Ops-Normal.org

BenThere wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 09, 2020 2:12 pm

For now the US remains the ecological paragon for reducing emissions, maintaining a healthy water supply nation-wide[...]

Sorry, that's about where you lost me. I'll mention Flint as an obvious example, plus the fact that the Trump administration is removing a lot of the protections against water pollution.

I can agree that I'm not convinced that the warming is entirely man-made because the Sun is a mildly variable star and the Earth's climate fluctuates accordingly, but it may be that combined with an increase in solar output, the human contribution is enough to push us over the edge. However, I do approve of all the efforts to use renewables because fossil fuels are limited and by taking less of that resource now means it will last longer.

I'm also not convinced by fracking, seems to be a good way to cause earthquakes in areas that are otherwise pretty stable, as well as polluting the local groundwater.

llondel wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 09, 2020 6:36 pm

BenThere wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 09, 2020 2:12 pm

For now the US remains the ecological paragon for reducing emissions, maintaining a healthy water supply nation-wide[...]

I'm also not convinced by fracking, seems to be a good way to cause earthquakes in areas that are otherwise pretty stable, as well as polluting the local groundwater.

I read in a reliable site although I can't remember where that groundwater is much closer to the surface.

Flint, 40 miles from where I sit, is an anomaly. Run by a corrupt city political machine for 50 years, suffering from the exodus of its automobile manufacturing backbone, Flint has declined precipitously. The local government decided the water provided by the existing infrastructure was too expensive and opted to source its water from a polluted river and neglected to keep up its pipes. But the city of Flint has a top notch diversity program, etc., and roughly 50% of its population on public assistance. Neither Flint's demographics or its water quality reflect US national standards. By the way, Flint residents receive full supplies of government supplied bottled water while their system is restored.

I wasn't aware of the Trump administration removing water quality standards or restrictions. Can you cite a reference for my enlightenment, llondel?

BenThere wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 09, 2020 7:20 pm

I wasn't aware of the Trump administration removing water quality standards or restrictions. Can you cite a reference for my enlightenment, llondel?

https://www.epa.gov/nwpr/final-rule-nav ... ction-rule is the rule itself. The interpretation is that it's rolling back protections that date back to before Reagan was in office.

There's also https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/clim ... tions.html which you might or might not consider fake news based on its source, or you can search for "Trump Water Bill" which is what I did and picked up that one from a cast of many.

Climate “emergency”?

If we believe the “Scientists” and the “IPCC” - then we should believe that there is no impending doom!

Am I interpreting this IPCC document correctly?

Am I right to conclude - that the corrective/preventative measures that some so drastically desire are really not as urgent the media and certain individuals and or entities have portrayed?

https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads ... ort_HR.pdf

“A.2 Warming from anthropogenic emissions from the pre-industrial period to the present will persist for centuries to millennia and will continue to cause further long-term changes in the climate system, such as sea level rise, with associated impacts (high confidence), but these emissions alone are unlikely to cause global warming of 1.5°C (medium confidence). (Figure SPM.1) {1.2, 3.3, Figure 1.5}”

“A.2.1 Anthropogenic emissions (including greenhouse gases, aerosols and their precursors) up to the present are unlikely to cause further warming of more than 0.5°C over the next two to three decades (high confidence) or on a century time scale (medium confidence). {1.2.4, Figure 1.5}”

I now expect at least one of the ‘believers’ to reply explaining why white is really black and that the sky actually is falling in.

Christ Sise, I can hear the Greta one saying to that HOW DARE YOU.

The only scientists I trust Sise are those who aren’t making a quid out of the GW racket. That immediately rules out the UN IPCC for obvious reasons AFAIC.

The only sources I trust and utilise here are Plum (when he dons his Hygrometer cap) and Fox3 (I wish he’d come back). What Plum thinks personally about Thunturd and future generations is his own opinion. I don’t challenge those because everyone is entitled to state their personal view.

+ 1 absolutely

Our whole knicker-wetting is based on the false premise that we can keep things exactly as they are today.

In my view, we should accept change as inevitable, because it is.

The UK was under a mile of ice some time ago, when it's time comes again, under it will go again and inconvenient though it certainly will be, it'll be entirely natural- like it was the last time, and the time before that.

All this fretting about tiny changes is pathetic.

This place changes, and we cannot keep it the same.

Adapt.

Plum are we to expect episode 3? I hope so. Some of us are interested.

Anthropogenic emissions ? ! ? !

That conjures up an image and certainly an odour...!

The US Environmental Protection Agency, which was given wide latitude to dictate environmental policy, sometimes seemingly without regard to economic and social consequences. The Navigable Waters and Wetlands regulations imposed largely on farmers since 2009 seriously impacted farmers' ability to till their land lest they run amiss of regulations that said even a pond on your property is subject to the onerous oversight of government regulations. I personally know farmers who lost the production of some of their prime acreage due to a dip in the terrain on their farms that held a splash of water and was determined to be 'Navigable Waters and Wetlands and therefore off-limits for productive farming by EPA. I immediately saw it as BS. It's a rare farm with any acreage at all that doesn't have a wet spot. The regulations were designed to exert control by the government and take that control away from the farmer, the steward of his land. It's no wonder that farmers nation-wide in the US exuberantly support President Trump, in some major part because his administration clamped EPA's over-reach.

Ben, it's time for your afternoon nap.

I am with you UP thank you. Interesting.

Record rain and lots of flooding, power cuts and whatever around Sydney. Hoping OBL and dog are ok!

BenThere wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 10, 2020 2:50 pm

It's no wonder that farmers nation-wide in the US exuberantly support President Trump, in some major part because his administration clamped EPA's over-reach.

Or maybe because they get 20-25 $billion in subsidies each year? Why do they need subsidies anyway? Farmers in Australia and NZ don't get much, if any from their governments.

Subsidies? Isn't that a form of socialism?

llondel wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:51 am

Subsidies? Isn't that a form of socialism?

It depends if it is addressed to the domestic (it is) or the international market (it isn't).

Oh goody! Good job Slash doesn't watch UK TV. Greta has her own series coming on the Beeb.............................

Stand by for puns.

Boac wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 11, 2020 2:12 pm

...... Greta has her own series coming on the Beeb.............................

Stand by for puns.

Standby for a mutual admiration love-in with Sir David Attenburgh.