LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

i'm sure this "thought" about rising sea-levels makes perfect sense to deplorables

Last edited:
Rainblow said:
Wow. Nuclear power? There are inherent risks involved. My biggest concern is what do you do with the toxic waste? Not to mention substantial safety and security risks, containment issues, bio accumulations and increased accidents due to extreme weather occurrences. They require huge amounts of water and still contribute to CO2 emissions.

An easy way to solve deforestation due to agriculture is to stop eating meat. 77% of the world's agricultural land, combined with grazing pasture, is used for livestock (or as I prefer to call them totured sentient beings).
Not pushing veganism just stating facts. And I might be wrong on this, I'd have to look it up, I believe meat (the flesh of tortured sentient beings :)) is responsible for 18% of the world's calories. Lotta land reserved for a small portion of the world's population.


[/https://www.cnet.com/features/nuclear-power-is-clean-and-safe-why-arent-we-using-more-of-it/
Click to expand...
 
Lazaran said:
Yeah, hellspawn like you and your fellow CA Deplorables probably DO like the climate change induced fire and brimstone plaguing the state.

You're really going to like it when the climate change induced droughts in Colorado, and elsewhere out west, lead to the depletion of Lake Mead, and the Hoover Dam's inability to generate power.

JFC

SAD!!!
Click to expand...

Meh. Most of us Californians don’t live in wildfire areas. We did get some annoying smoke for a couple of days, but it was no biggie. I’m not sure how dependent LA is on hydroelectric power from Hoover Dam, but if we need to build more power plants that’s cool with me.
 
Dribble said:
Wow....you out did yourself for the moron medal
Click to expand...

How o how are you going to deal with losing it? You’ve held it for so long it’s been a permanent fixture on your mantle. Your medal is safe #1. :D:cool:
 
BabyBoomer50s said:
Meh. Most of us Californians don’t live in wildfire areas. We did get some annoying smoke for a couple of days, but it was no biggie. I’m not sure how dependent LA is on hydroelectric power from Hoover Dam, but if we need to build more power plants that’s cool with me.
Click to expand...

I think LA's most vulnerable point is its water supply.
 
icanhelp1 said:
How o how are you going to deal with losing it? You’ve held it for so long it’s been a permanent fixture on your mantle. Your medal is safe #1. :D:cool:
Click to expand...

Just pointing out the truth. You do realize the Forest Service has always planted trees after fires for over a hundred years? Replacing what was lost has zero affect on reduction of CO2. Why? Because we were losing ground before the fire. Why would replacing what was lost improve the situation?
 
rae121452 said:
well, if they really wanted to lower the sea level, they could just drain some of it off, right? i'm sure there are deplorables who know where the plug is.
Click to expand...

Chinese could solve their Uighur problem by filling the Takla Makan Desert (or the whole Tarim Basin) up with water. By same napkin math I once did they could probably pour a meter or more of the word ocean in that huge dust bowl, maybe more, especially if they built some hundred kilometers of a dam that maybe would be over hundred meters tall in the middle. Given how water bodies do exert seismic pressure, maybe there's some economy on that dam is possible. It would be interesting how such a water body in previously very dry region would affect weather patterns and could it become self sustaining (with no proof I like to speculate it could). The crazy thing of course is how to fill that bathtub initially.
 
Dribble said:
You do understand what a "normal" is right? There would be no reason to change the normal IF THERE WAS NO CHANGE. Jesus you fuckers are retarded
Click to expand...

Don't know, In IMHO I have never been normal...

Oh, they CLAIM I'm Normal but...
 
LupusDei said:
Chinese could solve their Uighur problem by filling the Takla Makan Desert (or the whole Tarim Basin) up with water. By same napkin math I once did they could probably pour a meter or more of the word ocean in that huge dust bowl, maybe more, especially if they built some hundred kilometers of a dam that maybe would be over hundred meters tall in the middle. Given how water bodies do exert seismic pressure, maybe there's some economy on that dam is possible. It would be interesting how such a water body in previously very dry region would affect weather patterns and could it become self sustaining (with no proof I like to speculate it could). The crazy thing of course is how to fill that bathtub initially.
Click to expand...

It would be easier to dig a canal from the Gulf of Eilat to the Dead Sea, which is far below sea level. Of course, that means endangering whatever unique life forms might live in that unique environment.
 
pecksniff said:
It would be easier to dig a canal from the Gulf of Eilat to the Dead Sea, which is far below sea level. Of course, that means endangering whatever unique life forms might live in that unique environment.
Click to expand...

If we talk easy things, you could go about refilling Caspian Sea and Aral (they're both below sea level too and almost connected naturally when you get them up to that, with a little bit space on top before it starts to run off to the Black Sea) but even that system is just a puddle that can't hold much water.

Dead Sea is such a very small cusp, I'm talking about geologic feature more than hundred times the size. And in the area I'm talking about is the deepest dry point below sea level on the planet I believe, but the problem is, it's in the very middle of the Asia and almost entirely surrounded by multi-thousand meters high mountain ranges. An elliptic bathtub over 750-1100 miles long and 310-370 miles wide in the middle, and the only reason it can't be over a mile deep is the relatively open eastern end not much more than 60 miles wide.

Of course it's complete insanity.
 
Last edited:
Dribble said:
Just pointing out the truth. You do realize the Forest Service has always planted trees after fires for over a hundred years? Replacing what was lost has zero affect on reduction of CO2. Why? Because we were losing ground before the fire. Why would replacing what was lost improve the situation?
Click to expand...

What you say is true. There is a caveat though. First of all the majority of those replacement trees are conifers, relatively slow growing as compared to deciduous trees. Even then the deciduous trees conversion rates are too slow. An acre of corn has a CO2 uptake rate approaching 36,000 lbs/acre. The trade off there is water and the CO2 generated in the planting/harvesting/etc. All of the monocot's have high CO2 uptakes the trick would to be finding a way of (1) reducing the CO2 generated in the cultivation and (2) sequestering the CO2 contained in the residue.
 
Unfortunately, nuclear was torpedoed several decades ago by exactly the same people who want to get rid of cheap, reliable NG electricity now.
 
pecksniff said:
It's better than coal, but burning NG still adds CO2 to the atmosphpere.
Click to expand...

If we had been building nukes for 40 years, coal would be gone and NG on the way out. That we still have both is due to the tantrums of "environmentalists."
 
pecksniff said:
It's better than coal, but burning NG still adds CO2 to the atmosphpere.
Click to expand...

What do you do with China, India, Russia, Iran, Vietnam. We destroy our economy while they continue burning fossil fuels. No matter what is done we humans cannot control climate change.
 
Argue for your limitations and so they shall be yours. Of course a deplorable will say there is nothing that we can do....that is because their minds are too small to think bigger than "There is nothing we can do".
 
Bud_Spencer said:
If we had been building nukes for 40 years, coal would be gone and NG on the way out. That we still have both is due to the tantrums of "environmentalists."
Click to expand...

LMFAO, They want windmills and solar panels which are manufactured in China using coal plants. Reducing our oil output to reduce our carbon footprint by using Saudi and Russian oil and NG. You can’t have an intelligent conversation with these people, it’s all about cutting off your nose to smite your face then believing all fossil fuel problems go away. CO2 is a naturally occurring gas, a process of oxidation. Chloro/fluoro/ carbons and sulfates are the most destructive.

I wonder if these people who are so critical of nuclear waste looked into the waste stream created by windmills, solar panels and batteries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top