Global Warming Cont...

1381 posts. And still going strong!

BTW, LaNina is now forming. That means drought for Texas and this season's hurricane activity will not get shut down like last season. And I am now on the coast! Yeah, Baby! Bring it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arkansasbob

that is the most rediculous thing i've ever heard. he can use all the energy he wants because he can afford to make up the difference! if he really believed in what he was preaching, he would reduce his energy usage like he is telling everyone else to do, AND use his wealth to help acheive more "clean" energy. i don't have a problem with him using a lot of energy, just with him asking others to do something he's not willing to do.

---

Ditto! That was the most ridiculous dribble put out by Gore. Basically, "I can waste what I want because I can buy what I want.". Gore probably does nothing more than
purchases enough "green power" — renewable energy Stocks involved with solar, wind and methane gas — to balance 100 percent of his electricity costs. Gore was, is and always will be a huge joke. I still can't believe some of you guys voted for the internet inventing lying clown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Pup60

First, exactly what is an "average" gas well?????? The whole concept of this "factoid" is phoney!

How much a given well depletes in its' first year (or in any year, for that matter) is dependant on many facts. Reservoir porosity and permeability, reservoir pressure, how many other wells are producing from the same reservoir, the well spacing, wellbore "skin" effects, how rich is the gas (how much entrained liquids is it carrying at reservoir conditions) how restrictive is the wellbore tubing, how restrictive is the surface piping system, what is the market demand, etc etc.

Bottom line: some wells may produce half of its' recoverable reserve in the first year, some may produce less than 5 %. No way to make any sense of factoid like that unless you have a lot more of the relevant data.

---

FWIW, as a retired petroleum Geologist, I find Bill Pup60's post 100% accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saltydawg

Actually, it seems you and TT are being hypocrites since you don't limit your energy use (or do you?).

The guy lives in a mansion filled with a lot of electronics. Maybe you should post the $$$$ amount of energy used by the White House every year because we are paying for it but Al is paying for his own.

Ayn wouldn't have any problem with Al being a successful guy that wants to live in a big house.

---

Let's see, Slick and Billary never owned a house of their own as they bilked the federal and state governments their whole entire lives as they lived in free housing (energy free as well). Their own first house ever was after he left office. And knowing Billary they probably are still not paying their own energy bills or house note for that matter.

However, your argument is apples and oranges as Guisslapp and I aren't out there trying to stir up panic about some BS cause of ours and then doing exactly what we say others should not do.

I personally have zero problem with Gore being able to afford a huge house like JOHN EDWARDS and paying for however much energy he wants to use and waste. Just don't preach to me or the rest of the world your line of bullcrap.

Speaking of eco houses and "green" houses, here's one that is in stark contrast to Ozone Al's Tennessee mansion.



This house has 25,000 gallons of rainwater storage, gray water collection from sinks and showers for irrigation, passive solar collection, with the so called "green switch" . It uses 100% geothermal heating and cooling with water from 6 wells that is recirculated and stays at a constant 67 degrees F. “By marketplace standards, the house is startlingly small,” says David Heymann, the architect of the 4,000-square-foot home. "Clients of similar ilk are building 16-to-20,000-square-foot houses." Furthermore for thermal mass the walls are clad in "discards of a local stone called Leuders limestone, which is quarried in the area. The 12-to-18-inch-thick stone has a mix of colors on the top and bottom, with a cream-colored center that most people want. “They cut the top and bottom of it off because nobody really wants it,” Heymann says. “So we bought all this throwaway stone. It’s fabulous. It’s got great color and it is relatively inexpensive.”

Certainly no need for the owner to buy so called carbon credits for this house. Oh BTW, the owner of this house in none other than George W. Bush. This is the house on his Crawford ranch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saltydawg

THE REST OF THE STORY......

---

the rest of the rest of the story.......

http://billhobbs.com/2007/02/more_on_gore.html

gore: "i'm super duper serial, you guys! my carbon footprint is zero!"

Are the martians causing global warming as well?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...s-warming.html

I noticed an article in USA Today a couple of days ago with another overhyped doom story on GW. Since it contained a serious error, I wrote the following to the editor...................



"It would seem that writer Patrick O’Driscoll (“Study: Tipping Point for climate is near, Feb. 28) needs to brush up on his basic science since he’s writing a Science column. He makes the statement that…. “Rising temperatures eventually could melt icebergs, raise sea levels and wreak havoc on coastal areas…..” Making a statement like this indicates he has forgotten (or never heard of) Archimedes’ Principle, one of the basic foundations of physical science. This principle states that an object immersed in a fluid will experience a buoyant force equal to the weight of the displaced fluid. Since icebergs are floating objects the fluid volume they displace is already accounted for. They float since the frozen water is slightly less dense than the liquid water. If they melt the volume they will occupy is already there, except for very minor differences due to differences in salinity. If all the icebergs in the sea suddenly melted today, there would be no rise in sea level!!

That also holds true for all of the Arctic polar ice cap since it is all floating. Although much of the Antarctic ice cap is over land that cap is experiencing significant thickness growth as a whole, meaning that it is taking more water in than it is losing in the few carefully selected glacier slide areas that Al Gore likes to show."

Nice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

Let's see, Slick and Billary never owned a house of their own as they bilked the federal and state governments their whole entire lives as they lived in free housing (energy free as well). Their own first house ever was after he left office. And knowing Billary they probably are still not paying their own energy bills or house note for that matter.

However, your argument is apples and oranges as Guisslapp and I aren't out there trying to stir up panic about some BS cause of ours and then doing exactly what we say others should not do.

I personally have zero problem with Gore being able to afford a huge house like JOHN EDWARDS and paying for however much energy he wants to use and waste. Just don't preach to me or the rest of the world your line of bullcrap.

---

That has to be one of the most inconsistent posts ever posted on BB&B. I was talking about the current occupant of the WH. Glad to hear that you respect Big Al's right to spend his money as he wishes without your permission.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

Ditto! That was the most ridiculous dribble put out by Gore. Basically, "I can waste what I want because I can buy what I want.". Gore probably does nothing more than
purchases enough "green power" — renewable energy Stocks involved with solar, wind and methane gas — to balance 100 percent of his electricity costs. Gore was, is and always will be a huge joke. I still can't believe some of you guys voted for the internet inventing lying clown.

---

Well, TT, how much money have you invested in green energy stocks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Pup60

I noticed an article in USA Today a couple of days ago with another overhyped doom story on GW. Since it contained a serious error, I wrote the following to the editor...................



"It would seem that writer Patrick O’Driscoll (“Study: Tipping Point for climate is near, Feb. 28) needs to brush up on his basic science since he’s writing a Science column. He makes the statement that…. “Rising temperatures eventually could melt icebergs, raise sea levels and wreak havoc on coastal areas…..” Making a statement like this indicates he has forgotten (or never heard of) Archimedes’ Principle, one of the basic foundations of physical science. This principle states that an object immersed in a fluid will experience a buoyant force equal to the weight of the displaced fluid. Since icebergs are floating objects the fluid volume they displace is already accounted for. They float since the frozen water is slightly less dense than the liquid water. If they melt the volume they will occupy is already there, except for very minor differences due to differences in salinity. If all the icebergs in the sea suddenly melted today, there would be no rise in sea level!!

That also holds true for all of the Arctic polar ice cap since it is all floating. Although much of the Antarctic ice cap is over land that cap is experiencing significant thickness growth as a whole, meaning that it is taking more water in than it is losing in the few carefully selected glacier slide areas that Al Gore likes to show."

---

How about the Greenland ice sheet? The fact is BillPup, we will both be dead and buried before the real impact of AGW becomes self-evident to the masses. It's the grand kids of Johnny and Dhuss that will face the music.

Green energy is for hippies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

Green energy is for hippies.

---

I'm a hippie. You need some acid?:)