Are hurricanes more damaging, or is there just more to damage?

The language used to deny Global Warming is eerily reminicent of the language used by Tobacco companies to deny health problems with their products.

CFB and I have said the same thing before, hey, we aren't sure exactly what's going on, but don't you think stepping back from the coal fired incinerator for a minute to find out what that black stuff you are coughing up is might be a good idea? Forget global warming, how about the rise in asma in children, etc?

Oh, someone here said something about who cares if America, the Asain Tigers and Europe reduce emissions, they aren't the majority of the population.

The average American consumes something along the lines of 250 times the energy the average African consumes. Of the ~80 million barrels of oil used a day, North America, Japan and China, and the EU use almost all of that.

United States: 20 million barrels a day

Nigeria (largest African country) : 310 thousand a day

Even Inda only uses about a million, and they have three times the population of the U.S. - that means 1/60th the per capita use!

So, o.k., developing countries are growing, and may start taking on first world habits. Isn't that all the more reason for use to research and develop a better way? Before the $%#& really hits the fan?

But those who will hear me already agree, those that don't will just glaze over this. :-\
 
What's the point in worrying about oil consumption? We're about to hit peak oil any day now, right? Oil will soon be, what, $100, $200/bbl? Nobody will use the stuff anymore. ;)

Oh, by the way, the black stuff the coal plant worker is coughing up probably ain't greenhouse gasses. Maybe particulate matter.
 
Laurence said:
It was a metaphor, but thanks for the clarification! ::)
Click to expand...

I just wanted to be clear we're discussing carbon dioxide (greenhouse gasses) and their relationship to climate change. I've just never heard of CO2 making anyone cough or increasing asthma occurrence rates. Maybe ground level ozone, NoX, particulate matter, VOC's, or a slew of other irritants. CO also has bad effects, but I don't think it causes asthma.

It is interesting to note that a major (maybe even predominant some say) source of VOC and PM air pollution are naturally occuring. Pine trees in many areas produce much more VOCs than man does. Similarly, naturally occuring suspended particulate matter occurs when dust/dirt is entrained in the air by wind. A lot of the earth is covered in dust/dirt.
 
I thought we were discussing hurricanes and I took part in a hijack of a thread!

But it will take some more fiddling (while Rome's oil burns) before we'll do anything. And if we do act in time, I'll shake my head as everyone claims they were pro environment the whole time. Just like they were all for the civil rights movement, women's right to vote, etc. etc. In fact, isn't it funny you can't find anybody who admits to being a pro-segragationist back in the day? Not unless they were on the record like Strom Thurmun or Jesse Helms...
 
Laurence said:
In fact, isn't it funny you can't find anybody who admits to being a pro-segragationist back in the day? Not unless they were on the record like Strom Thurmun or Jesse Helms...
Click to expand...

[threadjack] You haven't met my two grandfathers... one is deceased, but the other will gladly tell you what you want to hear re: how much of a segregationist he is/was. :-\

There is a small minority of minorities (no pun intended) today who favor segregation in a number of institutions, education being one of them. They will readily admit it because they think it works better.
 
justin said:
There is a small minority of minorities (no pun intended) today who favor segregation in a number of institutions, education being one of them.  They will readily admit it because they think it works better. 
Click to expand...
You mean like single-gender schools?
 
Nords said:
You mean like single-gender schools?
Click to expand...

I originally meant single race/ethnicity schools, but yes, single gender schools, too.
 
Back to the original hijack (I think, maybe it was a hijack off of a hijack), yes CO2 on its own may or may not present a problem. A fair percentage of the things that produce CO2 also throw off a lot of other fairly bad stuff, and that other fairly bad stuff may in fact cause breathing ailments, such as asthma.

Last stats I saw, over the last 25 years the percentage of americans with asthma rose 75% and the percentage of preschoolers with asthma rose 160%.

I'm thinking that this has something to do with increased pollutants. But then again, I didnt go to medical school, i'm not a scientist and i'm not even an economist.

Seems to me though that arguing the merits (or lack thereof) of piecemeal bits of data isnt relevant, although its a great way to rathole a discussion until you can make it someone elses problem. Heck, you can rathole a whole presidential campaign for an entire year just by talking about someones wartime medals from 30 years ago.

Do a prairie dog on this.

Pollution Bad.
 
More gasoline on the fire:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13591551/

It talks about how the big three autos produce more pollution than the biggest power plant, but that's a gimmick statistic. What I thought interesting is their cars produce 75% of the car emmissions in the U.S. but account for less than half the cars overall. This tidbit was also enlightening:

"With just 5 percent of the world’s population, the United States has 30 percent of the world’s automobiles and produces 45 percent of the world’s automotive carbon dioxide emissions, the report said. U.S. cars are driven more and burn more fuel per mile than the international average."
 
Cars have been getting cleaner for decades. Except for CO2 (which is an unavoidable byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion), the other pollutants have been gradually declining. Better fuels, better sensors, more perfect combustion and catalytic converters all lead to drastically lower levels of non-CO2 pollution, even though the population has increased and the total number of vehicle-miles traveled has increased.

If you define "air pollution" as CO2 emissions, then yes, cars are a big source of pollution.

For localized air quality concerns (what causes bad health) CO2 just isn't a concern.
 
Are you proposing CO2 isn't a problem?

Cars may be doing a little better per gallon of gas, but gas mileage has actually decreased, principally because people want the same thing Capt. Kirk wants, "More Power, Scotty!". The Catalytic converter was a big step forward, but that was decades ago.
 
Laurence said:
Are you proposing CO2 isn't a problem?

Cars may be doing a little better per gallon of gas, but gas mileage has actually decreased, principally because people want the same thing Capt. Kirk wants, "More Power, Scotty!". The Catalytic converter was a big step forward, but that was decades ago.
Click to expand...

I never said CO2 emissions weren't an issue. They're just a different issue from the real pollutants and irritants that vehicles and industry emit that have rather immediate effects on those near the pollution sources and downwind. Different strategies exist to deal with the different types of pollution. CO2 is important on a macro scale and the other pollutants are important on a much smaller localized scale. Plus the non-CO2 pollutants have much more immediate effects than CO2 emissions.

Re: catalytic converters - the technology continues to advance and provide cleaner exhaust. Other technologies continue to advance and provide cleaner exhaust. And yes, the major reductions on NEW cars occured a while ago, but there are still old cars on the road today. Every year the US vehicle fleet gets cleaner and cleaner because the cars get more and more recent. This trend will continue for a decade or two into the future even if we stop all pollution control technological advances today and keep the status quo re: allowable emissions. It's amazing to see the reduction in pollution since the 1970's due to the new regulations implemented starting around that time.
 
Laurence said:
Cars may be doing a little better per gallon of gas, but gas mileage has actually decreased, principally because people want the same thing Capt. Kirk wants, "More Power, Scotty!".  The Catalytic converter was a big step forward, but that was decades ago. 
Click to expand...

Do you have a crediable link to support this statement. It seems to me to be just the opposite. There are many new cars using v-6's with as much power as v-8 a few years ago, and with better mileage. Many of the old reliable's (5.8's, 5.7's, 5.0's, 4.9's etc.) have been phased out, because they used too much gas, but they were war horses and could run forever.
 
I could probably find one, but I know its a true statement. Sure there are a lot of better mileage vehicles, but the float towards larger and larger trucks and SUV's has more than offset better economy in some vehicles. Look around you in traffic for validation.
 
Cute Fuzzy Bunny said:
the float towards larger and larger trucks and SUV's has more than offset better economy in some vehicles.  Look around you in traffic for validation.
Click to expand...

or you can look to any parking lot where my little car's parked. i have to take up two spots to assure safe exist. if i don't, i come out to the car and two monster trucks are a foot away on either side of me and i can't see a thing backing out.

if all you soccer mom's are gonna drive such big cars you ought to at least jack them up a few feet so i can at least see under'm.

oh, and to keep within the thread it's even worse just before a hurricane when all the soccer moms are panic shopping.
 
lets-retire said:
Do you have a crediable link to support this statement. It seems to me to be just the opposite. There are many new cars using v-6's with as much power as v-8 a few years ago, and with better mileage. Many of the old reliable's (5.8's, 5.7's, 5.0's, 4.9's etc.) have been phased out, because they used too much gas, but they were war horses and could run forever.
Click to expand...

Eridanus answered for me. But I hear that kind of talk from all my co-workers who drive expiditions. "My car has the latest technology! One time when I was driving downhill with the engine off I got 20 MPG!"

:p
 
eridanus--Those are six year old stats. Does anybody have anything newer. The increase in the number of hybrids surely has affected the CAFE. There have also been other increases in MPG in other engines since then. If I replace my vehicle with a similar one with a v-8, rather than the six I currently have, I'd get a little better MPG. When I replaced the DW's car with her SUV in 2001 she received batter MPG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Home insurance in Florida is out of control!
Replies
17
Views
1K
Alan
Alan
athena53
Why Your Auto Insurance Premiums are Going Up
2
Replies
48
Views
4K
livingalmostlarge
L
S
Reconciling micro observations with macro trends? (is the economy really doing well?)
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Koolau
Koolau
M
Real Estate in 2024?
Replies
9
Views
751
DrRoy
DrRoy
athena53
Potential Property Tax Freeze- WWYD?
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
DrRoy
DrRoy

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom