Naas: Xcel acknowledges massive cost of 100 percent renewables

[Gman]

When the government funds science, they get the results they're looking for.

ETA: Corrected a typo.

[hatidua]

When the government funds science, they get the results their looking for.

-every single time.

[clodhopper]

A long time ago there was a big swamp. For millions of years this swamp flourished creating a huge biomass. Then a large multiple of asteroid strikes buried this biomass. The biomass was transformed to fossil fuels. The burning of these fossil fuels alters the atmosphere of the planet. If we alter the atmosphere and the climate too drastically there are going to be repercussions. The bad part is that all this carbon dioxide acidifies the oceans killing the plankton reducing the oxygen levels. The polar ice caps and all the glaciers melt. The sea level becomes much higher. Because the temperatures are so high, we have famines due to crop failures.
I have seen Pentagon reports discussing going to war because other nations violated emissions protocols causing flooding, famines, etc.

As Americans we are 4.27% of the earths population. We consume 97% of the world fossil fuels production. 7,000,000,000 humans and 327 million are Americans. I just hope this doesn't end up like the Pentagon analysts predict.

Do you apply any critical thought before regurgitating something you found on the internets? 97%? https://cleantechnica.com/2019/05/03...-fossil-fuels/

[spqrzilla]

Yeah.... About DOD climate bullshit.....

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/12/...oy-us-in-2020/

[Gman]

72% of statistics are just made up.

Al Gore's doomsday countdown came and went. I'm not sure why everybody is concerned. The earth will end in 12 years anyway.

ETA: Love Anthony Watt's site. Intelligent conversation about 'climate change'.

Climate Prediction Swings and Misses: A Decade of Alarmist Strike Outs, 2010-2019

[BushMasterBoy]

Do you apply any critical thought before regurgitating something you found on the internets? 97%? https://cleantechnica.com/2019/05/03...-fossil-fuels/

I say the same to you. Did you even graduate any college?

[Gman]

Because a college degree means you're a real intellectual and everything you say/write is intelligent and well-thought-out.

[Aloha_Shooter]

A long time ago there was a big swamp. For millions of years this swamp flourished creating a huge biomass. Then a large multiple of asteroid strikes buried this biomass. The biomass was transformed to fossil fuels. The burning of these fossil fuels alters the atmosphere of the planet. If we alter the atmosphere and the climate too drastically there are going to be repercussions. The bad part is that all this carbon dioxide acidifies the oceans killing the plankton reducing the oxygen levels. The polar ice caps and all the glaciers melt. The sea level becomes much higher. Because the temperatures are so high, we have famines due to crop failures.
I have seen Pentagon reports discussing going to war because other nations violated emissions protocols causing flooding, famines, etc.

As Americans we are 4.27% of the earths population. We consume 97% of the world fossil fuels production. 7,000,000,000 humans and 327 million are Americans. I just hope this doesn't end up like the Pentagon analysts predict.

I've seen a lot of analyst reports from the Pentagon as well as other DC-area agencies. Most aren't worth the paper they're printed on (and I mostly read them in electronic form). Pentagon analysts are not a Hive or collective mind so be careful when you say "the Pentagon analysts" (emphasis added). Any discussion of going to war because of other nations violating emissions protocols is a lot of nonsense -- we would have to get the majority of the nation behind any cause of going to war and there's just no way we'd get national support for something as vague and disconnected as "violating emissions protocols".

There's a lot that alters the atmosphere of the planet, from biological organisms to biochemical processes to venting from geothermal activity. Carbon dioxide is a byproduct of a natural process and the Earth has feedback mechanisms for processing it. The same can't be said for man-made materials like plastics or the changing of Earth's albedo by laying dark asphalt over everything. For that matter, the ash from burning materials changes the albedo at the poles. Solar activity is the dominant factor affecting Earth's heat equation. In the early 90s we had a series of solar flares during solar maximum that actually caused the Earth's atmosphere to expand (shown by the measurable increase in drag on satellites in low earth orbit).

I say the same to you. Did you even graduate any college?

Yes. I even got a scientific post-graduate degree and have been working in engineering and analytic jobs for quite a while. So did quite a number of people who vary from "lukewarmers" to outright opponents of the fear-mongering from the Left. One of the big problems with diatribe you spewed is the lack of or incorrect use of causal linkages. There is a big difference between statistical relationships and actually having a causal relationship based on physics (or biology or chemistry). Overall global temperatures and carbon dioxide content in the thermosphere are definitely linked statistically but if CO2 causes the heat increase, why does the CO2 increase lag behind the temperature increase by decades? For that matter, your statement about increasing temperatures causing floods and famines fits the Agenda but doesn't fit the facts. Worldwide food production has increased dramatically during the same period that Climate Change activists keep pointing to (19th and 20th centuries). Famines have been caused by inability to get food from where it's grown to where it's desired/needed -- and usually due to politics rather than resource constraints.

By the way, temperature change direction and magnitude can vary greatly depending on where your start and end your measurements. There's a reason Michael Mann, Phil Jones, et al start their graphs and claims in the 18th century. There was a little thing called the Little Ice Age that was a local minima in measuring global temperatures. Funny thing about minima -- any measurement from there forward looks like dramatic increase in the baseline. If you go further back in time, you'll find temperatures were warm enough that vineyards existed in northern England and even Greenland -- see anyone growing enough (or good enough) grapes to make wine in either region right now? Now those periods were local maxima so it wouldn't be right to baseline your measurements there either but the point is that it has been much warmer in the past; activists have tried to get past those inconvenient facts and truths by simply relabeling them or denying the existence of the Medieval Warming Period.

Michael Mann has refused to publish the code he used to get his infamous "hockey stick" but analysts who reverse-engineered the code from the data he claimed to use have noted 1) MM and Phil Jones cherry-picked the data, and 2) the code produces a "Hockey Stick" even when white noise data is fed into it.

[BushMasterBoy]

If you are so smart, why aren't you rich?

https://markets.businessinsider.com/...-12-1028787852

[clodhopper]

Are you sure I am not?