Yes, so anyone who throws you into a furnace wouldn't be a criminal, as heat is a basic requirement of life.
Posted on 11/20/2008 1:46:37 AM PST by CE2949BB
ScienceDaily (Nov. 19, 2008) — Construction of new coal-fired power plants in the United States is in danger of coming to a standstill, partly due to the high cost of the requirement — whether existing or anticipated — to capture all emissions of carbon dioxide, an important greenhouse gas. But an MIT analysis suggests an intermediate step that could get construction moving again, allowing the nation to fend off growing electricity shortages using our most-abundant, least-expensive fuel while also reducing emissions.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
Hey, here’s a thought! Let’s just acknowledge the truth. CO2 is not a pollutant and AGM is a crock! Problem solved and it’s free!
Water is the prime polluter causing the green house effect. In fact, by the recent Ohio St. scientist's study, it is to blame for 97% of it.
Stop the process of evaporation!
Of course, we need the greenhouse effect, or we would all die in the deep cold.
In fact, by the recent Ohio St. scientist's study, it is to blame for 97% of it.
Is that Lonnie Thompson's work? What do you define as "recent"? The most recent word out of Ohio St. is David Bromwich support for the conclusion of Gillett, et al., in their recent paper in Nature Geoscience:
"Our results demonstrate that human activities have already caused significant warming in both polar regions, with likely impacts on polar biology, indigenous communities, ice-sheet mass balance and global sea level."Do I believe that CO2 emissions are the primary cause of the change in temperature measurements? No. Do I think we should distort the science? Also no.
*IANAL, so that ain't legal advice.
Yes, so anyone who throws you into a furnace wouldn't be a criminal, as heat is a basic requirement of life.
Carbon capture is a great idea despite the fact that Global Warming is a complete crock!! The thing is that I have helped work on a project of this nature and the fact that there are so many uncooperative Dems in office, it’s hard to get anything accomplished. They act like they are so PRO environment!! It’s a total joke. We got a lot more help from Republicans in office. I’m seeing a pattern here...
Too sensible ... besides, it doesn't grow big government even bigger while simultaneously supporting a few well-positioned people in their quest to become even more filthy rich. 
bttt
That is highly presumptuous. Science has never demonstrated with testing that carbon molecules caused by man to enter the atmosphere is causing significant warming so as to harm the world's climate.
See period at end of sentence.
The Ohio State University scientist’s study that I refer to was a news item about three months ago. I heard it or heard about it or read about it. You look it up, if you like, Gondring.
Did I distort the science? No.
A water molecule has a half life in the atmosphere of about a week, CO2 about a century. If you introduce a ton of CO2 and a ton of H2O into the atmosphere, the CO2 has approximately 5,200 times more effect.
Water is maintaining a roughly 97% level compared to other greenhouse effectors. The effects of carbon in the atmosphere are minimal, no matter how long it stays up there.
Of course, that is Earth. If we are talking about Venus, it’s a different matter. ;-)
Nationally, the United States (with all its infinite wisdom) seems to pass laws and regulations based on a 100% solution. Examples are banning all guns will solve the problem, eliminating all C02 emissions will save the polar bears, etc.
IMHO, most problems are like cutting grass. You take care of the immediate problem (the long grass), and the problem will appear at some indefinite future time. When we have to get the lawnmower out again, we should not be surprised, but we should keep the lawnmower in good repair.
Clean coal plants that capture CO2 for injection into oil fields will be much less costly (if not more than pay for themselves.) This is the only way to go until the technology becomes less costly.
Don’t go off onto a tangent. Please respond to my comment, which illustrated that your comment was a red herring.
(I.e., why was the sentence I quoted at all relevant?)
TBOPIOY
The answer
Nu - clear power.
notice the “clean” in Nuclear
From birth to death cleanist cheapest choice
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.