July 2016 Was The Hottest Month Ever Recorded

originally posted by: TomLawless
I don't usually agree with your positions, but if you'd just admit that the current solutions provided by the very same people that caused the problem are actually part of the problem, you might get more of the civil discourse I think you're trying to foster.

EVERYONE is part of the problem. We all contribute to it in some way. We can sit and complain about how the elite set the system up, but we are sitting comfortably and resisting it. Unfortunately there will be resistance to this. People don't like to change their ways. Plus there are always those people who get offended when you spell the truth out to them.

a reply to: seagull

You do know that there are more locations in the world than just your city right?

originally posted by: Greven
Years and years of bitching about the carbon tax, and I have yet to see it around anywhere.

It's a stupid idea, like a lot of other economic thought, but it sure holds makes for a boogeyman.

An example of Carbon tax in UK

Britain’s diesel drivers ‘should pay up to £800 more in road tax’

Carbon taxes don't exist though right....

Instead of governments giving people the stick to change their behaviour, why not offer carrot for a change ? People will feel more obliged to change their behaviour if they're rewarded rather than punished

a reply to: Discotech

Carrots cost money; taxes bring in money.

Just more proof that our leaders couldn't care less about science, the ecology, or people. It's all about the dollars.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No!? Really?

Well gosh all mighty, I'm certainly glad you're here to set me straight...

Does not change the fact that where I live July hasn't been the hottest ever, not even close.

No where did I say that other places were having, or had rather, hotter, even record hot, months of July.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

He's actually wrong. Solar investment is now outpacing coal. Money goes where the future is and solar has become viable. It'll all be solar soon enough and you'll have a nice battery storage system in your basement. I'm really certain of it. The car will be charged by it and public transportation will become more of a standard. We've only just begun to develop our infrastructure. People think way too small. The earth isn't going anywhere and we'll figure this thing out or we all die.

a reply to: seagull

Fantastic. Your point is irrelevant to what I'm trying to say.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I would like to see the focus on visible air pollution in China and the use of alternative energy. (If it won't work in your area, fine; here, we've been pursuing wind and solar aggressively, getting out of nuclear. Nice to be less energy dependent and less energy $ each month.) Nonetheless, I knew something was wrong when the 100+ deg (way over 100) days started in June and wouldn't let up. July was a record of 100+ days. Now, another week like that.

Because of the drought (this one wet year won't do much), there are ridge after ridge of dead trees in the Sierras. Harvested dead trees bring in only about 40% of healthy trees, plus the mills can't handle all of them as is (let alone if they cut every one), so it affects the logging economy.

Right now I've got smoke overhead from fires on the coast and in the Sierras (and that doesn't include the destructive fire down south). What used to be small fires of hundreds of acres are now thousands of acres. A spark starts a fire, which starts to eat from plate after plate of dry vegetation and dead trees.

Wildfires in West have gotten bigger, more frequent and longer since the 1980s

Just as Miami has local flooding concerns, concerns here are the massive wildfires. Cost of destroyed homes, businesses, towns. Health costs and poorer health to people with breathing issues. Increasing costs to fight wildfires. Down south, major roadways were cut off; detours were horrible for semis, traffic horrible for locals.

I'm at the end of my life. I've had a good run. Good luck to all you young people.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's an observation that you seemingly don't like. That's all. Does nothing to detract from your overall point, or shouldn't anyway.

a reply to: desert

It's drier than it's been in many years, that much is certain. Hopefully this wetter spring and somewhat wetter summer signals a lifting of that trend.

a reply to: seagull

Thanks It could be these shifts in weather trends are going to be with us for awhile--cooler some places, hotter others, dryer, wetter..... we'll have to adjust to live. I know there are young people doing some awesome work that will help the environment. They see some amazing possibilities. We just don't always hear about them.

I wonder this, it says we started tracking global temps in 1880. How exactly did we calculate the global mean temperature in the 1880's?

originally posted by: BrokedownChevy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

He's actually wrong. Solar investment is now outpacing coal. Money goes where the future is and solar has become viable. It'll all be solar soon enough and you'll have a nice battery storage system in your basement. I'm really certain of it. The car will be charged by it and public transportation will become more of a standard. We've only just begun to develop our infrastructure. People think way too small. The earth isn't going anywhere and we'll figure this thing out or we all die.

One event from a major Volcano as History shows happens for certain leaves us dead in the water. I have solar panels and have considered this. We need Nuclear power. I prefer the "Inherently Safe Reactors" such as Thorium. Imaginary Carbon problem solved and doom porn can seek the next matter. Trees will solve the issue, not taxing oil and driving the cost of doing business up. People have to suffer the inflation of goods to these insufferable idiots saying the Earth is doomed due to man made Climate change. No we who are so inclined to do so, will be doomed for being ignorant lemmings who follow blindly.

July was very hot in this part of Alaska. We exceeded 80 degrees Fahrenheit several times.

I wonder how this winter will be?

originally posted by: Discotech

originally posted by: Greven
Years and years of bitching about the carbon tax, and I have yet to see it around anywhere.

It's a stupid idea, like a lot of other economic thought, but it sure holds makes for a boogeyman.

An example of Carbon tax in UK

Britain’s diesel drivers ‘should pay up to £800 more in road tax’

Carbon taxes don't exist though right....

Instead of governments giving people the stick to change their behaviour, why not offer carrot for a change ? People will feel more obliged to change their behaviour if they're rewarded rather than punished

Of course they exist - in some countries that have taken efforts to combat climate change.

Meanwhile, I live in the U.S.

It looks like that particular tax doesn't come into effect below a certain threshold for emissions. There are a lot of vehicles that qualify for the low annual rates, too - I pay more than that annually for my tag.

However, it looks like that is changing next year. There will be a larger (essentially doubled) first-year tax, then the exact same values across the board afterwards. Anything over 0 emissions has to pay £140/yr. Anything over £40,000 has to pay an additional £312/yr for 5 years. Cheap 0 emissions vehicles are the only ones that escape this change.

It won't be much of a carbon tax come next year. Or ever, really - they have treated motorcycles differently the whole time it's been in effect. Though... the change next year will benefit motorcycles.

a reply to: Greven

One of us is confused. A page back you said

Years and years of bitching about the carbon tax, and I have yet to see it around anywhere.

And now you say

Of course they exist - in some countries that have taken efforts to combat climate change.

I think I should point something out to you concerning this extant/non-extant tax: emissions analysis can detect nitrates, sulfide, sulfates, and roughly carbon monoxide levels, but they do not detect carbon dioxide levels. The only quasi-accurate method of detecting carbon dioxide is spectral analysis. The carbon dioxide emissions are calculated based on fuel consumption alone. Carbon burned in an excess of oxygen always, always, always forms carbon dioxide.

That's what most don't seem to get: oil, coal, wood, natural gas, and almost anything else burnable that we have in good supply is made primarily of carbon. When burned in air, it will produce carbon dioxide. That covers easily 90% of the total energy sources we have available. The only other options are hydro (clean, but we're running out of places to dam), nuclear (clean, but has safety and waste product issues), wind (we're starting to run low on good wind farm locations too, and they're expensive), and solar (multiple energy density/conversion issues and the most expensive of all). We are literally talking about a tax on living. No more worries about better efficiency, because better efficiency means more efficient carbon dioxide production.

And yes, the carbon tax does exist. Other countries have it and are going broke. Our country will probably get it eventually and we'll join them in the poverty line. And we'll still hear how we're breathing too much and thereby contributing to Global Warming.

And somebody will suggest we make breathing illegal. Just watch.

TheRedneck

a reply to: GoShredAK

Good Lord! 80deg! I was a visitor in Alaska 20 years ago. They were having a "heat wave" one day, when the high temp was going to be 70deg. You could tell the tourists from the locals. We all had our jackets, jeans, and boots with socks on, while the locals walked around town in sleeveless t-shirts, shorts, and flipflops.... which I assumed they had hidden away in some closet after a trip to Hawaii.

ETA and it was a July day

originally posted by: TheRedneck
One of us is confused. A page back you said

I think I should point something out to you concerning this extant/non-extant tax: emissions analysis can detect nitrates, sulfide, sulfates, and roughly carbon monoxide levels, but they do not detect carbon dioxide levels. The only quasi-accurate method of detecting carbon dioxide is spectral analysis. The carbon dioxide emissions are calculated based on fuel consumption alone. Carbon burned in an excess of oxygen always, always, always forms carbon dioxide.

That's what most don't seem to get: oil, coal, wood, natural gas, and almost anything else burnable that we have in good supply is made primarily of carbon. When burned in air, it will produce carbon dioxide. That covers easily 90% of the total energy sources we have available. The only other options are hydro (clean, but we're running out of places to dam), nuclear (clean, but has safety and waste product issues), wind (we're starting to run low on good wind farm locations too, and they're expensive), and solar (multiple energy density/conversion issues and the most expensive of all). We are literally talking about a tax on living. No more worries about better efficiency, because better efficiency means more efficient carbon dioxide production.

And yes, the carbon tax does exist. Other countries have it and are going broke. Our country will probably get it eventually and we'll join them in the poverty line. And we'll still hear how we're breathing too much and thereby contributing to Global Warming.

And somebody will suggest we make breathing illegal. Just watch.

I'm not sure what your confusion is... ATS tends to be pretty U.S.-centric. This is the first I've heard of something vaguely carbon tax-inspired since Australia repealed theirs. It has a lot of shortcomings, as I outlined in my response, and will drift quite a bit further from being like a carbon tax with next year's changes.

Yeah, that's partly why oxygen levels are decreasing - that and the fact that photosynthesis doesn't turn CO2 into O2:


Sweet, can you do us the favor of listing these carbon taxes, as you claim they exist? We've got one quasi-example with this U.K vehicle tax. Any others?

e: oh and remember that I think it's a dumb idea, so I don't really get where you're coming from.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's an observation that you seemingly don't like. That's all. Does nothing to detract from your overall point, or shouldn't anyway.

My opinion on your observation is also irrelevant, because your point is irrelevant. If I start a thread talking about global climate, why do you think your observation on local weather patterns would be relevant to the thread?

a reply to: Vector99

Ship's logs most probably, and a small number of weather stations. Europe and continental U.S. over land was well represented.

The resolution and fidelity over the Southern Hemisphere was poorer in the earlier days.