the road, and that people ought to do more to reduce their own consumption. You can fuck right off with the anti-American rhetoric and catastrophizing though. Provide acceptable alternatives at reasonable costs and more people may come around.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Sawboss. What if the same SJW bullshit is pushing through a fraudulent agenda. Would you be open to watching a fairly short video that highlights the misleading climate change hysteria? This video compares the predictions of leading climate science figures vs. what actually happened.

Thirty Years of Failed Climate Predictions

Hopefully, we can all agree that a hypothesized theory is only as good as the predictions it makes.
If it doesn't accurately predict events, then it should be revised, or replaced.
The predictions of the 80's were completely wrong, and they're making the exact same predictions today.
Please take some time to look into this and decide for yourself.

[–]sawboss 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The predictions of the 80's were completely wrong, and they're making the exact same predictions today.

I watched the video. Climate change is pretty low on my list of concerns, anthropogenic or otherwise. The poor condition of our roads and automobile pollution I see when I look out my front door are immediate concerns which affect my daily life.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My concern is the trillions that they'll rob from social security, etc. with the pretext that it's too save the planet.

Also, the billions spent on subsidies could be Invested in road repairs, etc.

This is a racket.

[–]Zombi 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

~~Should be "Cows" instead of "cars". The methane produced from cows has a much more noticeable impact than the exhaust from cars.

Neither are good at all, but the meat industry makes up a much larger chunk of greenhouse gases than the automobile industry.~~

Apparently this is false. Here is a link to sources contradicting my point:

[–]ikidd 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

This old chestnut. Wetlands makes up the vast majority of methane production and prior to agriculture, wetlands were massively more common. As well, native ruminants that were displaced by cattle production (bison, elk, moose, deer) produced as much methane as well. Vegetative matter decomposing in any environment, whether it be by cattle or by soil organisms creates methane, and looking at an entire system and not just one level in a system gives you a better idea of where methane is produced.

You'd be better off blaming shale oil production that actually release stored methane, or clathrates on the ocean floor and arctic being liberated by warmer global temperatures.

I'm not one to deny global warming, but blame the right things.

[–]Zombi 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Hm, you're completely correct! That's what I get for not fact checking a claim! I've made a correction to my previous post. Though cars still make up a huge amount of greenhouse gases, it's around ~15% of total emissions according to the link I've edited in to my previous post.

Our main focus, as you've said, should be on cars, but also energy production. We're making strides towards both, though. Hopefully we can all eventually switch to pure electricity automobiles soon. It's already happening, it'll just take time. I think the biggest factors are cost and power storage/availability. Once we develope batteries that can last for a day or two while also lowering the vehicle cost, people will start to make the change. I know that the only reason I haven't gotten one yet is due to how costly they are to purchase. I can barely afford my shitty '08 civic as is lol.

[–]ikidd 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You'll be a long time making up the energy emissions of building and buying a new efficient (or electric) vehicle over using a relatively low-emissions vehicle like a Civic. Granted, that Civic would probably be used by someone else that isn't going to then buy a new car, but keeping existing vehicles running is more efficient than making new ones constantly.

Again, looking at systems from top to bottom and not focusing on individual elements makes more sense, though it's not easy. This is why hydrogen powered vehicles make no sense if you need to use fossil-fuel energy to make hydrogen, or take away clean energy from other users to do the same.

By far, the best option is to use solar energy already falling on the earth to generate electricity, but then storage and the high environmental costs of mining rare-earth elements used in solar cells becomes a factor, as well as building distribution networks to get it from where it's made to where it's used.

[–]Zombi 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah I always wonder why more research/awareness isn't put into solar. I've heard crazy numbers regarding just how much energy the sun emits worldwide in a single day. It's like we have a free, near unending (not forever, but you get my point) source of energy RIGHT THERE! I know we've made strides, but I feel like it's not in the public's mind.

[–]ikidd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think the estimate for an installation that would provide enough electricity for the US was 2000 acres of Mojave desert covered in cells, at a cost of about $1trillion, and the distribution and storage was another 1.3trillion, over 10 years.

Which frankly, is probably not a patch on what is spent by the military ensuring access to foreign oil by shooting brown people and propping up genocidal maniacs, and making themselves a target for terrorists.

[–]happysmash27 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do they have citations? I don't exactly trust US government agencies.

Actually, looking at the PDF, it doesn't even look like the emissions from agriculture take into account the emissions from the cows themselves, only agricultural equipment!

[–]ruperttaylor[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm about to post an article on methane and the meat industry.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Anthropogenic climate change is a hoax.

[–]Intuit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

They bait the line with whatever gets bites.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

[–]Intuit 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

And before warming, it was global cooling in the 1970s and an ice age that was coming (which I actually believe). But it's hard to blame us for cooling.

[–]happysmash27 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think more people should destroy cars, especially the new fossil fuel ones. It's reasonable to continue using an old fossil fuel car, but buying a new one in this climate is insane!

[–]Intuit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

When someone criticizes the state, people cry out, "But who will build the roads?" Maybe we don't need so many roads. Without the state to build them, cars could not have taken off to where they are today. Maybe cities could have been organized more compactly, so there's not as much need to cars. It looks like about half the space in a city is devoted to roads and parking.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree with this. The US was at one point the world leader in public transit.

Oil interests bought them up, and shelved them.

These same oil interested are investing in "climate change science". The old strategy was to control oil. The new strategy is to dominate the usage of any and all energy.

Edit:. I'm an environmentalist who accepted the climate change notion for 90% of my life, so I understand how absurd this assertion may sound. :-/