Once slow-moving threat, global warmi...

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

There are 58781 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.

Retired Farmer

Kuttawa, KY

#36148 May 26, 2013
Interesting read about the social cost of CO2 emissions put into money terms:

http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/article/20...
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#36149 May 26, 2013
Retired Farmer wrote:
Interesting read about the social cost of CO2 emissions put into money terms:
http://www.poughkeepsiejournal.com/article/20...
The problem with cost benefit analysis on matters of 'externalized costs' is that the benefit is private while the cost is public.
Retired Farmer

Kuttawa, KY

#36150 May 26, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem with cost benefit analysis on matters of 'externalized costs' is that the benefit is private while the cost is public.
I wouldn't exactly call that a "problem with cost benefit analysis" so much as a fact of life. If an industry wants to dump a toxic waste chemical into the air or water, or store it where it will leak out decades later, the owners of that industry will benefit in the form of increased profits from there being no regulations that require them to dispose of their waste safely or, it that is not possible, not engage in the operation that produces the waste. The public cost will come later, when the toxic chemical does its damage.
rico

Nashville, TN

#36153 May 27, 2013
http://dcavelaw.com/ http://www.greenevillesun.com/Local_News/arti...
Arne Marco wrote:
What we normally forget when talking about the amount of CO2, is the significance it has for the human (and other creatures) health. Above 425 ppm in the atmossphere the healthproblems will become more servere, because the blood will slowly be more acid. This will affect bloodpressure etc.
BTW: President Johnson was informed in 1965 about the dangers in increasing the amount of CO2.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36155 May 30, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
..
I too believe that Doctor James Hansen is not a scientist in which someone should bestow their faith.
-koolaid
Of course, you do according to your religion.

Dr Hansen would not care to know about your faith. Neither do I.
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36156 May 30, 2013
Dont drink the koolaid wrote:
<quoted text>
ouch... when did YOU emigrate from Mississippi?:-(
Did a pin drop?
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36157 May 30, 2013
How to address global warming

A growing number of business leaders, government officials and private citizens are increasingly concerned about global warming and its implications, and are proposing steps to reverse the trend.

Development of clean energy, including solar, wind and geothermal energy, has immense potential to reduce the amount of coal and oil burned to power electrical generating plants.

More sustainable transportation options, such as mass transit and alt-fuel vehicles, will also reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.(The Union of Concerned Scientists estimates that about 25 percent of energy-related CO2 emissions in the United States come from passenger vehicles).

Even individual efforts, such as lowering thermostats in winter and using energy-efficient light bulbs, will help to address global warming, but most climate researchers also stress the immediate need for large-scale, international policies to address the complex causes and effects of global warming.

“BET DAP”

Since: Feb 09

GOOM BOWN

#36158 May 30, 2013
SpaceBlues wrote:
How to address global warming
A growing number of business leaders, government officials and private citizens are increasingly concerned about global warming and its implications, and are proposing steps to reverse the trend.
Development of clean energy, including solar, wind and geothermal energy, has immense potential to reduce the amount of coal and oil burned to power electrical generating plants.
More sustainable transportation options, such as mass transit and alt-fuel vehicles, will also reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.(The Union of Concerned Scientists estimates that about 25 percent of energy-related CO2 emissions in the United States come from passenger vehicles).
Even individual efforts, such as lowering thermostats in winter and using energy-efficient light bulbs, will help to address global warming, but most climate researchers also stress the immediate need for large-scale, international policies to address the complex causes and effects of global warming.
what impact will your proposals have on the 'complex causes and effects of global warming"? so far....i haven't found a damned person who can answer that.

co2 is not a pollutant.....plants love it!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#36159 May 30, 2013
Another interesting sideline to the pollution from the oil refineries. The EPA have noted all oil companies have been under reporting their pollution from oil refineries for yrs. In effort to fix this anomaly they tried to get the oil companies to toe the line however companies like Exxon flatly refused.
Seems the resources at EPA haven't got the funding to go after them and they are well aware of that.

http://www.npr.org/2013/05/30/187044721/baton...

And for that poster who was defending the Chinese on their so called innovations. Well proof this week that they have been targeting US military contractors stealing blueprints and the like.
Also stole the complete blueprints from a new Australian (CIA) equivalent Spy headquarters with server locations etc. Now the whole blg which cost almost $700 million might have to be gutted inside. Yeah those Chinese are innovative alright!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36160 May 31, 2013
Q: Is CO2 a pollutant?

A: How we choose to define the word 'pollutant' is a play in semantics. To focus on a few positive effects of carbon dioxide is to ignore the broader picture of its full impacts. The net result from increasing CO2 are severe negative impacts on our environment and the living conditions of future humanity.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-pollutant...

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#36161 May 31, 2013
ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>what impact will your proposals have on the 'complex causes and effects of global warming"? so far....i haven't found a damned person who can answer that.
co2 is not a pollutant.....plants love it!
ROTFLMAO!!

You demand answers about the complex causes and effects of warming, then post some fatuous comment about C02 being fine because "plants love it?"

Jesus...you really are too stupid to live.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#36162 May 31, 2013
CO2 isn't pollution, it's invisible, odorless at atmospheric levels and beneficial to plants. Don't just hug a tree, exhale on it too.

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#36163 May 31, 2013
Asshat Deniers need to test their theories about the beneficial nature of C02 by walking into a room full of it.

It shouldn't be a problem...after all, PLANTS love it!

LOL
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36165 May 31, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
Asshat Deniers need to test their theories about the beneficial nature of C02 by walking into a room full of it.
It shouldn't be a problem...after all, PLANTS love it!
LOL
Plants love nitrogen too. I pee on my corn and tomatoes; maybe the asshats would like for me to pee on them.

I could do it.
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36166 May 31, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
CO2 isn't pollution, it's invisible, odorless at atmospheric levels and beneficial to plants. Don't just hug a tree, exhale on it too.
Yes, beneficial to ALL plants.

How do you like the part where CO2 is beneficial to kudzu, poison ivy, and weeds?
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

#36167 May 31, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, beneficial to ALL plants.
How do you like the part where CO2 is beneficial to kudzu, poison ivy, and weeds?
I disagree that it is 'beneficial' to most plants from the standpoint of OUR interests. Yes, it makes for more 'woody material' i.e cellulose and larger plants. That may be of interest to the paper makers and termites.

But it ALSO has two other effects. One is to reduce transport of minerals from the soil (and therefore lower mineral and vitamin content of food plants) due to lower transpiration rates (the stomata close up). And more of the plant is indigestible fiber, rather than food (seeds, fruits, etc). From the standpoint of AGRICULTURE, it is a loser.

Then there is the effect to warm the planet. This tends to make for more drought and lower yields of food crops due to heat stress and higher metabolism during nighttime when the sun is not producing food.

Overall, the total is probably negative on all levels. Even the 'boost' in woody fiber tends to last only a few years until some other factor becomes the 'limit'.

One thing on this article is that the reduced stomata opening may make plants hardier to desert or drought conditions.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#36168 Jun 1, 2013
Science DOES NOT say and in 28 years has never said climate change IS or WILL be a crisis only could be and they won't say their "possible" crisis is as inevitable as they love to say comet hits are. But unstoppable warming IS a comet hit!
Science ONLY agrees:
"Climate change is real and is happening and "could" cause, might cause, possibly cause......unstoppable warming. Not one IPCC warning isn't swimming in "maybes" and "could bes". Help my house could be on fire maybe?
You can't have a little unstoppable warming crisis outside of Harry Potter movies.
Climate Blame = Reefer Madness
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36169 Jun 1, 2013
LessHypeMoreFact wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree that it is 'beneficial' to most plants from the standpoint of OUR interests. Yes, it makes for more 'woody material' i.e cellulose and larger plants. That may be of interest to the paper makers and termites.
But it ALSO has two other effects. One is to reduce transport of minerals from the soil (and therefore lower mineral and vitamin content of food plants) due to lower transpiration rates (the stomata close up). And more of the plant is indigestible fiber, rather than food (seeds, fruits, etc). From the standpoint of AGRICULTURE, it is a loser.
Then there is the effect to warm the planet. This tends to make for more drought and lower yields of food crops due to heat stress and higher metabolism during nighttime when the sun is not producing food.
Overall, the total is probably negative on all levels. Even the 'boost' in woody fiber tends to last only a few years until some other factor becomes the 'limit'.
One thing on this article is that the reduced stomata opening may make plants hardier to desert or drought conditions.
Yes, I know all that. But more complicated arguments and questions than what I gave are wasted on short-attention-span, anti-science, paid agents of fossil interests.

Their reply to your detailed answer? CO2 is good for plants!
SpaceBlues

Houston, TX

#36170 Jun 1, 2013
One thing on this article is that ..??
gcaveman1

Bay Springs, MS

#36171 Jun 1, 2013
mememine69 wrote:
Science DOES NOT say and in 28 years has never said climate change IS or WILL be a crisis only could be and they won't say their "possible" crisis is as inevitable as they love to say comet hits are. But unstoppable warming IS a comet hit!
Science ONLY agrees:
"Climate change is real and is happening and "could" cause, might cause, possibly cause......unstoppable warming. Not one IPCC warning isn't swimming in "maybes" and "could bes". Help my house could be on fire maybe?
You can't have a little unstoppable warming crisis outside of Harry Potter movies.
Climate Blame = Reefer Madness
Coulda...woulda....shoulda.

Let me tell you a sure thing. You're stupid.

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.

California Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Violence follows California Trump rally, about ... 16 min Cat74 32
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 28 min JRB 212,959
The Clinton's made NAFTA Trade!! Jobs going ov... 1 hr Vote For Bernie S... 1
Vote For Bernie Sanders To Save Social Security... 1 hr Vote For Bernie S... 1
Mexico will reconquer California, Arizona and t... (May '12) 2 hr Kemosabe 36
News Essential Politics: Campaign gets another Calif... 8 hr Le Jimbo 6
News Travel Q&A: Best to trim route for 'epic' Calif... 9 hr Sheri 1
More from around the web