goldbrick
Posts: 958
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2017 3:33 pm
Delivery Date: 01 Aug 2017
Leaf Number: 311806
Location: Boulder, CO

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:40 pm

As will the folks in the SouthEast after the next few killer hurricanes wipe out their version of a comfortable life.

Oilpan4
Posts: 1731
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:03 pm

Ok so if Atlantic hurricanes are proof of climate change getting worse then why have about 2/3 of major hurricanes hit in the 45 years between 1885 and 1930 and about 1/3 made land fall between 1930 and now, which is 70 years?
If it was getting worse it should be the other way around. Right?
Just to warn you this is a trap, I have asked this question all over the Internet for the last 8 years, gotten a lot of stupid answers and you have about 0 chance of giving an original answer.
"THE ABOVE POST CONTAINS MISLEADING AND INACCURATE INFORMATION. PLEASE CONSIDER IT OPINION, NOT FACT". -someone who I offended and is unable to produce the facts in question.

smkettner
Posts: 7501
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:13 pm
Delivery Date: 26 Feb 2014
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:06 pm

Oilpan4 wrote:
Fri Aug 21, 2020 7:10 pm
How about all that climate saving alternative energy in California, looks like it's working out well for them. I wonder how long the power has to be turned off for all climate change support to drop to 0. I guess we'll find out. I bet its only a few hours.
I understand the outages started when a natural gas plant went off line last Friday. Maybe it is the FF that is unreliable?
OK that and the CAISO called for load reduction with about 9% reserve when the expected standard is closer to 3.5%. Poor management?

Then Newsom is outspoken about these issues and the reluctance to serve the customer even with increased costs. The next day but some miracle the CAISO website is showing and extra 4,000 MW of supply reflecting the change to service over profit.

The sooner we can oust the old cronies of FF the better is my opinion. Yes CA has a long way to go but I believe we are on the right path.
1 bar lost at 21,451 miles, 16 months.
2 bar lost at 35,339 miles, 25 months.
LEAF traded at 45,400 miles for a RAV4-EV
RAV4 traded in for I-Pace Dec 2018

smkettner
Posts: 7501
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:13 pm
Delivery Date: 26 Feb 2014
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:10 pm

Oilpan4 wrote:
Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:03 pm
Ok so if Atlantic hurricanes are proof of climate change getting worse then why have about 2/3 of major hurricanes hit in the 45 years between 1885 and 1930 and about 1/3 made land fall between 1930 and now, which is 70 years?
If it was getting worse it should be the other way around. Right?
Just to warn you this is a trap, I have asked this question all over the Internet for the last 8 years, gotten a lot of stupid answers and you have about 0 chance of giving an original answer.
Is that weighted for strength? Certainly it gets more attention now as the cost is higher due to exponential increase in improvements getting destroyed.
1 bar lost at 21,451 miles, 16 months.
2 bar lost at 35,339 miles, 25 months.
LEAF traded at 45,400 miles for a RAV4-EV
RAV4 traded in for I-Pace Dec 2018

WetEV
Posts: 4000
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:54 am

Oilpan4 wrote:
Fri Aug 21, 2020 8:17 pm
A Russian troll with standards.
Get it right.
Not a Sith Troll?
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

WetEV
Posts: 4000
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:51 am

Oilpan4 wrote:
Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:03 pm
Ok so if Atlantic hurricanes are proof of climate change getting worse then why have about 2/3 of major hurricanes hit in the 45 years between 1885 and 1930 and about 1/3 made land fall between 1930 and now, which is 70 years?
If it was getting worse it should be the other way around. Right?
Just to warn you this is a trap, I have asked this question all over the Internet for the last 8 years, gotten a lot of stupid answers and you have about 0 chance of giving an original answer.
https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutgloss.shtml
Major Hurricane:
A hurricane that is classified as Category 3 or higher.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200814073 ... canes.html

I count 27 between 1885 and 49 between 1930 and now. Sure, slightly less than twice, but this year isn't over. Feel free to check my count.

So how about you document your claim?
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

User avatar
Nubo
Posts: 5776
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:01 am
Delivery Date: 31 Oct 2014
Location: Vallejo, CA

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Sat Aug 22, 2020 12:12 pm

Oilpan4 wrote:
Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:03 pm
Ok so if Atlantic hurricanes are proof of climate change getting worse then why have about 2/3 of major hurricanes hit in the 45 years between 1885 and 1930 and about 1/3 made land fall between 1930 and now, which is 70 years?
If it was getting worse it should be the other way around. Right?
Just to warn you this is a trap, I have asked this question all over the Internet for the last 8 years, gotten a lot of stupid answers and you have about 0 chance of giving an original answer.
I'd begin by questioning your data. What is your criteria for "making landfall" and why do you think that is relevant to climate change vs. the number and intensity of storms themselves? Image
I noticed you're still working with polymers.

WetEV
Posts: 4000
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Sat Aug 22, 2020 2:46 pm

Nubo wrote: I'd begin by questioning your data.
And I should also question the interval.

Why 1885 to 1930 compared with 1931 to 2020? Is there something special about those years?

Is that a cherry I see being picked?
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

WetEV
Posts: 4000
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Sat Aug 22, 2020 8:18 pm

And I should question the threshold. Why cat 3 and above? A cherry of a choice, eh?

Cat 5 hurricanes landfalling in the USA are a total of 4. None before 1935, the half way point in the record.

1935, 1969, 1992, 2018
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

Oilpan4
Posts: 1731
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: Costs of Climate Change Denial Start to Roll In

Thu Aug 27, 2020 10:25 am

smkettner wrote:
Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:06 pm
Oilpan4 wrote:
Fri Aug 21, 2020 7:10 pm
How about all that climate saving alternative energy in California, looks like it's working out well for them. I wonder how long the power has to be turned off for all climate change support to drop to 0. I guess we'll find out. I bet its only a few hours.
I understand the outages started when a natural gas plant went off line last Friday. Maybe it is the FF that is unreliable?
OK that and the CAISO called for load reduction with about 9% reserve when the expected standard is closer to 3.5%. Poor management?

Then Newsom is outspoken about these issues and the reluctance to serve the customer even with increased costs. The next day but some miracle the CAISO website is showing and extra 4,000 MW of supply reflecting the change to service over profit.

The sooner we can oust the old cronies of FF the better is my opinion. Yes CA has a long way to go but I believe we are on the right path.
A natural gas plant dropping out occasionally is not expected. But they cut power to so many people it could be from just 1 natural gas plant going off line.

I think new mexico is on the right path. The cheapest or 2nd cheapest electricity in the nation. Have a lot of wind power installed, going to close the last coal plant in the state by 2024. All the new demand is being met with wind, ect, ect, ect.
We're not going to virtue signal by sitting in the dark and sweating our asses off.

For me I'm not going to have a power bill about 8 to 10 months of the year on account of the solar panels.
"THE ABOVE POST CONTAINS MISLEADING AND INACCURATE INFORMATION. PLEASE CONSIDER IT OPINION, NOT FACT". -someone who I offended and is unable to produce the facts in question.

Return to “Environmental Issues”