Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

There are 53996 comments on the Newsday story from Dec 14, 2008, titled Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt.... In it, Newsday reports that:

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

PHD

Overton, TX

#33220 Dec 23, 2012
TrollBot wrote:
<quoted text>
Troll. Ignored.
Hay when you respond your not ignoring. Sorry you’re another one that attended the one child left behind program. So that would again make you the commander TROLL!!
Are you going for the ignorant award? You finally made the commander troll position
PHD

Overton, TX

#33221 Dec 23, 2012
litesout wrote:
<quoted text>
You must explain why Indy car engines run at high compression ratios, instead of the lower compression ratios of gasoline engines.
The ethanol industry in step with the U.S. gov't, do not test 10% ethanol blends against 100% gasoline, to show that 'their 3% difference' between 10% ethanol blends & 100% gasoline is a lie.
But to make sure that auto manufacturers get the highest EPA city & highway mpg ratings, the EPA tests with the equivalent of 100% gasoline without ethanol. A pox on EPA that they say they are simplifying the parameters of mpg ratings.
Not one gov't or ethanol study does comprehensive tests for extensive numbers of real-world 'designed for gasoline' automobiles, comparing 10% ethanol blends & 100% pure(ethanol-free) gasoline.
100% gasoline as compared to 10% ethanol blends, not only gives better mpg, but makes engines designed for gasoline, run smoother, quieter, & gives a bit extra low end torque, such that less down shifting is necessary when ascending hills.
Yes folks the litesout gives another empty chair response.
Teddy R

Mclean, VA

#33222 Dec 23, 2012
SpaceBlues wrote:
<quoted text>Remember your earlier comments re the Chinese.
See this now, stunning stuff:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/...
Enjoy.
Perhaps you misunderstand my "comments re: the Chinese."

My comments regarding the general lack of ability to innovate were in respect of the Chinese national corporate entity - i.e., the PRC.

Not individual Chinese people, who are as talented as any other when free to work outside the PRC in an environment that values and rewards free thought and free expression.

My comment was made in response to a discussion on the subject of national competition between the US and China for economic and technological superiority in the world.

A glance at the affiliations of the principal and second authors of this paper shows it is a prime example of why the US need not fear being eclipsed by Chinese science any time soon:

University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA.

Yes, by the time we get down to the 3rd and 4th Authors we find an affiliation with Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, P. R. China - but both these authors are also affiliated with MIT in the first instance.
TrollBot

Mclean, VA

#33223 Dec 23, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Hay when you respond your not ignoring. Sorry you’re another one that attended the one child left behind program. So that would again make you the commander TROLL!!
Are you going for the ignorant award? You finally made the commander troll position
Troll. Ignored.
TrollBot

Mclean, VA

#33224 Dec 23, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Yes folks the litesout gives another empty chair response.
Troll. Ignored.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#33225 Dec 23, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps you misunderstand my "comments re: the Chinese."
My comments regarding the general lack of ability to innovate were in respect of the Chinese national corporate entity - i.e., the PRC.
Not individual Chinese people, who are as talented as any other when free to work outside the PRC in an environment that values and rewards free thought and free expression.
My comment was made in response to a discussion on the subject of national competition between the US and China for economic and technological superiority in the world.
A glance at the affiliations of the principal and second authors of this paper shows it is a prime example of why the US need not fear being eclipsed by Chinese science any time soon:
University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA.
Yes, by the time we get down to the 3rd and 4th Authors we find an affiliation with Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, P. R. China - but both these authors are also affiliated with MIT in the first instance.
Nice.

Also nice that you mistakenly spotted a misunderstanding. However, your understanding of PRC is beyond mine.

Have a nice day, too.
PHD

Overton, TX

#33226 Dec 23, 2012
TrollBot wrote:
<quoted text>
Troll. Ignored.
Hay when you respond your not ignoring. Sorry you’re another one that attended the one child left behind program. So that would again make you the commander TROLL!!
Are you going for the ignorant award? You finally made the commander troll position
TrollBot

Mclean, VA

#33228 Dec 24, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Hay when you respond your not ignoring. Sorry you’re another one that attended the one child left behind program. So that would again make you the commander TROLL!!
Are you going for the ignorant award? You finally made the commander troll position
Troll. Ignored.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#33229 Dec 24, 2012
Why don't you boys go play somewhere else?

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#33230 Dec 24, 2012
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
What are some of the positives of ethanol for fuel? Saves on fossil fuels. It is an oxygenation. It increases the octane rating of gasoline without adding dangerous additives. When mixed with gasoline, it is a very good gum solvent and cleans the fuel injectors. Since it absorbs water, it dries gasoline and prevents gas line freezes. Since it is produced from growing crops, it adds much less CO2 into the atmosphere. It helps the farmers show a little more profit.
All that said, it would be better if it were produced from non food crops. Brazil is doing just fine with producing it from sugar cane.
Does it save on fossil fuel? After all, it does not burn as well and is corrosive which leads to reduced engine efficency which means gases leak and more fuel is needed to produce the same amount of power. As far as CO2, the amount adds nearly as much CO2 since the amount of fuel needed to run the equipment, transport the supplies and the harvested crop, converting it into ethanol and then transporting it where it is mixed with the gasoline is far larger than you are admitting to. Then lets not forget the enviromental damage in Brazil where rain forest are cleared to grow that sugar cane to convert into ethanol. Rain forest that are far more efficent at extracting CO2 out of the air than the sugar cane.

Yes, it asorbs water which might freeze in the fuel line in the winter time. Which in the summer that same little bit of water adds a additional bit of power and milage. Something they discovered in the 1930's.

http://www.audiworld.com/tech/eng80a.shtml

http://www.rallycars.com/Cars/WaterInjection....

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#33231 Dec 24, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Was that an answer from experience/knowledge or the usual cut and paste you do?
Does it matter? What matters is it true or is it not. The simple fact is that many of the engines on the road were not built to burn the new gas. They were built to run on the old and cars were being built to narrower and narrower specifications in an attempt to trim weight and increase fuel milage.

Do I normally agree with litesong, no. This time he is right and I will admit someone is right when they are. This time he is. If you doubt then start talking to mechanices. The older ones are best since they have the most experience and have seen the changes.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#33232 Dec 24, 2012
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
The corrosion problems have been solved. The hygroscopic property is a plus as well as a minus. Even though the energy content per gal of ethanol is less than gasoline, it is a viable energy efficient alternative. Most studies show a significant positive energy content.
http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmgmt/ILSR_e...
"steel USTs have been shown to be satisfactory for storing 100 percent ethanol and E-blend gasoline (Archer Daniels Midland Co., 1998). Steel tanks have been used to store alcohols for more than 50 years without documented compatibility problems."
The tailpipe emissions of ethanol are at least as clean as petroleum gasoline and produce much less environmental CO2.
The positives and negatives will decide the future of ethanol.
Actually the corrosive issues have not been solved, just the new tanks are made out of a different material. The energy content is still only 2/3 that of gasoline and the reason why manufactors stopped using steel tanks was that they are more subject to rust than the material that replaced it and they were heaver which resulted in reduced milage.

As for the CO2 levels, the amount of CO2 produced to get it into the tank is about the same as the gasoline. Don't forget that the farm equipment used to raise it uses diesel, as well as the trucks that transport the crop to the production site and then transport the finished product to the consumer. That the fuel all those tractors and trucks aslo has to be transported, not to mention the fertlizers and pesticides which are more often made from oil.

Then there the little fact that a bad year can raise the cost of the crop, not to mention deprive the poor of food so that someone like you can feel like they are doing something to make the world a better place dispite the fact that ethanol usage is making it worse.

Why not do something better and use that corn, sugar cane, and sugar beets to feed the hungry, Plant clover to feed cows and sheep so poor kids can have milk and warm clothes instead of switch grass.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#33233 Dec 24, 2012
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Yes folks the litesout gives another empty chair response.
Actually, no he didn't. You are the one with the empty chair. In this case the research and experience of automotive repair experts agree with him that ethanol isn't living up to the hype.
PHD

Overton, TX

#33234 Dec 24, 2012
TrollBot wrote:
<quoted text>
Troll. Ignored.
Hay when you respond your not ignoring. Sorry you’re another one that attended the one child left behind program. So that would again make you the commander TROLL!!
Are you going for the ignorant award? You finally made the commander troll position.
PHD

Overton, TX

#33235 Dec 24, 2012
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, no he didn't. You are the one with the empty chair. In this case the research and experience of automotive repair experts agree with him that ethanol isn't living up to the hype.
Actually that's why you’re the one and only Less than a Box of Rocks. I never said ethanol lives up to anything. What ever you’re smoking today it's not working for you.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#33236 Dec 24, 2012
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually the corrosive issues have not been solved, just the new tanks are made out of a different material. The energy content is still only 2/3 that of gasoline and the reason why manufactors stopped using steel tanks was that they are more subject to rust than the material that replaced it and they were heaver which resulted in reduced milage.
As for the CO2 levels, the amount of CO2 produced to get it into the tank is about the same as the gasoline. Don't forget that the farm equipment used to raise it uses diesel, as well as the trucks that transport the crop to the production site and then transport the finished product to the consumer. That the fuel all those tractors and trucks aslo has to be transported, not to mention the fertlizers and pesticides which are more often made from oil.
Then there the little fact that a bad year can raise the cost of the crop, not to mention deprive the poor of food so that someone like you can feel like they are doing something to make the world a better place dispite the fact that ethanol usage is making it worse.
Why not do something better and use that corn, sugar cane, and sugar beets to feed the hungry, Plant clover to feed cows and sheep so poor kids can have milk and warm clothes instead of switch grass.
We have been through all that. We will get things figured out. Anyhow, have a Merry Christmas.
PHD

Overton, TX

#33237 Dec 24, 2012
Merry Christmas to all.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#33238 Dec 24, 2012
Land hurricanes.

Weather patterns are shifting north and both the sea and the land are warmer. Hurricanes are breaking out further north.

Land hurricanes.

They used to go through the Gulf. Now, they go through the South.
TrollBot

Mclean, VA

#33239 Dec 24, 2012
[QUOTE who="Troll Piled Higher & Deeper"]<quoted text>Hay when you respond your not ignoring. Sorry you’re another one that attended the one child left behind program. So that would again make you the commander TROLL!!
Are you going for the ignorant award? You finally made the commander troll position.[/QUOTE]

Troll. Ignored.
TrollBot

Mclean, VA

#33240 Dec 24, 2012
Troll Piled Higher and Deeper wrote:
<quoted text>Actually that's why you’re the one and only Less than a Box of Rocks. I never said ethanol lives up to anything. What ever you’re smoking today it's not working for you.
Troll. Ignored.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min John Galt 1,252,121
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 22 min Go Blue Forever 99,903
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Dr Guru 192,404
easter house adoptions (Jan '11) 6 hr Julie 28
Another Centralia, IL Police Scandal: Officer ... 9 hr Counselor48 1
Ask Amy 7-5-15 13 hr mrs gladys kravitz 4
5 Truths You Cannot Disagree With. 14 hr Dave 11
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages