Posted on 06/27/2006 7:01:25 AM PDT by rdax
(Washington, DC) The Environmental Protection Agency is seeking to classify water vapor as a pollutant, due to its central role in global warming. Because water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, accounting for at least 90% of the Earth's natural greenhouse effect, its emission during many human activities, such as the burning of fuels, is coming under increasing scrutiny by federal regulators. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at ecoenquirer.com ...
Lew Moninsky was a pretty good clue.
I think this is an enviornmental version of The Onion. Check out their website.
So much for hydrogen fuel....LOL
Without air there could be no global climate change either. Air must be a pollutant then.
You're right!!! Oh, woe is we!!!
LOL!
That name sort of rang a bell, but I brushed over it while trying to figure out what it really was.
A moron alert for the EPA would of been nice! :>)!
Glad to see they are getting around to addressing the Dihydrogen Monixide threat.
Their beloved hydrogen vehicle will then become a mega- polluter. Oxidized hydrogen is H2O.
Let's talk about Global Warming some more. Now that we have acknowledged the most important and prevalent greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming is water vapor (90% of all greenhouse gasses), we need to stop it? BTW, what percent of the remaining 10% is carbon dioxide? Of the percentage that is left that is carbon dioxide, what percent of that is manmade Vs. naturally occurring in nature? It gets pretty infinitesimal.
1.) How long have humans been accurately tracking global climate and temperature? About 100 years? What did we find? The global temperature has increased by 1 degree in that time. It obviously is a result of man.
2.) For millions of years the earth has gone through heating and cooling cycles, some pretty dramatic cycles over the course of 10 to 50 years. But at this time in history, following an ice age of 11,000 years ago, it is now a man made heating of our planet.
3.) The polar ice caps on Mars have been melting and getting smaller over the past 5 to 8 years. How did we manage that? Scientists say that Mars is indeed going through a period of global warming. Scientists say that global warming on Mars is caused by our Suns recent warming cycle. Our sun, the star at the center of our solar system, apparently goes through cycles of intensity. This affects the climates on all planets in the solar system except earth. On earth, all climate change is the result of greedy humans.
4.) If the earth's average surface temperature increases 1 degree every hundred years, then all of us will be living at this planets poles in 5,000 years. Careful though, in the last 4 years, the temperature has actually dropped .2 degrees.
5.) If the oceans are warming and causing more participation (storms), causing more water vapor, causing more storms…..how do we cool the oceans? How can we contribute to ocean cooling to counter the effects of global warming? I got it! We manufacture ice and dump it in the ocean. Wait, that would take an immense amount of energy that would contribute to global warming. How much ice would it take? The amount of ice that we could dump into the ocean to affect the total average temperature of all oceanic waters is about equal to the human contribution to our environment to global warming. Maybe we could use solar power to create ice.
All I ask is some common sense environmentalist address these questions. Why won't they just explain it to me rather than writing me off as a radical capitalistic environment hater?
This is from The Onion, right?
NO "greenhouse gas" can be effectively regulated, and if there is too much CO2 in the air, well, start planting and cultivating some high-metabolism plants, to convert the CO2 back into oxygen and sequester the carbon in carbohydrates, specifically sugars, starches and cellulose.
Urban farming seems like an excellent method of introducing these high-metabolism plants to places close to the point source of pollutants.
bump for later reference
Bad news for Nantucket (foggiest place in the USA). Perhaps they'll be eligible or federal funds...
No.......the articles by the Onion make sense..........statements by the EPA never do!
Urban farming seems like an excellent method of introducing these high-metabolism plants to places close to the point source of pollutants.
You seem to think the they are really concerned about solving the problem..........they aren't. It's about power.
OMG! It's FOGGY here this a.m. And when it breaks up a little I can see CLOUDS! I love satire - it's the best antidote for stupidity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.