Gather round' kids. Time to redpill ya'll on """"GLOBAL WARMING""""

Gather round' kids. Time to redpill ya'll on """"GLOBAL WARMING""""

Facts:

>Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is simply part of the carbon cycle and all life forms rely on it.

>You can build a coal-fired power plant at a fifth of the cost of an equivalent solar plant.

>You can burn coal, and fossil fuels at these plants without emitting any pollution.

>There is enough natural gas in North America to power the country for another 100 years.

>Plants thrive in high carbon environments. Humans thrive in warmer weather,.

>Global warming isn't happening. It just isn't, which is why they changed it to "Climate Change"

>California WILL get rolling blackouts, or will economically collapse in the next 10 years, it's one or the other or both. They shut down their last nuclear plant and refuse to build any more power plants for a net gain of 0 in energy production while the population continues to increase.

>China has abandoned almost all of their plans for solar farms in their country because they know it's shit

Solar is a complete scam. Even wind power beats the shit out of it. When will we stop this solar meme?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=vFK-UTGH1Zw
youtube.com/watch?v=eNU3MLqyzPk
thestar.com/news/canada/2017/01/03/ontario-power-generation-stands-by-plan-to-bury-nuclear-waste-near-lake-huron.html
youtube.com/watch?v=N2vzotsvvkw
youtube.com/watch?v=daOH-pTd_nk
earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/decadaltemp.php
eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/579543/Press_Notice_December_2016.pdf
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Yeah, but filling the atmosphere with carbon as we rapidly remove forests and plants and kill off all the algae in the ocean thus all provide us oxygen will have no bad consequences for us, right?

Solar is economically shit, go nuclear.

>not taking the liquid thorium power pill

fucking off yourself bitch. I bet you don't even know that there are commercial hover bikes for sale right now.

you're as bad as they are for parading some of these points around as "facts"

>pic
AYO HOL UP

It's not necessatily a pollutant but it is a greenhouse gas and insulates&absorbs heat. 5th grade earth/space science

lel

...

Please stop reading this. Please, get some sleep. You must all be so tired. Have a drink, take a Xanax, get some rest. Log off Sup Forums for a little while, it seems like you've been on for too long now. Have some sleep, I am so tired, I am so sorry but I must sleep now. I am so tired.

Fuck off shill

Good thing plants eat carbon dioxide and turn it into oxygen or we'd really be screwed.

We wouldn't be. We'd just find a way to make oxygen out of it through evolution.

This is nothing more than hyped up WikiLeaks fanatic nonsense. Please, get some rest. I am so tired, let's get some sleep. I am so sorry but I must sleep now.

>>You can build a coal-fired power plant at a fifth of the cost of an equivalent solar plant.
Solar is cheaper than coal now, gramps. The real issue is tying solar into the spinning reserve.

>>Plants thrive in high carbon environments. Humans thrive in warmer weather,.

Up to a certain point then their cell walls fall apart. Humans, like most life, prefer it slightly cool.

You fail biology class?

Climate change is literally a scheme by Al Gore to get himself a lot of money through a complex financial scheme with the ex-ceo of goldman sachs David Blood.

He's already been exposed in congress for this.

youtube.com/watch?v=vFK-UTGH1Zw

>humanity builds more nuclear plants
>earth gets hit by an asteroid
>2,000 foot tidal wave causes 10,000 separate fukushimas at once
>ambient global radiation levels reach 5,000 sieverts
>the people crawling out of the vaults in 24,000 years all have 9 arms and telekinesis

As cool as that sounds, just fucking release the Tesla-tech free energy Col. Bearden talks about.
youtube.com/watch?v=eNU3MLqyzPk

Honestly how do people still think climate change is real. It's been proven false by scientists constantly.

It's literally just playing off of peoples "feeeewings" about the environment and telling them a bunch of bullshit as an excuse to create taxes that go directly to (((them))) and the fact that people on this website still believe that is embarrassing but I guess we still have communist generals so whatever.

If you believe this and you're right wing you've probably been watching Lauren Southern too much. That bitch also said she thinks GMOs are amazing too. She was kind of a shill at rebel media and I think that company is paid to promote that stuff. Canadian conservatives must have a financial lobby on GMOs or something.


The point is if a bunch of fucking commies and lefties all believe in climate change, that right there should tell you it's BS.

Solar is an obvious solution and the technology is developing more and more to get better efficiencies. Just because it doesnt work now doesn't mean it won't work in the future.

t. Chemist who is actually researching and giving a presentation this week novel organic semiconductors to be used in solar cells

hmm.. Maybe. I'm certain that the fossil fuels required to produce hitechsuperfuture alternative energy sources will create a massive economic deficit.

Go to the bed fucking shill and stop talking like my pornstars

No hay nada que leer aquĆ­. Lo siento. Me voy a dormir ahora.

Please stop reading this. Please, get some sleep. You must all be so tired. Have a drink, take a Xanax, get some rest. Log off Sup Forums for a little while, it seems like you've been on for too long now. Have some sleep, I am so tired, I am so sorry but I must sleep now. I am so tired.

solar and wind dont work

they are jsut attempt by silicon valley jews n investors to get some of energy moved ove rto shitty tax subsidized corps to take over oil industry

torium clean atomic works
USA should be building small clean safe reactors based on lquid salt throium model
like flibe.com
and forget israel and oil
let alone stupid shit like wind and solar
fuck people are gullible as fuck believing in wind n solar
all tax money scam

Not to mention, solar has to be massively subsidized in order to even be affordable.

I still don't get quite how it's subsidized because it's very confusing but isn't it true that the government subsidizes all solar projects basically?

oh totally
elon musk owes tax payers 15B

not putting the nuclear power plants say... inland at all on non island countries.

Wow Sup Forums, just wow.

If you believe this bullshit, you can also go and fucking kill yourselves.

Climate Change doesnt exist, sure, thats why every year got new weather extremes around the world.

Fucking retard, I hope you get lung cancer and die faggot. Whats so hard about keeping the planet clean? Retard.

Renewables aren't efficient or reliable in large scale, although putting solar panels on houses is good, a household can pretty easily end up with an overall surplus of energy with a couple of (admittedly ugly) panels on the roof
Nuclear is clean and has a high enough throughput to replace coal, but human error makes it dangerous (Chernobyl and Fukushima both could have been avoided if people had done their jobs properly). I think it's unlikely that nuclear power will ever be safe enough without AI
Coal and gas are the most practical but carbon pollution is real and an issue, in the long term they will run out but pollution is the more pressing issue

Really the solution is to research better ways of dealing with the carbon, unfortunately it takes more energy to do so than you get from the combustion. There may be a solution where the CO2 is used in agriculture, but to the best of my knowledge photosynthesis is far too slow to be a practical solution.

>Whats so hard about keeping the planet clean? Retard.

And yet again, it's the German that wants to kill millions upon millions to keep the planet clean.

You're a fucking idiot. Phytoplankton which contributes half of oxygen in atmosphere has something like quadrupled in the past 50 years due to carbon emissions.

2017 and people still don't understand evolution?

What's so hard to prove we affect it to the point changes are made? Oh yeah, you won't since you can't, Hans

>Whats so hard about keeping the planet clean? Retard.
Whats so hard about not believing fake science ? It's almost like you can't think for yourself. The weather is no more extreme than it has ever been. faggot.

>Be OP
>Patronise other people within three words

Good start, moran

>humans thrive in warmer weather
>Africa, Middle East, Middle America
>mfw

>nuclear

yea have fun with that. lol here's a free preview of the antics to come.

thestar.com/news/canada/2017/01/03/ontario-power-generation-stands-by-plan-to-bury-nuclear-waste-near-lake-huron.html

thorium atomic is way cleaner

its new tek
kill all democracrats who oppose
its the way forward
youtube.com/watch?v=N2vzotsvvkw

...

OP is bluepilled as fuck

Believe your corporate masters.

...

>not putting all nuclear power plants on the moon instead and bring back energy with cheap SpaceX rockets

It's obviously at this point, that niggers have completely conquered the Netherlands.

Your right but you still don't understand what your talking about.

stfu religious conservative theist, go suck ahmeds dick somewhere else where you're keeping your politics strictly all about "muh immigration"
lets see how advanced your country will be in a couple of decades

Sorry, I don't speak nigger. Also you can't "bring back energy" with rockets. The very notion that you think this is possible clearly reveals you to be a sub 80 IQ nigger spawn.

>huehue why doesn't every household has a personal nuclear power plant because you can't transport energy apparantly

>Fukushima
>human error

No one expected a 9.1 quake. I doubt anything can withstand that.

You're dumb as fuck nigger. Literally too stupid to live. Therefore I win. kys.

This year, here in the North Italy, there are 4 degrees more than in the 1997.

What about sulphur?

>rapidly remove forests

Lol how does that happen?
Do you know how many fucking trees there are in the world?

>Humans thrive in warmer weather.

Bollox! people get lazier the closer you get to the equitor.

>No one expected a 9.1 quake.

It's #&@%ing JAPAN. If people are too dumb to realize there will be an earthquake, then they shouldn't be allowed to build nuclear plants anywhere.

>its the the leaf who thinks everyone who disagrees with him is a nigger and shills his retarded stormfag blog

My serious advice is this. Pick a place (as a suggestion where you were born). Pick a time of say (as a suggestion 12.00 noon). Get the temp figures for every week of the year for the last 100 years and chart yourself. The accuracy will change over time so take that into account. You will find very little change unless you use a skewed x and y axis.

The largest of all fast carbon consumers is soil. Yet we don't treat it as a living organism, we could collect all the CO2 in the atmosphere in 5 years if we took care of our soils.

>Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is simply part of the carbon cycle and all life forms rely on it.
CO2 is a ghg.
>Global warming isn't happening. It just isn't, which is why they changed it to "Climate Change"
That was a Bush policy advisor Frank Luntz. You should check his wikipedia page, the bit about his view and policy advice on global warming.
I think nuclear is the only viable answer for now. Greens that oppose nuclear are some kind of dumb primitivists or commies.

That is not true. It was predicted and reported on many occasions it might happen. The scientist was ignored. Plenty of other faults like having the pump equipment on the ground floor and not have passed a proper safety inspection because of inherent bribery.
If a power plant can not withstand 9.5 and below then it should not be sited. Even then there are places in Japan that could exceed that.

Get a better source than wiki. Do your own study.

FUCK OFF MINDLESS SHILL

You can swear on the internet m8

ah no, it's the Canadian who constantly models for strawman sculptures after pointing out blatant retardation.

This was the original post
>bring back energy with cheap SpaceX rockets
>bring back energy with rockets

So, I will now declare that I have not only determined the presence of another nigger, but he is an illiterate one as well.

youtube.com/watch?v=daOH-pTd_nk

bad thing these plants and trees are pulled out the ground

Good thing trees aren't replanted or grow back naturally.

...

>You can burn coal

BURN THE COAL PAY THE TOLL

>liquid thorium
Not using pressurised water reactor, kek

>not putting the nuclear power plants say... inland at all on non island countries
>Not realising plants are normally by the sea for water supply reasons.
kys

>You can build a coal-fired power plant at a fifth of the cost of an equivalent solar plant.

>You can burn coal, and fossil fuels at these plants without emitting any pollution.

>There is enough natural gas in North America to power the country for another 100 years.

The filth of the earth, literally death and hell.

I'll bite.

>>Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is simply part of the carbon cycle and all life forms rely on it
I, and most people agree. I would argue that pollution should be a separate category, for things like NOx, SOx, heavy metals, actual nuclear waste, VOC's etc.

CO2 is a naturally occuring part of the atmosphere. An important analogy though: Your body also needs trace amounts of cyanide in its diet to help fight small induced cancer sites; but too much causes asphyxiation and death. (not saying CO2 will kill us)

>>You can build a coal-fired power plant at a fifth of the cost of an equivalent solar plant
This literally means nothing. does this mean equal kW output? equal kW output including capacity factor?

Typical non-capacity factor'd solar plants can be insalled for 2-3 (2017, commercial plant scale) $ / watt (2000-3000 per kW). Coal power plants typically cost close to 1000. Coal power of same scale cost ~2$ per watt (2K per kW). That's not 1/5th. Additionally this is STILL misleading, because the correct measure of this has to account for amortization, or possible be compared as an NPV with a nominal financing discounting factor (spoiler: coal looks horrible due to large capital costs in addition to operational costs, solar capacity factor ends up hurting solar but minimal operational costs help it out in the long run)


1/???

This graph is atrociously misleading. Almost intentionally so.

Yes, of course, the more of something the lessening effects, but read the graph:

Pre-Industrial (lets assume, 1900) to today (100 or so years) is 5 segments on that graph. 5 segments of around 0.15C = 0.75C increase (which we have measured - earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/decadaltemp.php )

The issue is, the segments are 20ppm CO2 not time. So the next segment could be reached next week - and with the developing world continuing to increase fossil fuel reliance, the speed of each segment being reached will increase.

So while the rate of temperature decreases, the rate of concentration increases at a greater rate, and all of this forgets that the changes are one way only (never decreasing temperature, only increasing).

Secondly to this argument, the whole global warming / climate change arguments (the term was changed because of the easy counter argument "THIS WINTER WAS COLDER LOL") against change, are purely American ones. Considering the world view is in agreement, it's irrelevant what Americans think. "Humans thrive in a warmer environment" is fine when your maximum is 35C, but when its 50C you really can't afford another 2C. And this is disproportional - in Britain the rise will be 0.5C, but in South Sudan the rise will be 4-5C.

tl;dr - if you deny climate change, you're effectively inviting a wave of immigrants from countries such as Sudan, Yemen, Ethiopia, Somalia, Egypt....

This is the ultimate redpill about this topic

Additional point - every molecule of CO2 which we release into the atmosphere requires a greater input of energy to sequest (capture/store).

If you gained 1W from releasing 1 CO2 - it would always take >1W to remove.

CCU's (carbon capture units) don't remove CO2 from coal/gas powerstations, they remove soot and larger particulates. They couldn't remove all CO2, or you'd generate negative power.

They actually pull the oxygen off of water

>American fiction author

I think I'll stick to my BSc Chemistry + MSc Environmental Chemistry thanks.

People forget, during sunlight hours plants use CO2, during night hours plants use O2.

Algae atrophying O2 levels in water is due to their blanketing of the surface, though.

>>You can burn coal, and fossil fuels at these plants without emitting any pollution

That is close to being correct. However, don't pretend that happens. the coal industry has A LOT of exemptions to the clean air and clean water acts. Part of the reason for the coal electrical industries recalcitrance to building new plants is they cannot keep the grandfathered in status of many of their facilities, which continue to spew SOx, NOx, heavy metals into the air.

In addition, even the most up date retrofitted plants and newer facilities still don't reach perfect cleanliness in regard to poilution (though they do have a pretty good handle on it).

Also, you can build these plants (economically) to sequester carbon in addition to pollution control. That brings the cost up quite significantly, but makes it grossly less appealing that current mainstay renewable or nuclear.

>>There is enough natural gas in North America to power the country for another 100 years.
I believe this is true, though I can't common on the exact years. Personally, I strongly advocate for usage of natural gas. I (an energy policy and environmentally minded chemical engineer) would be tickled pink to see coal replaced by natural gas. The electrical industry would as well.

>>Plants thrive in high carbon environments. Humans thrive in warmer weather
ok

>>Global warming isn't happening. It just isn't, which is why they changed it to "Climate Change"
They changed it to "Climate change" because global warming wasn't global. Upon further inspection, it was found to be dependent on localized conditions. Ergo, some places are warming, others are expierencing different things with climate, thus climate change. This is how science works (observe, create theory/model, test, revise/conclude)

2/???

so you say humans are better in warm climates, then you say its not happening. which one is it retard?

...

>I was born in a native english country and therefor I declare that every single human being on this planet has to speak accurate english grammar or else I will disregard their arguments and call them out for being retarded
btw I speak 3 languages
>implying igaf about proper use of words and grammar on a informal internet forum

If we're getting tidal waves that big, that asteroid is wiping us out anyway, so there isn't a huge problem there. The plants should be kept inland though.

>Harvard Medical Doctor

I'm pretty sure he knows more than you.

Oh thats how it works high school biology didnt explain that part

>>California WILL get rolling blackouts, or will economically collapse in the next 10 years, it's one or the other or both. They shut down their last nuclear plant and refuse to build any more power plants for a net gain of 0 in energy production while the population continues to increase

regarding exclusively the blackouts, this is one of the most unfortunately true things out there. Cali nuke plants yes, cali power plants idk if true or not.

Rolling blackouts or economic collapse: Rolling blackouts aren't a cali thing, they're across the nation. The rate of blackouts across the US has steadily up every year since Jimmy Carter era national energy plans. This was due to the bust-up of the join monopoly-monopsony that the electric industry had on society, pioneered by Samuel Insull (Thomas Edisons assistant) and Edison Electric of Chicago.

the Electric industry found itself in a position where they built the business to make money by having exclusive control, and all of the sudden had that control ripped out from under them. Because of the government interference, the electric industry became slow reacting, lazy and un-innovative throughout the 20th century (this is what happens when there's no incentives to compete). This lead to the construction of what is literally the single largest machine on the face of the planet, the electric grid. The downside to this is that it is extremely inflexible, and susceptible fluctuations and not running constantly (an artifact of Insull's marketing methods and getting in bed with goverment at the turn of the 19th-20th century).

>in anthropology

I'm good. I'm sure he knows more than me about where humans came from.

Well, it just so happens that the best source of easy cheap electricity these days (solar and wind - suggestion no energy storage, which is a different problem) is extremely erratic, and we have a recalcitrant, un-innovative lazy industry that is STILL waiting to fail but being propped up by government price control on a commodity. This causes extreme problems for electric companies that don't know how to cope and have only had to play by """""free market""""" (hardly) for a few decades, but with the pre-free market business model. They aren't flexible enough for it, and due to government price controls, they literally cannot compete, and worse they cannot upkeep the transmission equipment and innovate on a system that direly needs it.

There's a very easy answer to this, and the US military is pioneering it, and doing well. Micro-grids. Grids that are predominantly self sufficient based on renewables and an energy portfolio tailored to the area of operation. This too is how the US will have to move in the future (indeed, Texas and Ontario actually have somewhat already; Texas's power grid can be completely separated from the rest of the union just incase the want to secede).

>>China has abandoned almost all of their plans for solar farms in their country because they know it's shit

I just don't know if that's true. I guess I don't care enough to check it lmao

I agree we SHOULD go over to south america, aficra and china and start ruling these people under an iron fist seeing how we the whites are the only group of people who care about preserving our forests while people like the brazilians do too little too late with almost no recovery planting to make up for the amount of sheer destruction.

I'm just tired of seeing the global warming finger pointed at us and then people expecting US, the people who are currently doing THE BREST when it comes to the size of our population and industry. Its abosolutely nonsensical the only way to stop it is "trust"(not working) or brute force.

Now i will watch this post be completely ignored by leftist because the only solution is right here(imperialism) but you're plug your ears and tell me to pay a ":carbon tax" on nations who are phenomenal at keeping pollution down and produces some of the cleanest energy usage.

America isn't really leading the way though.

US primary energy (nuclear, wind, solar, hydro) totalled 13% of generation in 2015:

eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

While in the UK, in 2016 (admittedly a year later) we have passed 50% from primary sources:

gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/579543/Press_Notice_December_2016.pdf

So yes, imperialism may be the way forward, but we tried that before.

>inviting immigrants

lets not forget an even worse and compounding factor, crime has a strong correlation to heat.

why not just build coal plants and steal money from the jew to pay for filters for them tho? Two birds with one stone lol

correction, 33% from primary for US*

Excuse me, but please find a greener country with comparable population and industry. We certainly are, just because smaller European countries are able to be green from the lack of it doesn't mean we aren't the absolute shining example atm of a clean and industrialist nation.

Plus solar plant kills shitload of birds and other tiny animals

Population is irrelevant, as you have a larger landmass (more green available sites, especially so for hydro).

Per usage %, you're just behind. Sorry. Even if you added the whole EU together, which includes some proper shithole countries, they'd be ahead of the US (with a much larger population).

so I want to wrap my head around the first, basic variables

>co2
who and what releases it? How much co2 does one gallon of fuel burn, its pretty easy to find out

>how much can the planet process that?

the oceans, the trees, the soil perhaps even, are there any ill effects?

You know, the most worrying thing, though somewhat pleb tier what spurred me to think about all of this is the fact that fuel generators cannot be placed indoors, or else they kill you.

If a car engine consumes so much air, or releases so much co2, how do 1 billion cars fit on this planet? And all the added factories.

jesus what a fucking mess of a math sum. Would really be nice if some scientists spend more time here on Sup Forums so explain it to us. Because I, unlike other right wingers am pretty open to it. I dont believe that shielding yourself from potentially uncomfortable truths is a good thing to do. Even if all of this is true, we can probably still save the planet while killing all the jews.

Population, land mass, and the amount of industrial factories are extreamly relevant to the conversation. What are you on about? Please find me a comparable country doing as good as us. Please.

>the climate changes cyclically
>it has been since climate started existing
>it will continue to change
>carbon emissions are largely irrelevant
>lefties do not understand this
>cognitive dissonance is a powerful thing

It's your comprehension that is shit. Now apologize to me immediately or fuck off.

Why is America the only Western nation to reject the global warming scam?

I'm a junior scientist and I hate the condescension from my European peers.

Why can't they just take the red pill?