Global Warming scam reveals itself

a reply to: khnum

That doesn't change the fact that coal is not as abundant than wind, salt water, sun razes, so on and so forth. All the sources of energy that can help sustain life is there, and why do we need coal at all.

Besides many, many countries have seen the potential for alternative green energy sources, and are or have already adapted that, and as the technology improves in this area, more efficient means of energy devices can be created to have much lesser impact to the environment and the lives of all that inhabit this plant.

I say go green!

Peace

a reply to: khnum
What are these facts you write of? Do you really think wind turbines are worse than mining coal, oil, and natural gas and then burning said resources for energy?

Nothing I have seen seen refutes the evidence we have that humans are indeed causing climate change.


If you actually want to do you own research www.skepticalscience.com... is a good place to start.

a reply to: InnerPeace2012

Well when we do the US dollar will loose its status as it is oil dependent,I agree with you if there are viable cost effective alternatives then run with them,that being said though the only cost effective relatively clean energy is nuclear,new nuclear technologies such as thorium even promise no possibility of melt down,no long half life spent fuel and the opportunity to get rid of conventional waste.

As I was discussing though we are nowhere near the end of the rainbow in terms of making existing technologies leaner,greener and more efficient and these technologies produce power at half the cost of renewables,if you double power bills industry folds refer Spain.

a reply to: khnum
Go ahead and ignore the environmental impacts of coal mining too and while your are at it really pull the wool over your eyes and pretend that wind turbines are worse for the environment.
Deny ignorance!!!!!!

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

How would a massive solar panel farm send that energy back to the Earth?

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: khnum
What are these facts you write of? Do you really think wind turbines are worse than mining coal, oil, and natural gas and then burning said resources for energy?

Nothing I have seen seen refutes the evidence we have that humans are indeed causing climate change.


If you actually want to do you own research www.skepticalscience.com... is a good place to start.

Humans causing climate change?SUUUUUURRRRREEEEE they are!


It is a religion to Globull Warming alarmists!

a reply to: khnum

Thank you global warming, for revealing yourself for the farce that you are, now can we concentrate on something a little more believable?

a reply to: jrod

earths age 4 000 000 000 years
95 per cent confidence level
sample size required 9604 years

so website = epic fail

a reply to: jrod

Well I happened to live in Mackay a few years back and dealt regularly with Peak Downs and Saraji coal mines after open cut coal mining they employed environmental engineers to restore the environment back to original condition now an aboriginal may notice some subtle changes but I sure as heck couldn't so it can be done responsibly,this is not to say that in second or third world countries it is done responsibly.Wind turbines are making people sick worldwide look it up.

a reply to: khnum

So prepare for it when it happens, neither you or I can stop that from happening change is imminent, when a better way of doing things is in plain sight, than grab it, embrace it.

Cause all you doing for the sake of humanity is creating abundance by your action, and not let a hand full of people control what should be in abundance for all.

Peace.

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012
At least 'green' energy doesn't produce tonnes of black smoke as a result of burn coal into our nice blue skies...

I would rather prefer seeing energy in abundance through alternative means than a fast diminishing means of energy such as coal, oil etc, that can only lead to war at the end.

Peace

You know , I live not far from a large coal burning power installation. I have yet to see any "black smoke" coming from it in my 25 years living here. I see it from my front door every day. Always plums of white smoke that make you think of those white cottony clouds.

The years of black smoke ended in the 80s thank to the EPA . You do know they continuously monitor the exhaust of every single coal fired plant in the US , right ?

a reply to: InnerPeace2012
Have you seen the foundries in China that produce the materials used to make the alternative energy machines?
Have you seen the rivers in China polluted by mining the materials being used in those foundries?
How is it that it's okay in China but not here? Is it merely the fact that you don't have to see the results of the manufacturing process? Do you think that the Chinese have a magic wand that they wave over the ore fields to make wind turbines and solar panels pop up?
The raw materials must be mined, transported to refineries or foundries, and the "good bits" separated out from the ore. That can't be done using solar or wind power. Something must be done with the pollutants used to separate out the "good bits" and something must be done with the remaining materials after the value is extracted.
Twenty years is the limit of usefulness for these machines. Then the process must start over to bring the efficiency back to anything usable.
Take a good look at all the materials needed to manufacture these alternative energy machines and then take a good look at the energy needed just to get those materials from the earth and to your house, city or neighborhood. Every twenty years if all goes as planned.
Or---believe that the Chinese have that magic wand that allows them to manufacture these items without mining and its attendant costs to the planet.

You folks here a losing the point, it's not about the color of the smoke coal produces that matters. I stated 'black smoke' and stand corrected..thank you.

But why does it matter if coal is so far cleanly manufactured, and so as other more abundant free energy sources...

We can all agree for "less to zero impact on the environment", but what about an abundance of it for humanity. I think free, clean and abundant energy generation is the way to go..imho

Peace

a reply to: diggindirt

If your complaining about what factories in china are creating and polluting the environment so forth...than why don't you stop using all the things that have been manufactured in the factories that in one way or the other has some sort of impact in everything on this planet.

Quite frankly, to me it's either an abundance of energy or we are just gonna continue fighting over scarcity!

Peace

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: khnum
Go ahead and ignore the environmental impacts of coal mining too and while your are at it really pull the wool over your eyes and pretend that wind turbines are worse for the environment.
Deny ignorance!!!!!!

What about the environmental effects of mining the ore to make the alternative machines? What about the environmental effects of the manufacturing process of these machines?

To use coal as energy you must mine one area, process the coal in that same region, and ship the fuel to the customer. The coal is burned, scrubbed and the ash is recycled.
In order to capture the energy of the sun or the wind you must mine tons and tons of minerals in various parts of the world, as many as twenty different mines could be required just to manufacture photo cells that are only going to last for twenty years. Same with wind turbines. The rare earth magnets required for those babies aren't really "forever" at all it turns out and it takes tons of ore for just an ounce of magnet.
Here's a brief description of the process to obtain these materials.

The problem is that, though widely dispersed, the rare-earth elements occur in extremely low concentrations. Only a handful or so places exist—in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, India, South Africa and the United States—where deposits have been found rich enough to justify mining them. Even then, abundance in their host minerals is usually measured in concentrations of a percent or two. Because of their similar chemical properties, the rare earths tend to clump together in rocks, often along with radioactive thorium or uranium. That makes extracting, separating and refining them difficult. A lot of water, acid and electricity has to be used in the ion-exchange, fractional crystallisation and liquid-liquid extraction processes used to manufacture them. Handling the radioactive and chemical waste produced in the process adds significantly to the cost. Lax environmental standards, along with low wages, has allowed Chinese producers to undercut competitors abroad and corner the market.

www.economist.com...

Once these materials are mined, they must be refined---using lots of water and electricity. The refined product must then be transported to the factories---using more energy. The factory must then use a great deal of energy to convert the refined products into consumer products which then must be shipped to the consumer---using more energy.

It is mathematically impossible to recover the energy used to manufacture/transport those machines in their short lifetime.

I am not one to ignore the environmental effects of coal mining. I live in Kentucky. I've seen those strip mines and mountaintop removal firsthand. I've also seen the industry undergo tremendous changes in my lifetime. But I'm also not one to turn a blind eye to things happening to other people in other parts of the world so I can have "sustainable" energy and feel good about myself.
The guy who explained this scam to me was a guy with degrees in math and physics. He had been tasked by a major university to look into the efficiency of going solar in the mid-80s. He was astounded when he totaled up the figures and realized this whole thing was actually less efficient than locally supplied energy and resulted in far more environmental damage.
There are multitudes of ways to reduce energy usage and to produce energy on a local scale. But those ways don't make a lot of money for the corporate-owned governments so the corporate-owned media don't like to promote them.

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012
At least 'green' energy doesn't produce tonnes of black smoke as a result of burn coal into our nice blue skies...

I would rather prefer seeing energy in abundance through alternative means than a fast diminishing means of energy such as coal, oil etc, that can only lead to war at the end.

Peace

I have news...even when Lockheed gets the FUSION reactor operating and energy becomes abundant there will still be wars over it. For control of it.

a reply to: InnerPeace2012
I have, to the best of my ability, stopped buying Chinese products. Yes, my computer has components manufactured in China but it was made in the USA. I make a very conscious effort to find out the country of origin for each product I purchase. I make a conscious effort to let merchants know that I wish to buy US-made products. I won't put my stamp of approval on their practices by buying their products.
There's not a lot I can do to influence their government in its treatment of their people but I don't have to send them any of my money.
Our government has decided it is in our best interest to turn a blind eye to the massive human rights violations and the environmental damages on which this Chinese economy is based. We needed their money.

originally posted by: yuppa
I have news...even when Lockheed gets the FUSION reactor operating and energy becomes abundant there will still be wars over it. For control of it.

There are many many other alternative free energy sources other than the FUSION Reactor. At least I foresee, lesser wars and ultimately a peaceful world.

Take this analogy for example, why should someone attack you if his already got more than enough of what you already have. Simply pointless to fight over something that is free and abundant.

Those who want to control it, will surely have a hard time trying to control what free energy mother nature has for us in abundance. Just matter of harnessing it.

Peace

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: InnerPeace2012
I have, to the best of my ability, stopped buying Chinese products.

China may by far be the worst casein your books but there are many other nations who equally pollute nature with toxins.

Apart from the wind turbine sickness, you do know that there is a mountain of alternative safer energy generation methods or devices out there right? That are safer and cleaner in my opinion. Why are such energy source not public news? Because news about free energy is not important, so they say, cause that's what the so called elites don't want the public to see. Any attention on free energy is a potential treat to oil companies, if the public interest picks on.

Good news is, free energy is already gaining that much needed momentum will one day free ourselves from relying too much on changing oil prices and what have you.

Peace

a reply to: khnum

Its called wind turbine syndrome its caused by infrasound frequencies or vibrations

Which is, of course, something that doesn't actually exist except in the fevered imagination of windmill opponents.

Wind Turbine Syndrome

Wind turbine syndrome (WTS) is an alleged condition suffered by people living close to wind turbines. It was invented by Dr. Nina Pierpont in 2009 as propaganda against what a handful of anti-wind energy advocates refer to as "Big Wind." It has zero evidence supporting it, and its main proponents are people who don't want tall metal structures visible from their house and the fossil fuel industry through front organisations.

And then there is the Nocebo Effect

The placebo effect has a somewhat less well-known, slightly evil cousin; the nocebo effect. This occurs when an individual's expectation of negative effects generates or aggravates those effects, much like a hypochondriac developing symptoms because he or she is actively watching for something to go wrong with their health. This is particularly important when looking at side-effects of drugs, as a placebo pill can generate the negative side-effects associated with drugs, and in some cases, specific side-effects can be increased by mentioning them prominently or adding an extra layer of suggestion, such as complex consent forms.

For ethical reasons the nocebo effect has not been well studied directly, but it is probably behind the witch doctor's ability to cause illness in those people he curses. It has also been used to explain unusual phenomenon like SUNDS (Sudden Unexpected Nocturnal Death Syndrome) in immigrants from the Hmong people of Laos; belief in angry supernatural forces combined with the phenomenon of sleep paralysis to convince sufferers that they were under attack, leading to extremely high levels of stress which could trigger dormant heart defects. As a side note, these same deaths were what inspired film director Wes Craven to create the fictional dream-using serial killer Freddy Krueger.