Global Warming News

Status
Not open for further replies.
   / Global Warming News #1,151  
Fallingbrock,
Speaking of grasping at straws - I'll bite

Could you show us where the US Constitution addresses the issue insider trading ? .....or freedom of speech, or much of anything that does not require interpretation which is and has always been debatable. Every amandment shows that things were missed or times have changed or both. Seems like if it was perfect it would tell us clearly what to do with monopolies. Where does it say that I can't have my own nuke?

Loren

And you left
out that it doesn't address the cost of hula-hoops!
1. It does address insider trading, check out the criminal code of the US Govt.
2. Freedom of speech,1st amendment to the Constitution
3. Yes, that's one of the strong points(IMHO)is that it can be
amended.
No it isn't perfect. The Framers were only men after all.
But it is a plain language document, that while some can and do twist and turn and find some word or phrase that is not to their liking and make an issue out of it.
4. You are correct in stating that the framers could not have envisioned linotype machines ,the internet,and other innovations in the field of speech So how about we register
everybody that uses the internet(Only to make sure that they use it "correctly")Now before you think that I am exaggerating ,When I was just in Italy, wanted to use my wifi phone to stay in touch, Sorry you have to have an Italian phone # or in the alternative, give them your passport.
5. You don't have your own nuke?
 
   / Global Warming News #1,152  
I don't think a lot of us that don't listen to Fox radio think government is going to solve the problem like all you "my profit is sacred guys" think. There's nothing wrong with making a profit, just how it's done and when enough is enough. They bought it as working forest land and that's how it should stay. Basically there are allegations with pretty good evidence here in Maine that the Plum Creek development corporation bought the Land Use Regulation Commitee (state government). It doesn't surprise me. There is not a real big difference between Government and big business. I hope most people are aware that it's a revolving door and there are a lot of people being bought and sold. Not everyone but enough. I don't want business to run rampant over the country but it sure seems like they are trying sometimes.

You and I are in total agreement with the revolving door that government has become(The politician gets caught in some scandal, and is punished with a job in the private sector/union job/ngo at a greater salary)but I think that is the fault of the voters. Either they don't vote or don't inform themselves as to the issues. (Not just reading some propaganda from whatever group they think represents them).
I will take issue with your statement regarding profits "When enough, is enough"
I would say whenever the person making the profit decides that it is enough.
And as to your statement "That they bought it as working forest land and thats how it should stay" I am sure there were members of the Seneca tribe said the same thing about the land that became New York city.(Actually I might agree with them :)
 
   / Global Warming News #1,153  
When the cost of coal vs alternative energies is discussed, these coal-related costs never seem to be part of the discussion:


CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. - More than a year after a Tennessee coal ash spill created one of the worst environmental disasters of its kind in U.S. history, the problem is seeping into several other states.

It began Dec. 22, 2008, when a retaining pond burst at a coal-burning power plant, spilling 5.4 million cubic yards of coal ash across 300 acres into the Emory River and an upscale shoreline community near Knoxville. It was enough ash to cover a square mile five feet deep.
While the Tennessee Valley Authority's cleanup has removed much of the ash from the river, the arsenic- and mercury-laced muck or its watery discharge has been moving by rail and truck through three states to at least six different sites. Some of it may end up as far away as Louisiana.
At every stop along the route, new environmental concerns pop up. The coal-ash muck is laden with heavy metals linked to cancer, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is considering declaring coal ash hazardous.

"I'm really concerned about my health," said retiree James Gibbs, 53, who lives near a west-central Alabama landfill that is taking the ash. "I want to plant a garden. I'm concerned about it getting in the soil." Gibbs said that since last summer there has been a "bad odor, like a natural gas odor."

After the spill, the TVA started sending as many as 17,000 rail carloads of ash almost 350 miles south to the landfill in Uniontown, Ala. At least 160 rail shipments have gone out from the cleanup site, said TVA spokeswoman Barbara Martocci.

Since the EPA approved that plan, unusually heavy rain including about 25 inches from November through February has forced the landfill to deal with up to 100,000 gallons a day of tainted water.

The landfill operators first sent it to wastewater treatment plants a common way that landfills deal with excess liquid in two nearby Alabama cities, Marion and Demopolis.

After what the EPA calls unrelated problems with ammonia in Marion, the landfill in January started using a commercial wastewater treatment plant in Mobile, Ala., 500 miles from the original spill.

A month ago, however, after a public outcry about discharging it into Mobile Bay, that company refused to take more of the landfill water.

A private treatment facility in Cartersville, Ga., also briefly took some of the befouled liquid in February, although Georgia environmental officials said Friday the company did not have a required state permit.

Hi-Tech Water Treatment Services stopped accepting wastewater from the Alabama landfill, manager Amalia Cox said, after becoming "concerned about payments and the publicity."

In a landfill management plan presented to Alabama environmental officials, tanker trucks could haul the dirty water to a non-hazardous waste disposal site in Louisiana and to a public wastewater plant in Mississippi. The plan also says there are "negotiations underway" on taking it to an unspecified facility in Georgia.

Neither the TVA, the companies hired to take the ash, nor environmental regulators want to discuss the disposal problems.

TVA's coal ash cleanup manager, Steve McCracken, and agency spokeswoman Martocci referred disposal questions to Knoxville, Tenn.-based contractor Phillips & Jordan.

So did the owners of the 977-acre landfill, Perry-Uniontown Ventures and Perry County Associates.

Phillips & Jordan, which operates the Alabama landfill with a subsidiary, Phill-Con Services, has a $95 million disposal contract with TVA.

The operators, who are in a financial dispute with the landfill owners, referred questions about the ash water to a Nashville public relations firm, McNeely, Pigott and Fox.

In a statement issued through the PR firm, Phill-Con Services president Eddie Dorsett said the landfill had received about 1.4 million tons of TVA's coal ash with another 1.6 million tons projected for delivery. Dorsett declined to answer questions about where the ash water is being taken for treatment or any problems it may have caused elsewhere.

In a letter to Alabama environmental officials, the landfill operators said they are trying to reduce the excess wastewater, partly by using lime and soil to solidify it. They also said TVA is making new efforts to "minimize moisture in the ash waste or to better bind up the moisture in the ash waste."

TVA's McCracken said he was unaware of any new effort to further dry the dredged ash.

"We are not planning to do anything different," McCracken said.

Federal and state environmental regulators have been only minimally involved with disposal of the landfill wastewater.

Even though coal ash contains toxic materials, it isn't considered hazardous waste.

EPA officials late last year delayed a decision whether to propose reclassifying coal ash as hazardous. Doing so would limit where it could be sent for disposal, possibly increasing the projected $1.2 billion cleanup cost for TVA ratepayers and affecting the ability to recycle the ash into cement and building materials.

The Alabama Department of Environmental Management, which is paid $1 for each ton of the coal ash, monitors the landfill and has found no rules violations involving its excess water, spokesman Scott Hughes said.

He said there are no restrictions on where the landfill sends the drained water, even to other states, as long as recipients have proper permits to treat it.

In Demopolis, about 20 miles from Uniontown, officials failed to renew their wastewater treatment operating permit but the wastewater plant has continued receiving the landfill's drained fluids while operating under a special state order.

Hughes said Thursday that new orders propose additional monitoring of the wastewater at the landfill and allow Demopolis to accept it. If arsenic and other pollutant concentration levels meet standards, he said, there is no limit to how much landfill wastewater that Demopolis can take. He said Demopolis is the only treatment plant in Alabama currently taking the landfill wastewater.

An attorney for the Demopolis wastewater system, Woodford "Woody" Dinning Jr., said the shipments are being tested on arrival.

David Ludder, Tallahassee, Fla.-based environmental attorney who represents Gibbs and other neighbors, said, "ADEM recovers a good bit of money off that coal ash. They get a fee for every ton of ash that gets disposed of there. EPA has a vested interest because they have to get the spill cleaned up in Tennessee and they can't do it without a place to put the ash."

Dave.

I want to also thank you for posting this article.
It is a perfect example of the Chicken Little environmentalist mentality.
Reread the article and tell me where one person was harmed.
The one sentence that jumps out is:"Even though coal ash contains toxic materials,it isn't considered hazardous waste."
Yea I guess the sky is falling.
 
   / Global Warming News #1,154  
Interesting article Dave - I knew a little about the problem but this article makes me wonder if things are being done as well as they should be. Imagine what will come in the future as we try to safely dispose of nuclear wastes. Looks like Yucca Mountain is not going to be the elusive answer.

Loren

Loren,
Imagine this, you flip the switch and nothing happens, the light doesn't come on, or the diswasher doesn't wash, or the electric blanket isnt all cuddly.
Firstly, the rest of the world somehow uses nuclear power without any disposal issues, why can't we?
If nuclear power is so dangerous, why don't the sailors working on nuclear powered ships glow?
If you are saying that nuclear power is not the answer, offer an alternative(one that will working on non sunny days, and on non windy days. EG one that is reliable and cheap) ???????
 
   / Global Warming News #1,155  
FallbrockFarmer,
All I stated was that nuclear waste disposal is a problem - some are very concerned about what we pass on to our children. What facts do you have that disposal is not an issue with other countries? Everything has its risks and I actually feel that its likely that nuclear power should be part of the solution. I'm sure that if you care to look you would find many potential serious and expensive problems that we are pretty much ignoring. I believe that much or all of the wastes from the 2 nuclear plants near Syracuse NY are still on site and that deterioration of their containment is a problem. During the discussion on its construction in the 70s it was made clear that a permanent offsite disposal area was in the works. Wonder how much closer it will be in the next 40 years. If they were forced to put away enough money to safely dispose of the waste (obviously would be an estimate), it would also make comparisons to other sources of power look better.
Concerning the TVA spill - the 5.4 million cubic yards of ash are not classified as toxic waste. Do you suggest that it should have been left there or that the company, because of its conscience, would make it right? Should someone (meaning government) watch how they contain material so that this isn't repeated or is it just best use for the land and the folks down stream just need to live with it. Its clear that proper disposal of this business byproduct would lower the company profit or make electricity more expensive (or make renewable sources more economical)
Surely you know that just because no one died yet has little value in evaluating the long term damages. Give a bunch of people significant levels of some of the heavy metals and I bet you'll be able to deny for a long time that they did any damage.
Remember on the "no lights when you flip the switch" comment - I have my own power system - I've had that happen - I fixed it - My wife and I, along with our 2 young sons chose to have just lanterns for light for the winter of 1983-83 - wood stove, outdoor water pump and outhouse. It was educational. Helped me to see that blurry line between want and need. One of the best winters of my life.
Note also that with the size of the power grid that at almost all times the wind is blowing at various points on the grid.
A little example of free use of your land -what if your neighbor could and did accept about a million cubic yards of the material to be piled about 30ft deep on her land. Should the organization of people that are your community(government) have any say?
As you talked about the constitution - the part that makes it perfect and that it can be amended - remember that when amendments are made that you disagree with or when courts rule different than you are sure is correct. Example - they have allowed our Social Security System and much government health care.

Loren
 
   / Global Warming News #1,156  
I want to also thank you for posting this article.
It is a perfect example of the Chicken Little environmentalist mentality.
Reread the article and tell me where one person was harmed.
The one sentence that jumps out is:"Even though coal ash contains toxic materials,it isn't considered hazardous waste."
Yea I guess the sky is falling.

Heck that's an easy one. The cleanup is costing about $1.2 billion. The rate payers are certainly harmed. And people who wish to demonstrate how cheap coal is compared to alternative energy, will never include this cost in their comparisons. That's delusional. You can buy a lot of solar panels for $1.2 billion.

The effects of carcinogens are not immediate, just because nobody is ill today doesn't mean they won't be 10 years from now. There is practical evidence that says the risk is there.

Even though coal ash is not now considered a hazmat, notice the next sentence says they delayed making that decision. In other words, as soon as TVA has this mess cleaned up, it could well be listed as a hazmat.

I'd rather be Chicken Little than Chicken With a Tumor. :) I would also like my kids to be Chicken Smart, not Chicken with Mercury Damaged Brains.

I guess you are promoting the healthy effects of drinking coal ash seepage. Drink Up! Enjoy!
Dave.
 
   / Global Warming News #1,157  
FallbrockFarmer,
All I stated was that nuclear waste disposal is a problem - some are very concerned about what we pass on to our children. What facts do you have that disposal is not an issue with other countries? Everything has its risks and I actually feel that its likely that nuclear power should be part of the solution. I'm sure that if you care to look you would find many potential serious and expensive problems that we are pretty much ignoring. I believe that much or all of the wastes from the 2 nuclear plants near Syracuse NY are still on site and that deterioration of their containment is a problem. During the discussion on its construction in the 70s it was made clear that a permanent offsite disposal area was in the works. Wonder how much closer it will be in the next 40 years. If they were forced to put away enough money to safely dispose of the waste (obviously would be an estimate), it would also make comparisons to other sources of power look better.
Concerning the TVA spill - the 5.4 million cubic yards of ash are not classified as toxic waste. Do you suggest that it should have been left there or that the company, because of its conscience, would make it right? Should someone (meaning government) watch how they contain material so that this isn't repeated or is it just best use for the land and the folks down stream just need to live with it. Its clear that proper disposal of this business byproduct would lower the company profit or make electricity more expensive (or make renewable sources more economical)
Surely you know that just because no one died yet has little value in evaluating the long term damages. Give a bunch of people significant levels of some of the heavy metals and I bet you'll be able to deny for a long time that they did any damage.
Remember on the "no lights when you flip the switch" comment - I have my own power system - I've had that happen - I fixed it - My wife and I, along with our 2 young sons chose to have just lanterns for light for the winter of 1983-83 - wood stove, outdoor water pump and outhouse. It was educational. Helped me to see that blurry line between want and need. One of the best winters of my life.
Note also that with the size of the power grid that at almost all times the wind is blowing at various points on the grid.
A little example of free use of your land -what if your neighbor could and did accept about a million cubic yards of the material to be piled about 30ft deep on her land. Should the organization of people that are your community(government) have any say?
As you talked about the constitution - the part that makes it perfect and that it can be amended - remember that when amendments are made that you disagree with or when courts rule different than you are sure is correct. Example - they have allowed our Social Security System and much government health care.

Loren

1. Why is it a problem? Because some people are "concerned"? see http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/factsheet/doeymp0411.shtml. As I stated the French seem to be doing just fine. You are correct, everything has its risks, including your woodstove, Check out the stats, and I think you find its much more dangerous, Healthwise and safety wise
So aren't you concerned about the safety and health of your family? As a matter of fact I will bet you dollars to donuts that more people have died/gotten asthma from woodstoves than have died/become sick from radiation poisoning.
Evidently the spill was being handled perfectly by the free market. One entity made a mistake, and then rectified it without any assistance from the government, and without cost to the taxpayers. So whats the problem with that?
Actually we had almost an exact situation like that here in Fallbrook
about three years ago. Developer dumped a huge pile of dirt on a plot that he owned. Neighbors were outraged.But it was resolved without the intervention of any govt entity. The neighbors wrote letters, local newspaper published them, any a group formed to litigate the matter. The developer removed the pile.
I never said that an owner of a piece of property can do whatever they want with it, if it affects adjoining properties, or the community as a whole.
Adjoining property owners also have rights, and if they can prove damages, then the issue can be resolved in that manner.
And one more time, I have never said that the Constitution is a "perfect" document. You keep saying that. I know that you are a charter member of "people for a perfect world", but sorry it doesn't exist.
What I have said is that our Constitution is the best system of governance ever created. If you have a better system, please let me know what it is.
 
   / Global Warming News #1,158  
FallbrockFarmer,
This is what you posted yesterday at 8:46
Good News!!!
The challenge to find the perfect amount of government has been found!!!!!












It's called the US Constitution.


I misrepresented you as saying it was a perfect document but must say your claim of that the perfect amount of government is established by our Constitution has the same issues. Now unless the Supreme Court can declare a Constitutional Amendment unconstitutional it seems that the level of federal, state or local government involvement in our lives may be quite fluid. Is there a problem with this logic? I don't know how far reaching the power of the Supreme Court is over the will of the citizens.

Concerning another hypothetical question about why the Federal (or State) Government wouldn't outlaw cigarettes - I would suggest that they learned a good lesson with the experiment with Prohibition of Alcohol. It would create more problems than it would solve, many would still consume, there would be a market for the outlaws. Now as with many things it is taxed in theory to help cover some of the costs to all taxpayers. (I'm not claiming that the level of taxing is fair and equitable considering our many n other habits)

Note also that many of the zoning and other land use laws our enacted by local government. Our township of 25,000 acres and 425 residents has its own zoning and land use laws. A very few motivated property owners can make a difference. (Our building codes are dictated by the State :( which is a pain in my ***) We can be more stringent but they set the minimum standards.

Short note on my wood stove vs nuclear power plant. I don't have a waiver that exempts me from damages in case my wood stove explodes and contaminates a few thousand square miles of New England.

Loren
 
Last edited:
   / Global Warming News #1,159  
Just a little nuclear wast info - why would the company producing this waste not have to factor in a fair and reasonable plan for long term safe management of nuclear wastes - it seems that they may be looking at a band aid for the first 100 years - what if technology doesn't find an affordable solution - looks worse to me that a national debt. I believe theses companies have limited liability.

Radioactive waste - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Long term management of waste
See also: Economics of new nuclear power plants#Waste disposal
The time frame in question when dealing with radioactive waste ranges from 10,000 to 1,000,000 years,[36] according to studies based on the effect of estimated radiation doses.[37] Researchers suggest that forecasts of health detriment for such periods should be examined critically.[38] Practical studies only consider up to 100 years as far as effective planning[39] and cost evaluations[40] are concerned. Long term behavior of radioactive wastes remains a subject for ongoing research projects.[41]

Illegal dumping
Main article: Radioactive waste dumping by the 'Ndrangheta
Authorities in Italy are investigating a 'Ndrangheta mafia clan accused of trafficking and illegally dumping nuclear waste. According to a turncoat, a manager of the Italy痴 state energy research agency Enea paid the clan to get rid of 600 drums of toxic and radioactive waste from Italy, Switzerland, France, Germany, and the US, with Somalia as the destination, where the waste was buried after buying off local politicians. Former employees of Enea are suspected of paying the criminals to take waste off their hands in the 1980s and 1990s. Shipments to Somalia continued into the 1990s, while the 'Ndrangheta clan also blew up shiploads of waste, including radioactive hospital waste, and sending them to the sea bed off the Calabrian coast.[61] According to the environmental group Legambiente, former members of the 'Ndrangheta have said that they were paid to sink ships with radioactive material for the last 20 years.[62]

I'm not sure the Europeans are much ahead of us on this issue.

Loren
 
   / Global Warming News #1,160  
Heck that's an easy one. The cleanup is costing about $1.2 billion. The rate payers are certainly harmed. And people who wish to demonstrate how cheap coal is compared to alternative energy, will never include this cost in their comparisons. That's delusional. You can buy a lot of solar panels for $1.2 billion.

The effects of carcinogens are not immediate, just because nobody is ill today doesn't mean they won't be 10 years from now. There is practical evidence that says the risk is there.

Even though coal ash is not now considered a hazmat, notice the next sentence says they delayed making that decision. In other words, as soon as TVA has this mess cleaned up, it could well be listed as a hazmat.

I'd rather be Chicken Little than Chicken With a Tumor. :) I would also like my kids to be Chicken Smart, not Chicken with Mercury Damaged Brains.

I guess you are promoting the healthy effects of drinking coal ash seepage. Drink Up! Enjoy!
Dave.

What carcinogens? The articles states that it is not considered toxic waste!
I just did the math. You can buy 24 million solar panels each putting out 80 watts, so not including installation costs, we can produce 1billion nine hundred million watts while the sun is shining. Lets see, the average home(not algores)consumes about 18000Kw per year, thats 180000
watts per year. That's 1106.66 houses per year, and those are ones without electric heat.
Now that sounds like a GREAT investment! Where can I send the check.
I have decided that your new career is not going to be in creative writing, you should be a politician!
And I can think of one who was very successful(for a while)who launched his political career using the very same scare tactics on people.
The Naval Weapons Facility, which is right next to Fallbrook, had a bunch of napalm, left over from the sixties that they needed to get rid of,This politician, who had just been elected to Congress, and had to make a name for him self, started a scare campaign,saying that people were going somehow going to be harmed, just by the train carrying it as it passed thru their towns, and what if some terrorists attacked the train, well you get the picture. After a he had gotten the headlines he wanted, the train went to Gary, Ind. where it was burnt for fuel without any problems.
The politician: Rod Blagojevich.
You and Loren can both be members of "People for a Perfect World"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

20'x12' Livestock Metal Shed (A53316)
20'x12' Livestock...
2019 MACK PINNACLE P164T DAY CAB ROAD TRACTOR (A51406)
2019 MACK PINNACLE...
2012 Ford F-350 Crew Cab 4x4 Pickup Truck (A53422)
2012 Ford F-350...
Sheets of 12' Tin (A53316)
Sheets of 12' Tin...
2019 Chevrolet Express 2500 Cargo Van (A55788)
2019 Chevrolet...
SAMSUNG SMART REFRIGERATOR (A54757)
SAMSUNG SMART...
 
Top