Climate Change

[Wander]

As far as nuclear, that has so many other risks and problems, most notably, what do you do with waste that will be radioactive and lethal for millennia?

Nuclear power has problems – it's not a panacea. But if nothing is done, power from fossil fuels will, with 100% certainty, eventually have hugely devastating effects that result in countless fatalities and horrible economic impacts. It makes sense IMO to shift a lot of weight toward relatively clean nuclear power right now, with an eye on eventually moving away from that as well. It's just a matter of priorities.

[Wander]

And how is not eating meat going to halt the rise of temps?

Preparation/packaging etc of meat takes a lot of energy, and preparing meat uses up a disproportionately high amount of farm resources compared to other food, relative to how much people eat each type of food. Also, a lot of land for raising livestock involves deforestation.

That said, I agree with you that it's not a great tactic in fighting climate change, and I think we should avoid telling people to do that.

[Indoor66]

It must be horrible to live life anticipating the end of life.

[Devilwin]

Does it not take a similar amount of energy to package vegetables and fruits? I am all for fresh produce being in the diet. I love veggies, especially stuff I grow here. But I most certainly love my meats, and believe both foods are essential for a well balanced diet.
I don't know if it means anything, but as a bass fisherman, we tend to wait for the water temps to hit 48 degrees before we head out to start fishing each year. I have found that almost invariably this occurs between February 15th and March 2d of every year, almost without fail. I checked my journal I keep, and found this to be so..

[tteettimes]

Spanish Mackeral arriveat Cape Lookout May 12th.... 😍😍

[Devilwin]

Yes, around that time. They are really chewing by Memorial Day..

[PackMan97]

Does it not take a similar amount of energy to package vegetables and fruits?

As I understand, it's more about the energy required in growing the food, then it is in harvesting and packaging. In particular freshwater needs.

[YmoBeThere]

Does it not take a similar amount of energy to package vegetables and fruits? I am all for fresh produce being in the diet. I love veggies, especially stuff I grow here. But I most certainly love my meats, and believe both foods are essential for a well balanced diet.
I don't know if it means anything, but as a bass fisherman, we tend to wait for the water temps to hit 48 degrees before we head out to start fishing each year. I have found that almost invariably this occurs between February 15th and March 2d of every year, almost without fail. I checked my journal I keep, and found this to be so..

The interesting thing to see with your data would be the time series plot and any trend therein. For example, convert your dates to a value such as the numbers of days of the year until you first measure 48F for the water temp. March 2nd would be 61 days. Since I think you are talking freshwater, I would think the biggest influence is melting Appalchian snow. An earlier date trend might be reflective of higher average tempertures. There is certain to be year to year variation, a clear trendline over an extended period of time imight be a sign of something going on.

[niveklaen]

While I understand that eating meat has impacts*, its small potatoes. The vast majority of carbon emissions come from a small number of multinational corporations. stopping their irresponsible damaging conduct is far more important than depriving people of meat if the goal is to stop global warming. Talking about meat is falling for the corporate propaganda that seeks to deflect the blame from where it belongs and to alienate the 90% of the population who eats meat - the vegetarian talking points on this issue are the puppets of big business.

https://www.theguardian.com/sustaina...climate-change

*there are also moral/ethical reasons to not eat meat which are fine, but irrelevant to the issue of global warming.

[Devilwin]

Those of us old enough to recall the 60s can tell you about how we were being told we were heading into another ice age.
And then there's the riddle of the polar bear, which has become the poster child for the GW folks. They will tell our kids how the mighty ice bear is heading for extinction, when in fact, in 1970, there were less than 11,000 polar bears across their entire range. Today, that number has risen to over 30,000.
https://dailycaller.com/2017/02/16/p...lobal-warming/

[BigWayne]

Those of us old enough to recall the 60s can tell you about how we were being told we were heading into another ice age.
And then there's the riddle of the polar bear, which has become the poster child for the GW folks. They will tell our kids how the mighty ice bear is heading for extinction, when in fact, in 1970, there were less than 11,000 polar bears across their entire range. Today, that number has risen to over 30,000.
https://dailycaller.com/2017/02/16/p...lobal-warming/

Don't get me started about the Save The Manatee club.

[BandAlum83]

Those of us old enough to recall the 60s can tell you about how we were being told we were heading into another ice age.
And then there's the riddle of the polar bear, which has become the poster child for the GW folks. They will tell our kids how the mighty ice bear is heading for extinction, when in fact, in 1970, there were less than 11,000 polar bears across their entire range. Today, that number has risen to over 30,000.
https://dailycaller.com/2017/02/16/p...lobal-warming/

The population of polar bears today is larger than it was in the 1970s, due mainly to legislation banning polar bear hunting, but exact numbers are unclear

.

A couple of sources on this:

Polar Bear Population from Factcheck.org

Are polar bear populations increasing: in fact, booming? From Polar Bear International

[Devilwin]

It's been warmer in the past..
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics...al-warm-period
And, what caused this? No emissions to speak of.

[OldPhiKap]

The Earth clearly has had warming and cooling trends over its existence that are unrelated to man. It is not static and never has been.

It also seems to be the opinion of the vast majority of scientists that carbon emissions and certain human-influenced activities add heat to whatever natural trend is happening, and that the impact of this additional heat can be lessened through various practices (many of which are mentioned here).

Both of these statements can be true, it is not an either/or thing.

What, or whether, to do something is a political discussion. Whether it is happening, though, seems to be settled science everywhere but in the United States.

[Devilwin]

The interesting thing to see with your data would be the time series plot and any trend therein. For example, convert your dates to a value such as the numbers of days of the year until you first measure 48F for the water temp. March 2nd would be 61 days. Since I think you are talking freshwater, I would think the biggest influence is melting Appalchian snow. An earlier date trend might be reflective of higher average tempertures. There is certain to be year to year variation, a clear trendline over an extended period of time imight be a sign of something going on.

The angle of the sun's rays actually has more to do with water warm up than air temps. Shallow water warms quickly, and the north west shorelines warm the quickest. Those shores see the big females begin to stage earlier than in other areas for the spawn, which occurs the first full moon after the water reaches 60 degrees.
As for the melting snow, there is a lot of truth in that. However, that being said, most of the water sheds we fish are not on mountain river basins, but rather the Deep River, which has its headwaters in Guilford County. We fished High Rock Lake two years ago on March 1st, and the water temp was 51 degrees. At High Point City Lake, the temp was 52 degrees one day later. High Rock is on the Yadkin, which does begin near the mountains, but High Point Lake is on the Deep..

[left_hook_lacey]

The Earth clearly has had warming and cooling trends over its existence that are unrelated to man. It is not static and never has been.

It also seems to be the opinion of the vast majority of scientists that carbon emissions and certain human-influenced activities add heat to whatever natural trend is happening, and that the impact of this additional heat can be lessened through various practices (many of which are mentioned here).

Both of these statements can be true, it is not an either/or thing.

What, or whether, to do something is a political discussion. Whether it is happening, though, seems to be settled science everywhere but in the United States.

This seems to be the most logical assessment.

I won't get into the climate change debate and where we humans fit into the discussion. But I will say, after having spent quite a bit of time in several European countries this past year, they are light years ahead of us when it comes to reducing waste and handling the waste they do produce.

I'm not saying they're saving the planet, but just from a cleanliness aspect, I like what they are doing.

For example, in Denmark and Sweden, it's darn near impossible to find a trash can to throw anything away because they just don't generate a lot of trash. Want a bag at the grocery store? Fine, it's $2 per bag. That'll teach you.


And what trash they do generate is sent to processing centers in each town. They burn the trash to generate heat, which is then sent out to heat the homes and provide hot water.

They are so good at it, that they have run out of trash, and have started importing trash from other countries and charging them for it.


I don't care whether people eat meat or not, or what kind of light bulbs they use, but we can be a little better about the amount of trash we produce and how we handle it.

I was on the way home from the outer Banks this weekend and the amount of plastic bags and bottles in the ditches and fields made me visibly angry. It's embarrassing.

[Devilwin]

This seems to be the most logical assessment.

I won't get into the climate change debate and where we humans fit into the discussion. But I will say, after having spent quite a bit of time in several European countries this past year, they are light years ahead of us when it comes to reducing waste and handling the waste they do produce.

I'm not saying they're saving the planet, but just from a cleanliness aspect, I like what they are doing.

For example, in Denmark and Sweden, it's darn near impossible to find a trash can to throw anything away because they just don't generate a lot of trash. Want a bag at the grocery store? Fine, it's $2 per bag. That'll teach you.


And what trash they do generate is sent to processing centers in each town. They burn the trash to generate heat, which is then sent out to heat the homes and provide hot water.

They are so good at it, that they have run out of trash, and have started importing trash from other countries and charging them for it.





I don't care whether people eat meat or not, or what kind of light bulbs they use, but we can be a little better about the amount of trash we produce and how we handle it.

I was on the way home from the outer Banks this weekend and the amount of plastic bags and bottles in the ditches and fields made me visibly angry. It's embarrassing.

It certainly is a terrible eyesore, not to mention how dangerous it can be as well. Shameful.

[gus]

As I understand, it's more about the energy required in growing the food, then it is in harvesting and packaging. In particular freshwater needs.

Wikipedia has a long article about the environmental impact of the meat industry: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Envi...eat_production

But to grossly oversimplify it... growing food to be consumed by livestock, which we they then turn around and consume, is significantly less efficient than growing the food and eating it directly.

[JNort]

While I understand that eating meat has impacts*, its small potatoes. The vast majority of carbon emissions come from a small number of multinational corporations. stopping their irresponsible damaging conduct is far more important than depriving people of meat if the goal is to stop global warming. Talking about meat is falling for the corporate propaganda that seeks to deflect the blame from where it belongs and to alienate the 90% of the population who eats meat - the vegetarian talking points on this issue are the puppets of big business.

https://www.theguardian.com/sustaina...climate-change

*there are also moral/ethical reasons to not eat meat which are fine, but irrelevant to the issue of global warming.

While yeah that's true the question is usually what can "we" do to help in our daily lives. The problem typically if I'm not mistaken comes from just keeping cows for meat. Cows produce a bunch of methane and fewer steaks and beef sold would mean we need fewer cows.

[gus]

believe both foods are essential for a well balanced diet.

I assure meat is not necessary for a well balanced diet, but that's really not a discussion for this thread.

I don't know if it means anything, but as a bass fisherman, we tend to wait for the water temps to hit 48 degrees before we head out to start fishing each year. I have found that almost invariably this occurs between February 15th and March 2d of every year, almost without fail. I checked my journal I keep, and found this to be so..

Are you suggesting global warming isn't real because water in your area hits 48 degrees around the same window? There is a lot of data supporting the fact that global warming is happening - it's not really a debate.