Global Warming

Discussion in 'Superintendent Forums' started by LarryAylward, Sep 27, 2013.

  1. AI Inc

    AI Inc LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 25,164

    Did I think king George was as much as a turd as this guy? If that is your question the answer is yes.
     
  2. Mark Oomkes

    Mark Oomkes LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 11,343

    And conversely, my area's 10 year average snowfall is up 10" over the 100 year average.

    Also, except for 2 years ago, we have been back to "normal" winters where we have snowcover for extended periods of time--45-60 days instead of a week at a time here or there. 2 years ago I don't think we even had 1 week straight of snowcover but 3 or 4 years ago we set a record for most consecutive days with an inch or more.
     
  3. RussellB

    RussellB LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 5,998

    Many of the new nieghborhoods here clear cut and build. The HOA bylaws forbid planting of trees thus leading to air conditioners running wide open for 8-9 months. Not very earth friendly.
     
  4. AI Inc

    AI Inc LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 25,164

    weird winter here last yr. We usualy get 7-10 2-7 in storms and 1 . 12" + storm a yr. Last yr we had no snow till Jan then when it cam in came in ft not inches.
     
  5. Charles

    Charles Moderator Staff Member
    Posts: 7,835

    Wouldn't the Lakes not freezing over(or not as long or as much) have something to do with increased snow falls for Grand Rapids? Really doesn't have to be all that cold to snow
     
  6. Mark Oomkes

    Mark Oomkes LawnSite Fanatic
    Posts: 11,343

    That can factor into it, but the one year water temps were in the 70's and even 80's we were supposed to be pounded by lake effect. And weren't. I don't remember exact details, but there have been several of those years where water temps were "abnormally warm" going into Dec and it didn't make any difference.

    Because we need Arctic air to create lake effect.

    Mid to late 80's and well into the 90's when we had crappy winters and infrequent snow cover--2-3 weeks here and there--there was no more or no less ice coverage on the lakes.

    Late 70's when we had extremely cold and hard winters, there was a ton of ice, IIRC that was when the lakes did or almost completely froze over.

    It's just like El Nino and La Nina. The last 2-3 years have been opposite of what is supposed to happen during those "phenomena". ANd they haven't been able to predict overall conditions based on which is present, either.
     
  7. Charles

    Charles Moderator Staff Member
    Posts: 7,835

    I agree Mark. I don't see how they can blame it all on Human activity. There are so many variables. Sure, anything that produces Greenhouse gases will effect the Worlds climate ie Industry, autos, Volcanoes ETC. But so does the Earth/Sun cycle, Sunspots, El Nino and La Nina--both long term and short term aspects of them. A long time ago Scientist say many Volcanoes erupted in a short time period and warmed the Earth so much that the Oceans main current stopped moving. This causes a mass extinction of Ocean life. Marine life is very sensitive to water temperature changes.
    Some people think warming is a good thing but once the permafrost melts and desalinates the Oceans, life on Earth is pretty much doomed. Will this happen no matter what we do? Probably. Human activity is likely speeding the process up according to a good many Scientist.
     
  8. Mscotrid

    Mscotrid LawnSite Bronze Member
    from USA
    Posts: 1,444

    Solar flares... This planet has been around for how many years? Weather forecasting and history is infantile compared to age of planet. Seems like every time we break a high temp for the day we are breaking temp from 40-50-60+ years ago. I think this is nothing more than historical earth cycles.

    Or you can follow the time tested theory of follow the money. Who is pushing these ideas and who will profit. Check out the Carbon Exchange, what a racket
     
  9. Mickhippy

    Mickhippy LawnSite Platinum Member
    Posts: 4,199

    Im personally a sceptic. I believe in the "cycle" theory but, what if Im/we're wrong? What if "we" are partly to blame?
    My problem is how can we realistically fix it? Right now we have a heap of large bush fires releasing mega tonnes of carbon. Taxing us isnt going to stop it!
    We (Australia) export mega tonnes of coal to China to burn in there coal fired power stations, and they build a new 1 or 2 every week. Taxing us wont stop them from burning coal in fact, we NEED the export money.

    Heres a read if interested... http://www.thegwpf.org/china-india-building-4-coal-power-plants-week/

    But, I saw this video just yesterday and he makes a pretty good argument IMO.
    http://youtu.be/zORv8wwiadQ
     
  10. Charles

    Charles Moderator Staff Member
    Posts: 7,835

    Yea but you really can't be skeptical about how Coal is polluting China. Here is a article on how Coal is effecting the Chinese people. They have to wear dust mask. One area was shut down last week because you couldn't see past 16' in front of you for the smog. Many forget that large US cities were engulfed in smog. Things have improved now but it used to be really bad. Not as bad as China is now though. Acid rain from coal fired plants have really hurt the water supply there. States here are suing each other over the acid rain issue:

    http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/19/b...ir-polluting-cities/index.html?iref=allsearch



    Earlier this month, the central government said it would stop approving coal-fired power plants in more heavily polluted industrial areas.

    It also announced a national blueprint to lower the concentration of harmful particles in the air -- much of it caused by the burning of coal -- by at least 10% between 2012 and 2017 levels.

    In heavily polluted areas, including China's north, targets will be more stringent. Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei, all signatories to this week's new air pollution control plan, aim to cut particles by 25%. In southern China's Pearl River Delta, across the border from Hong Kong, the goal is 15%.

    "We know high-ranking officials really want to tackle the (air pollution) problem but in reality how much does this help?" said Sum Yin Kwong, CEO of the Clean Air Network in Hong Kong, to CNN.

    "It all might be more symbolic because when you look at the regional or local level, growth is measured by GDP, not by how environmental the city has become. I'm not too optimistic," added Kwong.

    China is the world's largest consumer of coal by volume and will continue to be for years, relying on the fossil fuel for 70-80% of its energy needs, according to various experts and the World Coal Association. Much of that energy goes towards electricity for factories and for winter heating. Beijing says it hopes to reduce the nation's coal consumption to 65% by 2017.

    In comparison, Australia draws about 75% of its electricity from coal, according to the Australian Coal Association. The United States generated 37% of its electricity from coal in 2012, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

    As people in China have grown wealthier, they have increased demands on the government for a cleaner environment.

    This past July, a landmark study by Chinese and international academics revealed that severe pollution and toxic air slashed an average of five and a half years of life expectancy for residents of northern China.

    According to a recent Greenpeace report, 83,500 people died prematurely in 2011 from respiratory diseases in Shandong, Inner Mongolia and Shanxi -- China's top three coal-consuming provinces.
     

Share This Page