Scientists Baffled By Unknown Source of Ozone-Depleting Chemical

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientists Baffled By Unknown Source of Ozone-Depleting Chemical

Posted by Soulskill on Wednesday August 20, 2014 @10:27AM from the i-blame-the-schools dept.

schwit1 writes: Scientists have found that, despite a complete ban since 2007, ozone-depleting chemicals are still being pumped into the atmosphere from some unknown source. "Carbon tetrachloride (CCl4), which was once used in applications such as dry cleaning and as a fire-extinguishing agent, was regulated in 1987 under the Montreal Protocol along with other chlorofluorocarbons that destroy ozone and contribute to the ozone hole over Antarctica. Parties to the Montreal Protocol reported zero new CCl4 emissions between 2007-2012. However, the new research shows worldwide emissions of CCl4 average 39 kilotons (about 43,000 U.S. tons) per year, approximately 30 percent of peak emissions prior to the international treaty going into effect. "We are not supposed to be seeing this at all," said Qing Liang, an atmospheric scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the study published online in the Aug. 18 issue of Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union. "It is now apparent there are either unidentified industrial leakages, large emissions from contaminated sites, or unknown CCl4 sources."

303 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:30 · Score: 4, Insightful

Who else would, unapologetically, give the middle finger to the environment?
1. Re:Easy, India or China by dosius · 2014-08-20 10:35 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I can think of a certain group of American Republicans who would do exactly that...
  
  --
  What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
2. Re:Easy, India or China by iggymanz · 2014-08-20 10:40 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  and I can think of a certain group of American Democrats who despite whatever noises they make at the end of the day are equally mega-corporate bitches same as the Republicans. Obama and 90% of Democrats in Congress for starters....
3. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:40 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Who else would, unapologetically, give the middle finger to the environment?
  Brazil, Mexico, Spain, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, US, UK, Sweden, Argentina, Australia, South Africa, Nigeria, Poland, and probably quite a few others.
  But not Canada. Canada would apologize.
4. Re:Easy, India or China by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-08-20 10:47 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  So why has every environmental initiative in the past 40 years been pushed by the Democrats and resisted by the Republicans?
  Why did "mega-corporate bitch" Obama introduce new carbon emissions rules in June that will cost energy producers a fortune?
  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/02/us/politics/epa-to-seek-30-percent-cut-in-carbon-emissions.html
5. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:54 · Score: 0, Informative
  
  Or nobody. This is un-sourced nonsense.
6. Re:Easy, India or China by sjames · 2014-08-20 10:54 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  They probably rigged their SUVs to actually manufacture CCl4 and immediately release it into the atmosphere just because.
7. Re:Easy, India or China by Opportunist · 2014-08-20 10:55 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Can we just agree on greed being the culprit? Democrat, Republican, where's the difference? As long as there's money to be made by ignoring the law and as long as breaking a law and getting caught is cheaper than heeding it, greed trumps "doing the right thing" any time.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
8. Re: Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:55 · Score: 0
  
  You forgot to to blame former President Bush too.
9. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:58 · Score: 0
  
  I can think of a certain group of American Republicans who would do exactly that...
  No money or control of a nation in it. So not likely in this case.
10. Re:Easy, India or China by Richard+Dick+Head · 2014-08-20 10:58 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  I can think of some more skeptical reasons.
  
  Or the Ozone layer is perfectly fine now, and repairing itself, albeit slowly, and said scientists currently have their hand out and need to come up with an excuse to fill it.
  
  Or, the "Ozone Hole" was a natural occurrence all along, and had nothing to do with CFCs, because CFCs are so flipping heavy whoever construed all of it isn't on the ocean floor is a dunce...etc
  
  --
  The real path to male liberation
11. Re:Easy, India or China by ArcherB · 2014-08-20 11:02 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  So why has every environmental initiative in the past 40 years been pushed by the Democrats and resisted by the Republicans?
  You mean like this one?
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
  Odd. I didn't know Bush was a Democrat.
  What about this one?
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
  Where are the Democrats pushing this bill and Republicans opposing it?
  And although I'm stepping outside your 40-year limit, who created the Environmental Protection Agency in the first place? I'll give you a hint:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...
  
  --
  There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
12. Re:Easy, India or China by iggymanz · 2014-08-20 11:04 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  haha, under what president was the EPA created? and the Clean Air Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Environmental Pesticide Control Act, and the Endangered Species Act become law? DDT banned? why Tricky Dicky Richard Nixon, of course.
  HW Bush made Clean Air Act tougher and that reduced acid rain and smog at the time
  Obama is for fracking, some key Democrats just pulled support for anti-fracking laws, Obama allowed starting drilling in sensitive arctic areas, Obama caved in and didn't allow new smog/ozone levels as being too expensive on industry (even though Bush in 2008 made tough new ground level ozone/smog standards)
13. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 11:05 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, that is not the point. From the article: "Parties to the Montreal Protocol reported zero new CCl4 emissions between 2007-2012."
  I believe the United States is a party to the Montreal Protocol, which effectively refutes your 'point.'
14. Re:Easy, India or China by rogoshen1 · 2014-08-20 11:10 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  Facts and political debates never go well together.
15. Re:Easy, India or China by pla · 2014-08-20 11:19 · Score: 2
  
  They probably rigged their SUVs to actually manufacture CCl4 and immediately release it into the atmosphere just because.
  
  Oh c'mon now, no one (over the age of 2) would behave that petulantly, right?
16. Re:Easy, India or China by techno-vampire · 2014-08-20 11:19 · Score: 1
  
  Wikipedia states that all members of the United Nations, the EU and a few other states have ratified it, for a total of 197 countries. As the USA is a member of the UN, you are correct in saying that it's a party to the Montreal Protocol.
  
  --
  Good, inexpensive web hosting
17. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 11:23 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  Perhaps because Republicans believe that it will be more effective to protect the environment in other ways. Government is not always the correct answer.
18. Re:Easy, India or China by Dorianny · 2014-08-20 11:31 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I can think of a certain group of American Republicans who would do exactly that...
  Privately there are many Republicans that do believe in the scientific method and would like to see action on climate change but are reluctant to admit it because of fear of being labeled as traitors. On the Democratic camp there are many that realize that cap and trade, and so called "renewables" cannot be a complete solution to halting global warming but are simply afraid to support low or 0 carbon, but uncool power generation technologies, such as Nuclear for fear of being labeled the same.
19. Re:Easy, India or China by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-08-20 11:43 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Who controlled Congress for all of those things?
20. Re:Easy, India or China by ohieaux · 2014-08-20 11:46 · Score: 2
  
  Why did "mega-corporate bitch" Obama introduce new carbon emissions rules in June that will cost energy producers a fortune?
  I'm pretty sure the "fortune" will be paid by the common folk, and go to the corporations making green products. And, I'm guessing these "green" companies are held by the 1%
  
  --
  Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.
21. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 11:47 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Easy.
  Democrats are right-center moderately pro-buisness, socially liberal.
  Republicans are corporate whores controlled by a handful of privately funded think tanks that are actively out to destroy the wealth, social mobility, rights, and lives of anyone who's not rich. They are literally trying to upturn the last few hundred years of social progress and establish a modern aristocracy. They use religion and fear-based propaganda to whip up an uneducated voter base. They are monsters. Manipulative. Amoral. Evil in the purest sense.
  The former has problems that can be solved. The later will be the end of everything you love and hold dear.
22. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 11:48 · Score: 0
  
  If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you.
23. Re:Easy, India or China by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-08-20 11:55 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  So just because a bill is called the Clear Skies Act, you think it helps the environment and hurts corporations? Apparently you're the reason that consultants like Frank Luntz make the big bucks. My friend worked for him when he came up with that name. It was a total giveaway to corporate interests. That does nothing to contradict my post.
  Nixon was much more centrist and pragmatic on a lot of issues than people remember. Also, that EPA bill was passed by a Democratic Congress. The GOP really started their anti-environment push with Reagan- who immediately had the solar panels removed from the White House. It went into high gear starting in 1994 with Newt Gingrich.
24. Re:Easy, India or China by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-08-20 11:56 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Democrat, Republican, where's the difference?
  That was literally the entire point of my post that you're replying to.
25. Re:Easy, India or China by gargleblast · 2014-08-20 12:16 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  The Clear Skies Act 2003 was a failed attempt by Republicans to INCREASE the amount of allowed air pollution. It would have done exactly the opposite of its title. It is a textbook example of doublespeak. It was never passed. It was an abysmal failure on so many levels.
  Old George and Tricky Dicky weren't quite so brazen as Dubya. But: HW's sulphur cap and trade program took another five years to start, and was less successful than conventional regulation in Europe.
26. Re:Easy, India or China by geekoid · 2014-08-20 12:21 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  You should really read those links. Seriously dude, just linking something you don't actually understand as some sort of proof just mkas you look foolish.
  The first one made it worse:
  The law reduces air pollution controls, including those environmental protections of the Clean Air Act, including caps on toxins in the air and budget cuts for enforcement. The Act is opposed by conservationist groups such as the Sierra Club with Henry A. Waxman, a Democratic congressman of California, describing its title as "clear propaganda."
  Among other things, the Clear Skies Act:
  Allows 42 million more tons of pollution emitted than the EPA proposal.
  Weakens the current cap on nitrogen oxide pollution levels from 1.25 million tons to 2.1 million tons, allowing 68% more NOx pollution.
  Delays the improvement of sulfur dioxide (SO2) pollution levels compared to the Clean Air Act requirements.
  Delays enforcement of smog-and-soot pollution standards until 2015.
  By 2018, the Clear Skies Act will supposedly allow 3 million tons more NOx through 2012 and 8 million more by 2020, for SO2, 18 million tons more through 2012 and 34 million tons more through 2020. 58 tons more mercury through 2012 and 163 tons more through 2020 would be released into the environment than what would be allowed by enforcement of the Clean Air Act.[2]
  In August 2001, the EPA proposed a version of the Clear Skies Act that contained short timetables and lower emissions caps [3]. It is unknown why this proposal was withdrawn and replaced with the Bush Administration proposal. It is also unclear whether or not the original EPA proposal would have made it out of committee.
  The second one--Signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on December 17, 1963
  The third one-- Nixon combined existing groups into one, for budget reasons.
  However, I would argue the the Pubs of the 60's and 70s are vastly different then the pubs of today. Post religious right control.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
27. Re:Easy, India or China by geekoid · 2014-08-20 12:27 · Score: 1
  
  Well, all the initial groups where created by LBJ, and then Nixon consolidated them
  The clean are act did no such thing and created looser standards.
  please, Please, PLEASE read up on the stuff.
  DDT had never been shown to do what the speculation is SIlent Spring claimed it did. It was pure FUD.
  There is nothing wrong with fracking. Saying Obama is for fracking is like saying Obama is for factual evidence based decisions. I know you can't handle a politician that doesn't just spout nonsense that happen to support your uneducated biases.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
28. Re:Easy, India or China by geekoid · 2014-08-20 12:29 · Score: 1
  
  Really, if the pubs actually all got together and said, yep, it's real then they whole party would change and they would have little to fear.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
29. Re:Easy, India or China by geekoid · 2014-08-20 12:30 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Non of that actually makes any damn sense.
  This stupid scientist make things up for money meme need to really fucking stop when every expert in the field agrees.
  Fuck, you're stupid.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
30. Re:Easy, India or China by Nethemas+the+Great · 2014-08-20 12:38 · Score: 1
  
  The alternative sources of carbon based fuels doesn't increase pollution, just changes where we're getting the goods. Domestic production provides for some flexibility and reduced dependency upon middle-east and other traditional and problematic sources. It would have been nice to deal with the pollution thing too, but at least it was a step forward on other issues.
  
  --
  Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
31. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 12:43 · Score: 1
  
  "haha, under what president was the EPA created?"
  As an outsider looking in, why does it matter which person was president? It seems to me that as the current presidency has illustrated, who is president is a small factor in whether something passes. It is much more important who has the majority in congress.
  So for your example Acts, which party had the majority in congress?
32. Re:Easy, India or China by structural_biologist · 2014-08-20 12:50 · Score: 2
  
  I can think of a certain group of American Republicans who would do exactly that...
  Indeed, some conservatives in America have taken on the practice of coal rolling, outfitting diesel trucks to spew black smoke as protest against environmental regulations.
33. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:09 · Score: 0
  
  Australia has very strict laws banning all use of ozone damaging chemicals for years and the fines are very steep so you can cross Australia off the list. Just because Australia thinks the carbon tax is poorly thought out doesn't mean we are stupid. Also consider the average Australian consumption of electrical power is going down thanks to the wide use or solar cells/efficient home appliances that has nothing to do with the carbon tax and everything to do with clever government regulations you can understand our position on the matter of carbon taxes.
34. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:09 · Score: 0
  
  Who else would, unapologetically, give the middle finger to the environment?
  Brazil, Mexico, Spain, Turkey, Egypt, Pakistan, US, UK, Sweden, Argentina, Australia, South Africa, Nigeria, Poland, and probably quite a few others.
  But not Canada. Canada would apologize.
  Not just apologize, but cry out together as one, from the clear cuts to the tar sands.
35. Re:Easy, India or China by Type44Q · 2014-08-20 13:09 · Score: 1
  
  HW Bush made Clean Air Act tougher and that reduced acid rain and smog at the time
  Here's a thought: let's mod people up as long as they soundauthoritative...
36. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:21 · Score: 0
  
  Fuck, you're stupid.
  You are not occupying high ground from which to make pronouncements in the category
  of intelligence.
  I've read dozens of idiotic comments you've made over the years. I'd have to
  say you are one of the most stupid of all the regular commenters on Slashdot.
  You also seem to have an excess of free time, which indicates that you are
  not REALLY a "dad", or you are shirking your responsibilities toward family
  when you dick around on Slashdot and make comments worthy of a high school
  punk.
  .
37. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:22 · Score: 0
  
  All political parties are exactly the same. None of them give a shit about the planet or you, just their money.
38. Re:Easy, India or China by rubycodez · 2014-08-20 13:34 · Score: 1
  
  you are missing the fact that the presidents mentioned used their office as bully pulpit to push for those laws
39. Re:Easy, India or China by Richy_T · 2014-08-20 13:54 · Score: 1
  
  But it's a bridge to nowhere. And hey, you're taking my money at gunpoint.
40. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 14:13 · Score: 0
  
  Uh, Indonesia? The Philippines? Sicily and southern Italy? North Korea? Pakistan? Belarus? Basically anywhere with a little bit of industry, but run by a dictator or where the rule of law is sketchy.
41. Re:Easy, India or China by Imrik · 2014-08-20 14:27 · Score: 0
  
  Because the Democrats are backed by corporations that profit from "environmentally friendly" legislation.
42. Re:Easy, India or China by ChrisMaple · 2014-08-20 14:50 · Score: 0
  
  I assume you think 1917 was a particularly good year for social progress.
  
  --
  Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
43. Re:Easy, India or China by ChrisMaple · 2014-08-20 14:54 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Zero carbon?!? Why do you wish death for 90% of the people in the world?
  
  --
  Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
44. Re:Easy, India or China by Razed+By+TV · 2014-08-20 15:01 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Re-read your post. I'll help you out, even.
  
  So why has every environmental initiative in the past 40 years been pushed by the Democrats and resisted by the Republicans?
  
  Why did "mega-corporate bitch" Obama introduce new carbon emissions rules in June that will cost energy producers a fortune?
  What happened to your brain in the 60 minutes between your posts? At first you extoll the virtues of the Democrats, and now you claim your original post is about Democrats and Rebulicans being the same. Do you see the discontinuity?
  
  GP has it right. The US was built disregarding the damage we were doing to the environment. Now that we're on top, its easy for us to tell people not to do things. But if anyone else wants to get ahead, they're going to do it the cheap and easy way. Without some sort of alternative financial incentive, greed will drive countries to disregard the environment to ensure their industry evolves. While you can point at Democrats and Republicans and call them angels or devils, the rest of the world is going to do what they want with regards to the environment (and there are a lot more of them than there are of us).
45. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:05 · Score: 0
  
  Australia could crush it, but they have to dismantle everything shortly after building it, for the fun of doing it all again! The mind boggles.
46. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:09 · Score: 1
  
  Red or Blue they all worship green... it really doesn't matter.
47. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:27 · Score: 1
  
  What happened to your brain in the 60 minutes between your posts? At first you extoll the virtues of the Democrats, and now you claim your original post is about Democrats and Rebulicans being the same.
  
  What happened to yours, because Ralph never said they were the same.
  
  Here, I'll repeat the whole thread for you, but while using simpler words so that you can hopefully correctly follow it this time.
  
  dosius: Republicans suck!
  iggymanz: So do Democrats.
  Ralph Wiggam: Here are some reasons that Democrats do not suck.
  Opportunist: Democrat, Republican, what's the difference?
  Ralph Wiggam: I just told you what the difference is.
  
  Agree, disagree, I don't care. But don't act like Ralph said one thing when he really said another. It'll just harm your credibility.
48. Re:Easy, India or China by sg_oneill · 2014-08-20 15:30 · Score: 1
  
  Both the Dems and Republicans are as bad as each other on this point. To their credit the Dems haven't bowed to the denialism PR campaign by going full retard on the pseudoscience, but instead seem to be just doing as little as possible to seem like they are doing something and practically doing fuck all.
  Is it any wonder its the states that are really taking the lead on carbon reduction. I grant thats partly due to how US federalism works, but staunch action from the whitehouse would certainly send a message that no its not OK to shit in the commons without consequence.
  
  --
  Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
49. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:31 · Score: 0
  
  Perhaps because Republicans believe that it will be more effective to protect the environment in other ways.
  "Sorry, but you done fucked your own shit up, I ain't gonna bail you out again."
  
  -God
50. Re:Easy, India or China by Kernel+Kurtz · 2014-08-20 16:15 · Score: 1
  
  And a huge number of people, not just in America but indeed all around the world, persist in having open fires, despite the EPA regulating wood stoves and fireplaces.
  Bastards don't know Thermageddon is upon us. You would think they would not need fires.
51. Re: Easy, India or China by O('_')O_Bush · 2014-08-20 16:51 · Score: 1
  
  Just about all companies are held by the 1%. Typically, companies pay company holders enough to be 1%'ers. What was your point there? The 1% isn't a hand-wringing, conniving, homogeneous group of evil doers.
  
  --
  while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
52. Re:Easy, India or China by chmod+a+x+mojo · 2014-08-20 17:02 · Score: 1
  
  Wow, you either have guts or a serious lack of brains if you are trying to lecture a person on how Science works while not even knowing the difference between hypothesis, theory, and law.
  Here's a hint: for something to become "only a theory" all hypothesis aspects of it has to have undergone extensive testing as well as being an accurate description of the observations being studied.
  
  There is zero demonstrable practical output or progress in terms of human progress or human suffering to show for all the work and money that has gone into this field over the last 30 years, and anyone who puts any stock in it is no better informed than the creationist who believes that the world is 6,000 years old, because all of the world's leading bible scientists sat on their hemorrhoids and confirmed the same values while trying to infer the entire history and trajectory of the universe using a single pre-scientific-method cultural document transcribed from one culture's oral tradition, that described some details of some other culture's cultural events.
  Yeah, all of us scientifically trained people are stew-pod right? Just because we didn't directly observe the clown that threw the pie in our face it must mean that there is no pie on our face huh? Face it, there are tons of people smarter than you, me, and everyone else out there... thousands of them from hundreds of countries saying the same thing after studying the wide spread of data available VS something like 50, maybe 100, all with shall we say... interesting ties to funding provided by parties with a vested interest in denying any sort of involvement with the environment.
  Hmmm, wonder who seems more trustworthy to me?
  
  --
  To err is human; effective mayhem requires the root password!
53. Re: Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 17:04 · Score: 1
  
  It could come from garbage dumbs. Where people throw stuff years ago and slowly as materials break down the gas gets free.
54. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 17:04 · Score: 0
  
  The source is unknown. Carbon Tetrachloride, how do we know the source isn't something natural, the ocean is full of carbon and chlorine.
55. Re:Easy, India or China by digsbo · 2014-08-20 17:19 · Score: 1
  
  You mean like this thread? http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
56. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 18:06 · Score: 0
  
  Why stop only at people? Everything organic contains carbon, so...
57. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 18:38 · Score: 0
  
  Is the earth still flat?
  You realise that the ancient Greeks knew the Earth is round, right?
  One of the things they used to prove this was that the sails of a ship appear before the hull, at the horizon. If the Earth was flat, the whole ship would be in view.
  
  ...then I would expect the most powerful cluster of supercomputers on the planet to be able to predict if is going to rain next weekend better than the farmer's almanac.
  You think this is a good argument because you know nothing of science. If you had the first clue of what you are talking about, you would know why that is such a foolish thing to say.
  You should stop typing. Now.
  Actually, I have a better idea.
  Take all your ideas, and write them down. Try and break them up into individual parts. Grab your sheets of paper, and head on down to the local university, and duck into the various departments (you'll be spending most of your time in the mathematics and physics departments) and ask the staff there to explain to you why this is wrong.
  You will come away a more educated and better person for your trouble, but you will be there for a long time.
58. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 18:38 · Score: 0
  
  If you think the Left is any better than the Right, you've got some re-thinking to do. If anything the Left is worse, but they're both trying to kill the country. The key point to get over in your head, coming from the typical Left-preferable political angle you have, is that the "Government" isn't a special case that you can treat differently than a business. The Left isn't pro-business because they're pro-big-Government. The Government is basically the worst possible nightmare-scenario giant monopoly evil corporation you can imagine. The more the Left moves jobs from private-sector to public-sector, and moves people's incomes and dependencies from private-sector to public-sector (e.g. destroying the job market and then propping up the jobless on welfare programs), the worse the mega-Government-Monopoly gets as it consolidates all wealth and power. And unlike the worst corporations you can imagine, there is *no* legal recourse against an over-powerful government. They make the laws, and most of the laws that bind corporations don't apply. Just try and file an anti-trust lawsuit against a government department, or block their usurping of further private enterprise the way you'd block a corporate merger...
  But really, even that's a very naive point of view, it's just less-naive than the typical point of view. The next level up in enlightenment comes when you re-state the above more-clearly: Governments, Corporations, and even many multi-national NGOs are all examples of powerful people controlling little people for their own gain and to maintain a clear division between the elites and the non-elites. The concentration of power always attracts the sociopaths that want to abuse it and leverage it over the less-powerful. Whether they sit in the CEO's chair or Congress has little bearing on what's going on.
  Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle . Governments are aggressors by definition. They wield power over their people through aggression (police powers, prisons, tax systems, etc). The approval rating of the US Congress is in the single digits right now, and yet they're still in power and writing laws. Does that sound like the picture of democracy they painted for you in gradeschool?
59. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 18:42 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, ok, the rape of the middle class and all, but by in large the GOP has great hair.
  That's got to count for something.
60. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 18:50 · Score: 0
  
  Carl Sagan would not respect your ideas and would liken you to processed luncheon meat.
61. Re:Easy, India or China by theshowmecanuck · 2014-08-20 19:31 · Score: 1
  
  How about Chinese factories in Africa... for a twist?
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
62. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 19:36 · Score: 0
  
  This question:
  
  Democrat, Republican, where's the difference?
  If read as a sarcastic rhetorical question (which is likely how user Opportunity intended it to be), it means that there is no difference. If read literally, it is a question to which user Ralph Wiggam gave an answer.
63. Re:Easy, India or China by Wootery · 2014-08-20 22:11 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The Government is basically the worst possible nightmare-scenario giant monopoly evil corporation you can imagine.
  Here in the UK, our government has taken steps to prevent there being a monopoly ISP. They didn't start a government-run ISP, they just regulated things to prevent a monopoly. And... it worked. Not all government intervention means shifting things from the private to the public sector. If anything, I imagine there are now more ISP jobs than there would be with a monopoly.
  Also, we don't have to suffer truly godawful ISPs, the way you do in the US, which is nice.
  But no, you'll go on believing all that government does is evil (that might not be such a worry if it weren't for that your system allows payments that would be classified as bribery in damn near any other country, btw), and that there's no better way to run a country than by letting corporations screw over the average person.
64. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 22:49 · Score: 0
  
  Why is this insightful? Do you guys even know the U.S.' contribution to the destruction of the environment? How does it compare with India's or China's? Has the U.S. ever apologized?
65. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 22:58 · Score: 0
  
  I liked them better when they were whigs.
66. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 23:01 · Score: 0
  
  Amen brother.
  Not to mention the epic fuck ups in the middle east. As everyone can see in Iraq.
  But it accomplished the task of funneling lots and lots of tax $$$ into the industries owned and/or befriended by Cheney, Rumsfeld & Co. Mission Accomplished!
  Oh, yeah. And they also tortured some folks, for Freedom and Democracy.
  In the meantime, Bradley/Chelsea Manning is serving a 35 year sentence for disclosing abuses, indiscriminate killings and other human rights violations by US forces.
  Land of the free.
67. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 23:09 · Score: 0
  
  The first post states that Democrats have historically pushed for (introduced and supported) new legislation, and the Republican party generally opposes it. The second post is an example of a Democrat introducing new legislation. There is no discontinuity.
68. Re:Easy, India or China by dunkelfalke · 2014-08-20 23:10 · Score: 1
  
  Well, in fact it was.
  For the majority of the population life in soviet Russia was better than in czarist Russia.
  It also ultimately lead to Germany becoming a democracy.
  
  --
  "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
69. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 00:06 · Score: 0
  
  lol, you, still sucking thatchers lies.
  we have a near monopoly, BT which owns pretty much all of the last mile, nearly all isp's simply resell BT
70. Re:Easy, India or China by dcw3 · 2014-08-21 00:25 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  That's okay, I don't respect Carl Sagan.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
71. Re:Easy, India or China by Tyrannicsupremacy · 2014-08-21 00:38 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  And it worked? No, you just have a censored internet. http://www.csmonitor.com/Innov...
  
  --
  http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
72. Re:Easy, India or China by xrobertcmx · 2014-08-21 00:39 · Score: 1
  
  As a lifelong Democrat I think you pitched the number about 10% too low.
73. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 00:48 · Score: 0
  
  Obama has not done this and probably cannot do so. It is merely posturing.
  The last EPA initiative for cleaning up power plants was passed as an ineffective set of regulations:
  http://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/environment/epas-toothless-carbon-regulations
74. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 00:55 · Score: 0
  
  Carbon Credit farmers?
  
  Since the United Nations program began, 46 percent of all credits have been awarded to the 19 coolant factories, in Argentina, China, India, Mexico and South Korea. Two Russian plants receive carbon credits for destroying HFC-23 under a related United Nations program.
75. Re:Easy, India or China by Beyond_GoodandEvil · 2014-08-21 00:57 · Score: 1
  
  So why has every environmental initiative in the past 40 years been pushed by the Democrats and resisted by the Republicans?
  How the fuck did this get +4 insightful? The Kosdot is strong today. Let's go back less than 40 yrs ago to the Byrd-Hagel resolution that passed 95-0 in the US senate prior to Clinton signing the Kyoto Protocol. Do you honestly believe there were 95 republican senators at that time? Hint there wasn't.
  
  --
  I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
76. Re:Easy, India or China by CoderFool · 2014-08-21 01:01 · Score: 1
  
  I can think of some Democrats and some Republicans that are as you say. I can also think of some Democrats that are as you say the Republicans are and some Republicans that are as you say the Democrats are. The truth is somewhere in the middle between the Republican propaganda and the Democrat propaganda. And the comments people make tell you which propaganda they are swallowing hook, line, and sinker.
77. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 01:20 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, I forgot that a Democrat established the EPA, and signed the Clean Water Act.
  No wait, that was Richard Nixon.
78. Re:Easy, India or China by MachineShedFred · 2014-08-21 01:22 · Score: 2
  
  Congratulations on painting about 100M people with that brush, because clearly they're all exactly the same.
  YOU are the problem with politics in the United States.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
79. Re:Easy, India or China by budgenator · 2014-08-21 01:24 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe the radical fringe in the Democratic party doesn't count anything as "environmental initiative" unless it is narsisitic grandious exhibitionism and the moderates in both party find themselves putting more effort into keeping the fringes from scuttling any posible consensus than they do solve real demonstrable problems.
  For example FTA,
  
  "It is now apparent there are either unidentified industrial leakages, large emissions from contaminated sites, or unknown CCl4 sources."
  how many Eco-activists are going to automatically assume that it's "unidentified industrial leakages" from evil one-percenter corporations, vs. those wondering if salt in seawater, natural organic chemicals and high energy photons may be cause a previously unrecognised chemical reaction? Even odder, we have no evidence that there ever was no hole in the ozone, so how do we decide how much is anthropgenic and how much is natural variation and how much is always was?
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
80. Re:Easy, India or China by MachineShedFred · 2014-08-21 01:41 · Score: 1
  
  And, ultimately, have the power to shitcan the laws under Article I, Section VII of the United States Constitution:
  
  "Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law."
  If the President really doesn't want something to happen, and the other side doesn't have the 66% + 1 vote to override, that's the way it's going to be.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
81. Re: Easy, India or China by caveqat101 · 2014-08-21 01:53 · Score: 1
  
  It's amazing, that after DDT and malithion, things improved. More mosquito's but more birds. So then they created a stronger flu....
82. Re:Easy, India or China by Charcharodon · 2014-08-21 01:54 · Score: 1
  
  Also, we don't have to suffer truly godawful ISPs, the way you do in the US, which is nice.
  cough cough....BT...cough.
  P> Look up BT in the dictionary and you'll get the definition of "truly godawful"
83. Re:Easy, India or China by Noah+Haders · 2014-08-21 02:01 · Score: 1
  
  my first thought too. probably china.
84. Re:Easy, India or China by Noah+Haders · 2014-08-21 02:04 · Score: 1
  
  spanish flu sucked.
85. Re:Easy, India or China by BasilBrush · 2014-08-21 02:54 · Score: 1, Flamebait
  
  Nothing he said implies they're all exactly the same. As a group they do have the motivation he mentions. The wealth gap is widening, and everything the Republicans do is designed to make it so. They are evil. Every single one.
86. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 03:13 · Score: 0
  
  Precisely two of the several countries I was going to suggest. Also look at South America, Mexico, Russia, N. Korea (do they have power?) and any other 3rd world country that is trying to "grow up".
87. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 03:22 · Score: 0
  
  certain group? How about 100% of ALL politicians.
88. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 03:27 · Score: 0
  
  And that is worse that the previous state-owned total monopoly, how?
89. Re:Easy, India or China by Ralph+Wiggam · 2014-08-21 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  What the shit?
  Your reading comprehension is seriously terrible. See the other replies for details about why you're an idiot.
90. Re:Easy, India or China by dcw3 · 2014-08-21 03:59 · Score: 1
  
  HW Bush made Clean Air Act tougher and that reduced acid rain and smog at the time
  Here's a thought: let's mod people up as long as they soundauthoritative...
  That's how both Reagan, and Obama got elected.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
91. Re:Easy, India or China by Wootery · 2014-08-21 04:02 · Score: 1
  
  I use ADSL over copper owned by BT, but my connection is through another provider.
  (For non-Brits: BT are required to allow other ISPs to make use of their copper, for a reasonable price. Yes, there's kinda a monopoly on the infrastructure, but as a customer I deal with my ISP, not with BT. The actual connection to the Internet is handled by the ISP, not by BT. The scheme generally works pretty well.)
  I have no complaints at all, but I accept it's not perfect all over the country.
92. Re:Easy, India or China by Wootery · 2014-08-21 04:03 · Score: 1
  
  Totally irrelevant, but yes, it is a cause for concern.
93. Re:Easy, India or China by blue9steel · 2014-08-21 04:08 · Score: 1
  
  You're giving the Democrats way too much credit. The Republicans may be trying to establish a hereditary plutocracy, but the Democrats are working towards something that has the goals & efficiency of Communism with the forms of Fascism. (A large central bureaucracy, little economic freedom for individuals, integration of government and corporate interests, a disarmed populace subjugated by a wide array of government agents, etc.) On the bright side, with the two parties working at cross purposes we're ending up with the worst parts of both systems.
94. Re:Easy, India or China by Opportunist · 2014-08-21 05:00 · Score: 1
  
  I like their hair and I like their shoes, it's just that useless bit in between that sucks.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
95. Re:Easy, India or China by TemporalBeing · 2014-08-21 05:02 · Score: 1
  
  Nothing he said implies they're all exactly the same. As a group they do have the motivation he mentions. The wealth gap is widening, and everything the Republicans do is designed to make it so. They are evil. Every single one.
  What's funny is that everything the Democrats do does the same thing. They are evil. Every single one.
  
  --
  Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
96. Re:Easy, India or China by MugenEJ8 · 2014-08-21 05:17 · Score: 1
  
  On the bright side, with the two parties working at cross purposes we're ending up with the worst parts of both systems.
  Exactly this, sorry no mod points.
97. Re:Easy, India or China by fnj · 2014-08-21 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  Why did "mega-corporate bitch" Obama introduce new carbon emissions rules in June that will cost energy producers a fortune?
  President Obama did not introduce carbon dioxide emissions rules. The EPA, an agency answerable to no one, did. I will not attempt to analyze their motivation except to point out that their charter, their raison d'etre, is to pursue curtailing the effect of human life on the environment without a thought to return, cost, or tradeoff.
  It is a fallacious premise that taxing or levying costly requirements on businesses attaches or moderates their profits. It doesn't. It is just a dreary tax on society. Increasing costs for producers of absolute necessities does not cost them a dime. The producers just raise their prices and pass every bit of the increase on to their customers. The public is shafted. There will be programs to assist the hopelessly poor, but NOTHING for the working class. They have to buy their necessities to live. Their standard of living will plummet. Many of them will be made hopelessly poor; then finally they will get assistance, but only enough to allow them a bleak life.
98. Re:Easy, India or China by fnj · 2014-08-21 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  For the majority of the population life in soviet Russia was better than in czarist Russia.
  I think that is a pointless generalization impossible to support. Alexander Solzhenitzyn estimated Stalin's death toll at 60 million. That is a startling figure, even if it doesn't represent a majority of those who lived there during Stalin's period.
99. Re:Easy, India or China by fnj · 2014-08-21 06:12 · Score: 1
  
  Ultimately a pointless question. The named Presidents signed the bills involved. They did not veto them.
100. Re:Easy, India or China by i.kazmi · 2014-08-21 06:55 · Score: 0
  
  Plus there's the Virgin Media fibre broadband with the slowest connection at 50Mbps and the fastest at 152Mbps...hell I had a 20Mbps unlimited connection in 2007...
101. Re:Easy, India or China by dunkelfalke · 2014-08-21 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  Solzhenitzyn was full of shit for several reasons and 60 million would be half of the population.
  
  --
  "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
102. Re:Easy, India or China by omnichad · 2014-08-21 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  As everyone can see in Iraq.
  There are blind people in Iraq, too, you insensitive clod!
103. Re:Easy, India or China by omnichad · 2014-08-21 08:33 · Score: 1
  
  While that's mostly true, anything that lowers the price of fuel will increase consumption.
104. Re:Easy, India or China by david_thornley · 2014-08-21 09:45 · Score: 1
  
  Well, Anonymous Coward, do you want to own up to all the incredibly stupid posts under your username?
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
105. Re:Easy, India or China by riverat1 · 2014-08-21 10:09 · Score: 1
  
  So why has every environmental initiative in the past 40 years been pushed by the Democrats and resisted by the Republicans?
  Not really. Up until the 1990's there were enough Republicans who were sane about the environment to get things done. It's only recently that has changed.
106. Re:Easy, India or China by Richard+Dick+Head · 2014-08-21 11:08 · Score: 1
  
  Your pie in the face comparison is invalid. It suggests disaster has already struck. The only disaster that has ever struck flies in the face of what you and other scientific midgets who can't read a simple spreadsheet detailing results of core samples...the next ice age. It is coming. Bring on more carbon.
  
  Millions of people repeating the experiments of others to put a bullet point in the education section on a CV may or may not mean anything. How many lives have been improved by this experiment? Where is the utility? Just follow the money, and you'll find it...
  
  --
  The real path to male liberation
107. Re:Easy, India or China by Richard+Dick+Head · 2014-08-21 11:09 · Score: 1
  
  You realise that the ancient Greeks knew the Earth is round, right?
  Aww, he's trying to argue. Look at him use his words! Such a good boy.
  
  --
  The real path to male liberation
108. Re:Easy, India or China by wolja · 2014-08-21 11:13 · Score: 1
  
  and I can think of a certain group of American Democrats who despite whatever noises they make at the end of the day are equally mega-corporate bitches same as the Republicans. Obama and 90% of Democrats in Congress for starters....
  Just because both sides of your Govt are broken / corrupt doesn't mean the system is right.
  
  --
  Wolja Future Tombstone: Shit happened then I died
109. Re:Easy, India or China by Zynder · 2014-08-21 14:17 · Score: 1
  
  I can eat at any restaurant I want -there's 20 of em with 5 blocks of me- and I can eat whatever and however much of anything I want. Problem is all they serve are old beans and dried out liver and I hate them both!
110. Re: Easy, India or China by Zynder · 2014-08-21 14:28 · Score: 1
  
  [Citation Fucking Needed]
111. Re:Easy, India or China by ThurstonMoore · 2014-08-21 16:59 · Score: 1
  
  Why did "mega-corporate bitch" Obama introduce new carbon emissions rules in June that will cost energy producers a fortune?
  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/02/us/politics/epa-to-seek-30-percent-cut-in-carbon-emissions.html
  Correction. Will cost energy consumers a fortune, not producers.
112. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 17:46 · Score: 0
  
  "dick head" suits you well. You really think scientists would make up crap to get more funding? In a field that has propably thousands of people working around the world? You think they would get away with that? Reporting knowingly wrong facts will ruin your career in science (no, political shills aren't scientist, they report false science everyday, a practice which should be punishable, as they are trying, and succeeding, in conning the public)
113. Re:Easy, India or China by Wootery · 2014-08-21 21:42 · Score: 1
  
  Government-mandated censorship is a totally separate issue from a broken, monopolised, non-competitive ISP market.
114. Re:Easy, India or China by Charcharodon · 2014-08-21 23:34 · Score: 1
  
  Those connections are wonderful, where they are available (typically on in town, go even a couple miles outside and your choices are pretty much crap BT. No different than in the States. I live in Tampa now and enjoy a 100/65mbit for the same price I was paying in England for the garbage ADLS connection six years ago. 100/65 is not even their fastest offering, but again go a little to far out of town and your choices stink.
115. Re:Easy, India or China by BasilBrush · 2014-08-22 08:20 · Score: 1
  
  Nonsense. The Affordable care act for example is intended to do the opposite. Its a flawed semi-done piece of legislation, but that's because the Republicans have done nothing but obstruct as usual.
116. Re:Easy, India or China by diamondmagic · 2014-08-22 23:20 · Score: 1
  
  And there are other Republicans who do believe in the scientific method, and that global warming is at least in part manmade, but think the $100B price tag to delay the effects by just a decade or two could be better spent elsewhere.
  Seriously, when's the last time a climatologist actually did a cost-benefit analysis to the proposed solutions?
  
  --
  Wonder what the public key field is for?
117. Re:Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-25 00:06 · Score: 0
  
  Please explain how a Democrat-majority in the House, a Democrat filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and a Democrat President could enact a flawed semi-done piece of legislation, and then blame Republicans.
  Unless you are being sarcastic, in which case, good show.
118. Re:Easy, India or China by iggymanz · 2014-08-25 07:56 · Score: 1
  
  doesn't matter, these presidents PUSHED for those things and moreover were able to work with a Congress of opposite party in some cases.
119. Re:Easy, India or China by jwhitener · 2014-08-25 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  I wouldn't put past some people.... some anti-environmentalists rigged their trucks to produce more pollution. Rolling coal - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbAhfThNoco
120. Re:Easy, India or China by TemporalBeing · 2014-08-26 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  Never said they blamed the Republicans for it. Just that they are doing the same thing themselves.
  
  --
  Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
121. Re:Easy, India or China by TemporalBeing · 2014-08-26 01:24 · Score: 1
  
  Nonsense. The Affordable care act for example is intended to do the opposite. Its a flawed semi-done piece of legislation, but that's because the Republicans have done nothing but obstruct as usual.
  Publically intended, yes. Truely intended? I doubt it. It's a highly flawed piece of legislation that should never have been passed.
  
  --
  Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
122. Re:Easy, India or China by BasilBrush · 2014-08-26 07:14 · Score: 1
  
  I guess you don't follow US politics. The house has a Republican majority. And they've been blocking the president in everything they can. They are responsible for the problems in the Affordable Care Act.
china did it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:30 · Score: 0

and then lied about doing it
1. Re:china did it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:47 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, A China official said not long ago about Chinas air pollution, that the west started it, and that it's not their problem.
2. Re:china did it by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2014-08-20 10:56 · Score: 2
  
  "The west" started Chinese air pollution? So the smog around Chinese cities is our fault? They must be really desperate for excuses...
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
3. Re:china did it by Narcocide · 2014-08-20 11:02 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Its called "setting a bad example." This got my little sister out of trouble almost every single time.
4. Re:china did it by Stan92057 · 2014-08-20 11:17 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Well Corporate Americas is definitely at fault. They move the manufacturing to countries that have No EPA, No Unions, No OSHA. No labor laws.
  
  --
  Jack of all trades,master of none
5. Re:china did it by geekoid · 2014-08-20 12:31 · Score: 2
  
  Some fault probably belongs to the countries that don't have those regulations.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
6. Re:china did it by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 12:49 · Score: 0
  
  Certainly, but also with those intentionally abusing it for profit. Since they keep giving those countries an economical insentive to keep poluting. But at least the stats dont show that their own country is poluting...
7. Re:china did it by usuallylost · 2014-08-21 01:12 · Score: 1
  
  The history of China is that their government tends view their citizens as cheap expendable assets. If pollution related illnesses don’t kill them in inconvenient numbers they are willing to accept the impacts of the pollution. At least as long as those impacts fall on the general population and not the elites. I suspect you’ll find the elites have taken steps to protect themselves. Things like filtered water and air in their residences and offices etc. As far as the general public goes their real concern is that they are kept placid so what they are looking for is a scape goat to focus public anger on. So when people complain about pollution they trot out “evil people in the west did it”. Since they control the media and it is a police state ridiculous statements like that can pretty much stand mostly unchallenged.
North Korea? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:33 · Score: 1

Cuz ozone ronery.
1. Re:North Korea? by Opportunist · 2014-08-20 10:57 · Score: 1
  
  Can't be. Great Leader invented the Ozone Layer.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
2. Re:North Korea? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  Why would they bother to support a UN treaty? They're like the biggest rogue state on the planet.
  The continental United States is physically larger than North Korea. They are not the biggest rogue state.
Old drums leak by Noir+Angellus · 2014-08-20 10:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

and there are a lot of old drums of this stuff sitting around old industrial buildings because it costs money to have it disposed of safely. There's probably a degree of it being released by the new generation of workers who have no idea what's in those old rusty drums, and the older workers have plain forgotten, and are just dumping it into drains to get rid of it and make space in the chemical storage room.
1. Re:Old drums leak by Mashiki · 2014-08-20 11:58 · Score: 1
  
  If that was the case, it would be showing up in tests when they see what the composition of the waste is. I haven't heard of any places in north america where concentrations of CCl4 is showing up.
  
  --
  Om, nomnomnom...
2. Re:Old drums leak by rubycodez · 2014-08-20 13:30 · Score: 1
  
  such things are vented from old AC systems and fire suppression systems all the time, rather than properly pumped and destroyed
3. Re:Old drums leak by Mashiki · 2014-08-20 13:34 · Score: 1
  
  Then it should be showing up in local air samples too now wouldn't it? And again, I haven't heard of it showing up anywhere.
  
  --
  Om, nomnomnom...
4. Re:Old drums leak by rubycodez · 2014-08-20 13:43 · Score: 1
  
  they DO show up in air samples, alternative coverage of this article mentioned Tasmania, Australia
5. Re:Old drums leak by Mashiki · 2014-08-20 21:07 · Score: 1
  
  Well not exactly, it's showing up in batch samples. It's not showing up in various specific localized samples right. It seems that if they really wanted to find out "where it's coming from" they'd be running with more test equipment in various areas to narrow it down. Hell a smelter on the great lakes here in Ontario, has no less than 78 sampling devices in a concentric ring.
  
  --
  Om, nomnomnom...
6. Re:Old drums leak by rubycodez · 2014-08-21 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  but what kind of samplers, there are many types geared to specific concerns. and even of the kind that "absorb everything" for later analysis who knows what they look for?
7. Re: Old drums leak by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 19:59 · Score: 0
  
  Its a gas not a liquid.
Ooh, ooh I know! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:35 · Score: 0

It came from humans! Humans that don't give a shit!
1. Re:Ooh, ooh I know! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:39 · Score: 0
  
  Constipation causes ozone depletion?
2. Re:Ooh, ooh I know! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:51 · Score: 0
  
  Well, if I am constipated I am certainly liable to care a little less about the environment.
3. Re:Ooh, ooh I know! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2014-08-20 11:12 · Score: 1
  
  And lack of constipation causes global warming. We're screwed either way, it seems.
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
4. Re:Ooh, ooh I know! by Rosyna · 2014-08-20 12:43 · Score: 2
  
  Well, of course it came from humans. There is no natural source of CFCs on earth. They aren't a naturally occurring substance.
Source is HVAC Contractors by fibrewire · 2014-08-20 10:35 · Score: 5, Interesting

I know because it's happening all over the Coachella Valley. I have seen cut rate guys NOT reclaiming or pumping down coils - jettisoning 10+ pounds each time. This occurs at least 50 times a day here in the desert that I know of. Even top paid contractors like callthegeneral.com just don't care because their commission is based on number of visits per day, and it takes an extra 15-25 minutes to pump a system down before removal. The wholesale houses even pay a couple $$$ per pound of the reclaimed stuff, but commission rates ensure blowing off straight to atmosphere every time.
1. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Rockoon · 2014-08-20 10:41 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  ensure blowing off straight to atmosphere every time.
  Its a liquid. Please make arguments that at least show that you have a clue.
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
2. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by fibrewire · 2014-08-20 10:46 · Score: 1
  
  Water is a liquid as well, yet I'm breathing it as humidity every day
  "Prior to the Montreal Protocol, large quantities of carbon tetrachloride were used to produce the chlorofluorocarbon refrigerants R-11 (trichlorofluoromethane) and R-12 (dichlorodifluoromethane). However, these refrigerants play a role in ozone depletion and have been phased out." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
3. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by ShanghaiBill · 2014-08-20 10:51 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Nope. CCl4 is not used in HVAC systems. You are thinking of freon, which is not what TFA is about.
4. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:58 · Score: 0
  
  Please make arguments that at least show that you have a clue.
  Clueful posts on slashdot? That would be like Naples without garbage, traffic, and whores.
5. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 11:02 · Score: 0
  
  This people must be pretty dumb you get good money for used R22 and R12. Which also isn't the chemical being discussed.
6. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by sjames · 2014-08-20 11:10 · Score: 1
  
  I believe he was thinking of R22. Certainly a related problem.
7. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 11:41 · Score: 0
  
  There are lots of kinds of freon; are you sure none of them contain or decompose into CCl4?
8. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Rockoon · 2014-08-20 12:25 · Score: 0
  
  Water is a liquid as well, yet I'm breathing it as humidity every day
  When I open up the tap in my kitchen sink, am I "blowing off water straight to atmosphere" ???
  
  Of course not, showing us all that you didnt know that Carbon tetrachloride was a liquid while making your first post blaming a bunch of people that you clearly have other different issues with. You assumed that this stuff was a gas and because you have such a great track record with assumptions you didnt even both to verify it. This seems to be a repeating pattern in your life because for some strange fucking reason its not important to you to be informed before opening your fucking mouth..
  
  The correct order of operations is (1) Theory, (2) Evidence, (3) Conclusion. It is not what you have been doing which is (1) Conclusion, (2) Evidence, (3) Theory.
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
9. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Skidborg · 2014-08-20 12:32 · Score: 1
  
  You are, yes. Any water you use will end up in the atmosphere, because evaporation is inevitable.
  
  --
  Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
10. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 12:51 · Score: 0
  
  Yup, CCl4 is in fact a liquid at normal temperatures, but fibrewire was talking about HVAC units.
  They don't usually have CCl4 in them but rather freons (R12 is CCl2F2) which do evaporate immediately.
11. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Nethemas+the+Great · 2014-08-20 12:53 · Score: 1
  
  Actually you are. Take a nice hot shower (no exhaust fan, closed doors) and tell me what happens to your mirrors, walls, floor and ceiling.
  
  --
  Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
12. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by adolf · 2014-08-20 12:56 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I don't know of a single refrigerant in common use which remains liquid at STP. Almost all of them evaporate very, very quickly at atmospheric pressure.
  Indeed, the most common one in new equipment (these days) is R-134a. Which is the same thing that goes into the "canned air" commonly sold and used for cleaning computer gear, and is also the same chemical used in the more common forms of freeze spray (the difference being whether it is dispensed as a liquid via an internal dip tube, or as a gas by simple lack of a dip tube).
  What were you going on about, again?
  Oh, right. Clues.
  
  --
  Kid-proof tablet..
13. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by justthinkit · 2014-08-20 12:57 · Score: 1
  
  Article says ozone-depleting, and tries to blame a single thing. Wiki thinks otherwise -- Chlorofluorocarbons "deplete the ozone" (first paragraph).
  
  --
  I come here for the love
14. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:07 · Score: 0
  
  Its a liquid. Please make arguments that at least show that you have a clue.
  You do know that the problem as stated is that this stuff is in the atmosphere, right?
15. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:07 · Score: 0
  
  Right. To the tune of 30% peak.
16. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Nethemas+the+Great · 2014-08-20 13:09 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  CCl4 otherwise known as R-10 in the HVAC world, is a coolant and is a precursor to R-11 and R-12. Both of which happily decompose to CCl4.
  
  --
  Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
17. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by rubycodez · 2014-08-20 13:33 · Score: 1
  
  halon and the old refrigerants certainly are NOT liquid at STP, you are blathering about carbon tet perhaps but this thread was about venting HVAC
18. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:51 · Score: 0
  
  You seem a little upset, probably because you're missing something from my statements and it doesn't sit well with you. I usually just fill in the blanks using broken sentence fragments and assume that others can reconstitute the story through the process of inference. But let's go ahead and work out the details :)
  If you look here http://bit.ly/1oSZWkd you'll see that R12 or 'carbon tetrachloride' is "prepared by reacting carbon tetrachloride with hydrogen fluoride in the presence of a catalytic amount of antimony pentachloride" which has a boiling point of -21 degrees Fahrenheit, which makes it a gas at room temperature...
  I was going to spend a lengthy amount of time explaining the theory behind why carbon tetrachloride is found in the atmosphere and how it is destroying the ozone, and mention some conspiracy theorists views on the subject, but my wife says I need to get off the computer. Maybe we can finish this later - Have a nice day!
19. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by dentin · 2014-08-20 14:41 · Score: 1
  
  Don't be a dumbass. CCl4 isn't used in HVAC, CFC's are, and no, they aren't liquid at room temperatures.
  
  --
  Alter Aeon Multiclass MUD - http://www.alteraeon.com
20. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Rich0 · 2014-08-20 14:46 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  When I open up the tap in my kitchen sink, am I "blowing off water straight to atmosphere" ??? Of course not, showing us all that you didnt know that Carbon tetrachloride was a liquid while making your first post blaming a bunch of people that you clearly have other different issues with.
  Saying that something is a liquid/solid/gas/etc is a bit of a simplification. The reality is that substances exist in equilibrium between various phases, and this shifts based on temperature/pressure.
  If you spill some water on a sidewalk in the summer and come back an hour later, you won't see any water, because it will evaporate - probably fairly quickly depending on the humidity.
  Carbon tetrachloride is much more volatile than water in practice. The boiling point isn't all that much lower, but unlike water there is almost none of it present in the atmosphere to start out. That greatly facilitates evaporation per Le Chatelier's principle.
  Oh, and I don't think anybody uses carbon tetrachloride in air conditioners. Old ones certainly use CFCs though, and most of those boil at a lower temperature. Carbon tetrachloride has been a known carcinogen for ages, so industrial uses have been shifting away from it for a while.
21. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by apraetor · 2014-08-20 15:01 · Score: 1
  
  Freon, and the "safer' HFC-134a are both gasses at STP. They're only liquids during part of the refrigeration cycle, while under high pressure.
22. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Gothmolly · 2014-08-20 16:15 · Score: 1
  
  Thats the least of the worries people in Coachella have. It was a nice desert area and now it's turning into a smoggy, trafficky shithole due to farms, feedlots and Starbucks.
  
  --
  I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
23. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 16:31 · Score: 1
  
  R-11 boils at 75*f.
  R-12 boils at -20*f.
  R-22 boils at -40*f.
  R-134 boils at -25*f.
  See a pattern? Refrigerant compounds aren't chosen randomly, they're chosen because they can be liquified at reasonable pressures and sent through expansion valves to make frigidly cold gas at low pressures. For all their environmental faults, very short-chain halocarbons do this extremely well.
24. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by strikethree · 2014-08-20 18:19 · Score: 1
  
  When I open up the tap in my kitchen sink, am I "blowing off water straight to atmosphere" ???
  Erm... Heh. Actually, yes you are. Not all of it or even a significant percentage of it is blowing straight into the atmosphere but some of it assuredly is.
  As a test, take two rooms of equal size, one with a running a faucet and the other without. Measure the humidity level after as little as 10 minutes.
  Have a nice day. :)
  
  --
  "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
25. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Charliemopps · 2014-08-20 23:44 · Score: 1
  
  halon and the old refrigerants certainly are NOT liquid at STP, you are blathering about carbon tet perhaps but this thread was about venting HVAC
  I've seen a halon system go off in person before. It most certainly was a gas.
26. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Charliemopps · 2014-08-20 23:49 · Score: 2
  
  CCL4 has the industry name of R10
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
  And was most certainly used in air conditioners for decades. It's banned for that use now, but anyone with an older system that's being replaced could definitely have R10.
27. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by cnaumann · 2014-08-21 01:24 · Score: 1
  
  I have never seen an R10 have system. The are not common. It is possible that R10 exists as a contaminant in some older systems, but that would not account for the numbers they are seeing here.
28. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by usuallylost · 2014-08-21 01:27 · Score: 1
  
  I had an old HVAC system replaced in my house a few years ago. The contractor went to great pains to carefully pump out the old coolant before decommissioning the system. He told me that in my state if you get caught not doing it you can lose your license and incur significant fines. Perhaps your area simply doesn’t have the kind of enforcement mine does? Still from the article the amount being released is equaling 30% of the peak from before the ban. So while illegal dumping and venting may account for some of it I doubt it is all of it. My guess is we are going to find that some country is using it on a fairly sizable industrial scale. Based on their record of doing things like still using asbestos even though it is known to kill people I would look at India. That or some rogue country like North Korea.
29. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by cnaumann · 2014-08-21 01:34 · Score: 2
  
  Do you have a cite for this decomposition into carbon tet? You would have to knock the fluorine(s) off the R11 or R12, that is not so easy to do. I can see where bromine containing halons could decompose into chlorine containing halons given a mixture of chlorine and bromine containing halons and some UV light.
30. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by gpronger · 2014-08-21 05:56 · Score: 1
  
  Chemically it's not going to happen. Carbon tet is fluorinated to make the CFC's. The CFC's, in use are largely unreactive. We need to recharge due to leaks, not due to decompostion. In the atmosphere, the CFC's aren't going to have a ready source for the chlorine to somehow react back to carbon tet.
31. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 06:48 · Score: 0
  
  Keep in mind that the discussion is about unknown sources of CCl4 appearing in the atmosphere.
  One poster suggested HVAC units being dumped without having been purged.
  I don't think those could be a source of CCL4 because it has been a very long time since that was used as a refrigerant.
  I ask because I thought those were all phased out before the 1960's.
  Have you personally seen a refrigeration unit in use that used CCl4 (R-10)?
32. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 08:18 · Score: 0
  
  And when was the last time anyone used the poisonous R-10 in an HVAC unit?
33. Re:Source is HVAC Contractors by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 08:29 · Score: 0
  
  ensure blowing off straight to atmosphere every time.
  Its a liquid. Please make arguments that at least show that you have a clue.
  Please define the antecedent to the pronoun you used. What does "its" refer to?
  If you're referring to the CFC's in HVAC units in use for the last 40 years, then most assuredly they are vapor at STP.
  If you're referring to CCl4, the yeah it is a liquid at STP, but that hasn't been used in HVAC for decades due to being somewhat of a poison.
  Rockoon, it appears that you are the clue-lacking person regarding HVAC technology.
Re:Self-destructive people by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:36 · Score: 0

So... China then?
Check your local fracking mixture by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:36 · Score: 0, Troll

I would not be surprised at all if it is a component used in the fracking fluids associated with the process.
Since nobody will tell us what is used under "trade secret" lala, all naysayers to my possibility assertion are preemptively kaput.
1. Re:Check your local fracking mixture by ShanghaiBill · 2014-08-20 10:59 · Score: 1
  
  I would not be surprised at all if it is a component used in the fracking fluids associated with the process.
  That is extremely unlikely. In addition to being illegal, it would also not be effective. CCl4 is not soluble is water, and would not make hydrocarbons more mobile or more soluble. It would however, readily dissolve in hydrocarbon fluids, where it would be difficult and expensive to separate.
2. Re:Check your local fracking mixture by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:04 · Score: 0
  
  It's not actually much of a trade secret. If you're really curious, sit by a frack site and read the placards on the trucks driving in. Then grab a DOT manual and look up what those numbers mean. They'll boil down to one or two chemicals. Shape and color of said placard will tell you roughly what properties the chemical has, the numbers will specify in much more detail.
  Seriously, you guys for bitching so much about not knowing what's in it really can't be bothered to do any research. And yes, any and all hazardous materials MUST be placarded to be transported on the roads, and mislabeling is a serious crime. They're there so in the event of a spill, hazmat crews know what they're dealing with.
3. Re:Check your local fracking mixture by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:14 · Score: 0
  
  Physics is such a bitch. This is why we can't have flying sharks with frickin' lasers.
4. Re:Check your local fracking mixture by drinkypoo · 2014-08-21 00:30 · Score: 1
  
  CCl4 is not soluble is water, and would not make hydrocarbons more mobile or more soluble. It would however, readily dissolve in hydrocarbon fluids
  You mean like diesel fuel?
  where it would be difficult and expensive to separate.
  The petroleum is going into a fractional distillation column. Its whole purpose is to perform this kind of separation. While the process might be difficult and expensive, it is a process which the petroleum will undergo anyway.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
5. Re:Check your local fracking mixture by RockDoctor · 2014-08-23 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  In addition to being illegal, [in-]effective[,] not soluble is water, and would not make hydrocarbons more mobile or more soluble. It would however, readily dissolve in hydrocarbon fluids, where it would be difficult and expensive to separate.
  These are valid general objections. I'll add a genuine question from someone with 30 years experience in drilling oil wells - what the fuck would you expect it to do?
  The only time I've seen carbon tetrachloride used on an oil rig (with the possible exception of in HVAC systems, which I just use but don't have to maintain or care about their details, and which might contain CCL4) is as a laboratory reagent for separating different densities of liquid hydrocarbons. Which is something you don't really need to do at the rig site (why would you want 10 different tankers or pipelines when you can just run one to the storage farm and on to the refinery after blending). Separating gaseous and liquid hydrocarbons is routinely done (strangely, in the so-called "separator" ; doh!), but just using simple physical properties ; separating out solids ("waxes") is also needed in some low-temperature fields to prevent "waxes" accumulating in pipes, tanks, etc. But again, you don't need CCl4 for that either.
  I can't think of a reason to use anything more than traces of CCl4 on a drilling rig. Even for the lab uses we've replaced it with propan-2-ol or acetone.
  
  --
  Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
ignorance by iggymanz · 2014-08-20 10:38 · Score: 1

a more reasonable assumption would be use in parts of the world that don't know all of a chemical's properties. You would not be able to produce a list of ozone harmful chemicals from memory either
1. Re:ignorance by gweihir · 2014-08-20 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  As they actually have to produce the stuff to set it free, that is not a plausible scenario.
  
  --
  Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
2. Re:ignorance by rubycodez · 2014-08-20 13:29 · Score: 1
  
  that is false, cargo ships cover the planet
3. Re:ignorance by Imrik · 2014-08-20 14:32 · Score: 1
  
  So you are of the opinion that these chemicals were used in the US with full knowledge of what they would do to the ozone layer?
4. Re:ignorance by gweihir · 2014-08-22 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  If it were produced somewhere else and traded, it would be known where it comes from.
  
  --
  Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
5. Re:ignorance by iggymanz · 2014-08-25 08:02 · Score: 1
  
  No, there is not necessary a way to trace the origin of a random unlabeled tank or barrel of chemical. Could have been produced decades ago, or produced in a place that cares not for labeling. Or could have been transferred from one container to another by unknown middleman at some point.
Conspiracy Tinfoil Engaged by drpimp · 2014-08-20 10:38 · Score: 0

Chemtrails ....

--
-- Brought to you by Carl's JR
1. Re:Conspiracy Tinfoil Engaged by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 20:42 · Score: 0
  
  Chemtrails ....
  THIS!!!!
  http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/
No data, so choose your favorite villain by Mostly+a+lurker · 2014-08-20 10:42 · Score: 4, Funny

Since the source is completely unclear, most posters will blindly assume it is the fault of whichever group is their bête noire. Some favorites will likely be China, North Korea and Russia, but use your imagination folks. There is just as much evidence that it is caused by evil bankers, genetically modified foods, pedophiles or US militarism.
1. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:48 · Score: 0
  
  Repent, ye of loose morals, repent.
  captcha: satiric
2. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by Opportunist · 2014-08-20 11:00 · Score: 2
  
  Any chance to pin that on the content mafia or patent trolls? C'mon, at least ONCE such a story has to hit someone we can uniformly hate and not be controversial.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
3. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by Black+Parrot · 2014-08-20 11:16 · Score: 1
  
  Any chance to pin that on the content mafia or patent trolls? C'mon, at least ONCE such a story has to hit someone we can uniformly hate and not be controversial.
  So long as you don't blame it on Tesla, Bitcoin, or Starts with a Bang, everyone here will cool with it.
  
  --
  Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
4. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by blue9steel · 2014-08-20 11:20 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Well as long as we're blaming people without evidence then I choose environmentalists. They're already responsible for global warming since they blocked the transition from fossil fuels to nuclear. I'm sure once we dig into the issue it's likely to be caused by the banning of disposable bags or the manufacture of electrical vehicles or some other process which sounds good on the surface but has unintended bad side effects.
5. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by Tailhook · 2014-08-20 11:32 · Score: 1
  
  Christians. They're cooking some weird god food or storing CCl4 for the second coming or something.
  It's got to be them.
  If not them then it's the Joos. Israel is trying to burn off the ozone layer. Again.
  Bastards.
  <sarcasm you dolts/>
  
  --
  Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
6. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:09 · Score: 0
  
  Well, I would say it's probably an area that has a proven track record of environmental disregard and also a proven track record of lying. So yeah, you know how when you're kid claims they didn't do it, and though you have no hard evidence stating that they did, but due to past behavior, you know they did it. Yeah, it's sort of like that. China would probably be a good guess. Other options I like are in Africa, because they have no problem poaching animals into extinction for a buck, but I don't think they can afford the chemicals in the first place.
7. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 22:48 · Score: 0
  
  I choose BP and Deepwater Horizon.
  The surfactants used probably caused it.
8. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by mrchaotica · 2014-08-21 03:34 · Score: 1
  
  We'd still have global warming even with 100% of electricity being generated from nuclear power (or solar/wind, for that matter). To stop it, you have to eliminate the fossil fuels used in transportation too.
  (I suppose it's possible cars and airplanes might have switched to tiny fission reactors or RTGs in the absence of environmentalist opposition -- or that electric vehicles might have become popular sooner -- but it doesn't strike me as likely.)
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
9. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by blue9steel · 2014-08-21 04:33 · Score: 1
  
  CO2 output by burning vehicle fuels (gas, diesel, aviation fuel, etc.) is not the biggest offender. Power generation using Coal, Natural Gas, Oil, etc. makes up the largest portion of emissions. So, while you're right that nuclear power in and of itself wouldn't get us to zero emissions it would reduce them significantly. Requiring all fleet vehicles (semi-trucks, rental cars, delivery vans, etc.) to switch to natural gas would get us a 25% reduction in the bulk of the transportation emissions while battery technology continues to be developed. That's all irrelevant though since we don't have time for rational solutions!
10. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by riverat1 · 2014-08-21 10:18 · Score: 1
  
  Economics have a lot more to do with blocking nuclear power plants than evironmentalists.
11. Re:No data, so choose your favorite villain by blue9steel · 2014-08-21 11:12 · Score: 1
  
  If we look at power sources with all externalized costs included then nuclear power is a good choice. They're expensive to build but cheap to run. A sensible plan would have us building a mix of uranium and thorium based reactors with associated fuel reprocessing plants while the remainder would be made of up of hydro, solar and wind. Sure, base load isn't for everything but if we start adjusting our building codes to require solar for every building equal to it's daytime peak load minus nightime base load that would flatten out power requirements considerably while also reducing CO2 emissions.
From the wikipedia by mveloso · 2014-08-20 10:42 · Score: 4, Informative

Not sure how accurate this is, since it's from wikipedia, but the reference seems legit.
In 2008, a study of common cleaning products found the presence of carbon tetrachloride in "very high concentrations" (up to 101 mg/m3) as a result of manufacturers' mixing of surfactants or soap with sodium hypochlorite (bleach).[18]
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10...
FTA:
"By mixing surfactants or soap with NaOCl, it was shown that the formation of carbon tetrachloride and several other halogenated VOCs is possible"
1. Re:From the wikipedia by Smallpond · 2014-08-20 11:17 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Clorox had $5.6B in sales last year, of which 10% was laundry products according to their annual report. A gallon of bleach sells for $2, so if all their sales generated 275M gallons of bleach-containing chemicals = 1M m3 x 101 mg/m3 = 100,000 gm. Nope. That amount is negligible compared to what the study reports.
2. Re:From the wikipedia by slowdeath · 2014-08-20 11:23 · Score: 1
  
  "By mixing surfactants or soap with NaOCl, it was shown that the formation of carbon tetrachloride and several other halogenated VOCs is possible." So every time I do a load of laundry and put bleach into it to make my undies sparking white I'm adding carbon tetrachloride to the atmosphere unintentionally. So time to ban bleach. Or washing machines. Or white undies.
3. Re:From the wikipedia by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 12:03 · Score: 0
  
  Give me spots on my undies
  But leave me the birds and the bees
4. Re:From the wikipedia by Technician · 2014-08-20 12:41 · Score: 2
  
  I'm wondering how much is a false detection for a similar chemical, or as the result of another chemical reaction. At work our Lead detection kits respond the same to Copper. This has led to missdiagnosis in copper plating.
  Chlorinated hydrocarbons abound in the environment. Could this be by products of burning recycled PC parts and old monitors and wire. The copper and other metals theft and recycling may be the cause.
  
  --
  The truth shall set you free!
5. Re:From the wikipedia by Rich0 · 2014-08-20 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  So every time I do a load of laundry and put bleach into it to make my undies sparking white I'm adding carbon tetrachloride to the atmosphere unintentionally.
  That, and introducing a suspected carcinogen into your underwear.
6. Re:From the wikipedia by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:23 · Score: 0
  
  You should really stop licking the lead paint, even if it is on copper pipes.
7. Re:From the wikipedia by zisel · 2014-08-20 17:19 · Score: 1
  
  We all have that cleaning products in our house and we use it everyday. Does it mean that it could be us as source because, we are using it?
8. Re:From the wikipedia by mveloso · 2014-08-20 17:51 · Score: 1
  
  Bleach isn't just for laundry. Look for "industrial cleaners", not "Laundry products."
  Clorox doesn't have a lock on the laundry or cleaning products market by far. Plus, the figure is worldwide. There's a lot of bleach all over the place.
9. Re:From the wikipedia by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 18:57 · Score: 0
  
  So now we now how GP got his nickname...
10. Re:From the wikipedia by Smallpond · 2014-08-20 22:37 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Industry is much better than individuals at handling chemicals safely.
11. Re:From the wikipedia by drinkypoo · 2014-08-21 00:22 · Score: 1
  
  At work our Lead detection kits respond the same to Copper.
  Older copper and brass commonly had lead in them.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
12. Re:From the wikipedia by Carewolf · 2014-08-21 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  Industry is much better than individuals at handling chemicals safely.
  Can be, especially if it is economically beneficial for them or they are forced to do so by the government. If not, they are naturally inclined to do much worse.
13. Re:From the wikipedia by Technician · 2014-08-21 06:31 · Score: 1
  
  True,
  But in semiconductor manufacturing, Lead is contamination. EDX of the sample shows it to be Pb free. All Copper Sulfate indicates Lead. The testing kit instructions clearly state this is normal for the kit.
  
  --
  The truth shall set you free!
Meh. by Larryish · 2014-08-20 10:45 · Score: 1

Actually it turned out to be koala flatulence.
Turns out digesting eucalyptus releases that type of gas.
1. Re:Meh. by gewalker · 2014-08-21 03:45 · Score: 1
  
  This Seems like a more likely source to me -- after all, not that many koalas.
Comment Subject by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:48 · Score: 0

Time to blame random entities and get angry at groups of people without any proof of anything.
China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:51 · Score: 0

Mystery solved.
bullshit asshattery by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:51 · Score: 0

bullshit. Carbon tetrachloride is way too expensive to be used in that manner.
oh, and it wouldn't be leaking out that fast.
Exxon, Dupont, and many others american precious's by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:54 · Score: 0

Trolls will be trollin tho. Unless they are really that fucking stupid?
Baffles by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:56 · Score: 0

Baffles. They should make less of them. Because scientists always get baffled.
Re:Self-destructive people by Opportunist · 2014-08-20 10:56 · Score: 1

Can't we just do what we usually do? Kill them all and call the ones that don't deserve it "unfortunately unavoidable collateral damage"?

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Come on... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:56 · Score: 0

It's obvious where it's coming from... China and all those other "cheap labor" part of the world who don't give a damn about the environment.
1. Re:Come on... by Em+Adespoton · 2014-08-20 11:19 · Score: 1
  
  It's obvious where it's coming from... China and all those other "cheap labor" part of the world who don't give a damn about the environment.
  You know the world has changed when the USA gets listed under "all those other 'cheap labor' parts of the world" and China gets top billing....
Poland *probably* wouldn't, & why by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 10:57 · Score: 0

I was there in 2010 & have family there who have farms. The storks come from Africa (iirc) every year for 1,000's of yrs. for 1 thing: The place is COVERED in frogs (this is indicative of CLEAN earth & water)... & the dirt? It's BLACK (like potting soil here, I kid you not) & it grows *anything* extremely well.
That "all said & aside":
I also commented on the dirt AND frogs!
(Since in the fields it's actually TOUGH to not step on the zillions of tiny frogs everywhere, & storks crap all over folks' roofs there, lol, disgusting white like chicken crap (pure frog recycled no less) but it's considered "good luck" to have one on your roof - I thought otherwise, but there ya go)
In reply response I was told:
"We keep our land clean since we're primarily farmers & the Ukraine and Poland are the 'breadbaskets' of europe, and we steer clear of factories and chemical production pollution in excess as much as we can because of it"
So... they're much like our midwest in the USA is basically (garden of the world or @ least THEIR part of the world). Makes sense after the crop yields I saw, the soil fertility (avid gardener for decades here is why, 'somewhat' of an 'authority' with a bit of experience), & of course, those storks there migrating every year throughout time basically for those frogs (which DO signal clean earth & water).
APK
P.S.=> Is this 100% undeniable fact? No, of course not. I am not an authority on this. I can only report what I saw. Should others have contrary information that can "set me straight" or enlighten me? I'll listen & thank them for it... apk
1. Re:Poland *probably* wouldn't, & why by Misagon · 2014-08-20 12:25 · Score: 0
  
  The Polish soil is fertile because Poland has used a lot of fertilizer .. an excess of fertilizer .. which is flushed into the rivers that lead into the Baltic Sea.
  Large parts of the Baltic Sea is dead, the cause leading back to this overuse of fertilizer.
  Not that the other countries around the Baltic Sea are that much better in controlling their agriculture.
  
  --
  "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
2. Re:Poland *probably* wouldn't, & why by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:41 · Score: 0
  
  Great job posting about literally any other subject in the universe except hosts files. Seriously. You may be saved from the Troll Side yet.
3. Re:Poland *probably* wouldn't, & why by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:01 · Score: 0
  
  Wow, APK has other hobbies. Holy shit. The End is Nigh! You should stick to gardening. Maybe even smoking some of it.
Damn cars by cyberspittle · 2014-08-20 11:10 · Score: 1

All the ozone from the exhaust of cars is the culprit. We just can't make enough ozone. Time to rev the engines.
1. Re:Damn cars by Em+Adespoton · 2014-08-20 11:17 · Score: 1
  
  All the ozone from the exhaust of cars is the culprit. We just can't make enough ozone. Time to rev the engines.
  You'd need to make flying cars lucrative first... ones that could make it all the way to the ozone layer. Down here in the lower levels of the atmosphere, ozone is known as pollution.
North Korea? by DMJC · 2014-08-20 11:32 · Score: 1

Why would they bother to support a UN treaty? They're like the biggest rogue state on the planet.
Most likely a combination of things by WillAffleckUW · 2014-08-20 11:44 · Score: 1

Partly a few rogue countries, but it's more likely high level photochemical reactions above high pollution zones over China where the level of pollution has gone way beyond safe levels. Throw some electrochemical processes and a highly unregulated "military" sector of Chinese companies and you've got a ready source.
Lightning cares nought for your political boundaries. Neither does pollution.

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
It's a secret by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 12:14 · Score: 0

They won't know what's happening until next year, when I publish my description of the Tetranimous, the tetrachloride-releasing worm that lives in Arctic shorelines, far from the tropical reefs which researchers prefer to visit.
Not accusing anyone... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 12:30 · Score: 0

...but if you need a place to start looking... https://www.google.com/maps/pl...
I don't know .... by PPH · 2014-08-20 12:34 · Score: 1

.... where it all comes from. But that stuff works great for cleaning the soot off the ground-based NOAA sensor enclosures.

--
Have gnu, will travel.
1. Re:I don't know .... by omnichad · 2014-08-21 09:23 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure they would use trifluoroethane now.
Re:Massive Environmental Damage by Skidborg · 2014-08-20 12:34 · Score: 1

Well, California is pretty hot this year and they're just itching for someone to blame.

--
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
Maybe Dr. Smith left the cap off the bottle again? by Paul+Fernhout · 2014-08-20 12:41 · Score: 1

http://irwinallentvseries.wiki...
"Don and John come out of the ship asking about carbon tetrachloride. Smith says he uses it to remove stains--he's used it and left the top off. John asks him if he has any thoughts besides his immediate needs---without the carbon tetrachloride they will lose their food supply. They use it as food preservation (NOTE: how is a mystery---it is highly toxic). They will have to eat only non-perishable items and now face a food shortage (what about the hydroponic garden?). ..." :-)
Will Robinson saved the day on that episode, but he had to come all the way to Earth via an alien matter transporter to do it.
Kidding aside, you make a great point!

--
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
The fact they won't say is pretty damning by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 12:48 · Score: 0

If they don't want to blame someone, that proves they're the ones responsible. Why else would they protect a group that is attacking the planet in such a horrific way unless they themselves were the criminals.
It's the developing world, stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:00 · Score: 0

China and India, both "developing countries," are exempt from any and all global pollution treaties and laws. They can use R-12 to their hearts' content.
1. Re:It's the developing world, stupid by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 20:03 · Score: 0
  
  This is not R-12. That would be CF2Cl2. This is CCL4. Big difference.
  
  However, that does not mean that it is not China or India.
2. Re:It's the developing world, stupid by PPH · 2014-08-21 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  Different chemical. Same treaty lophole.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
Garbage dumps? by buckfeta2014 · 2014-08-20 13:01 · Score: 1

Could it be accumulating in garbage dumps, and getting released when the surface ground is disturbed... perhaps when they pave over it and turn it into a city?

--
Buck Feta. You know what to do.
Easy, India or China by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:03 · Score: 0

Russia. In Russia, ..... oh never mind
Aliens by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:07 · Score: 0

It's the aliens from the Zymba 4 who are actively zymbaforming our planet, one dance move and de-ozoning catalyst at a time.
Re:Massive Environmental Damage by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 13:11 · Score: 0

http://www.epa.gov/apti/ozonehealth/population.html
I guess you will refue to see the issue unless you or someone close to you are practically physcially mutilated.
Re:Massive Environmental Damage by Layzej · 2014-08-20 13:19 · Score: 2

Australians suffer the highest rates of skin cancer in the world. Being located close to the ozone hole over the Antarctic means they are exposed to higher levels of UV radiation.
Degreasers by rubycodez · 2014-08-20 13:36 · Score: 2

carbon tet and other degreasers used to just seep into the soil in "cleaning pits", I know buildings where that went on for half the 20th century.
Coming from Methane by Pete+Venkman · 2014-08-20 13:53 · Score: 2

Couldn't the CCl4 be resulting from radical chlorination in the upper atmosphere? There is certainly enough UV light available.
1. Re:Coming from Methane by RivenAleem · 2014-08-20 22:09 · Score: 1
  
  This is close to a question I was going to ask, and will do so now.
  Have we ruled out all possible natural methods of CCl4 production? Just like how volcano's spew out tons of CO2, there may be methods, like you post for natural production of CCl4 which has acted as an automated regulator of the biosphere. Increased animal population, increased methane production, increased Ozone depletion. This normally happens so slowly that it is more spread out around the globe, instead of fixed over the poles, so it would have a slower global impact, to increase UV pass-through which in turn increases plant growth etc or kills off animals to reduce the methane production.
  Humans came along an introduced a massive imbalance, in both methane production and directly introducing CCl4 to the atmosphere. We may have reduced greatly the amount of CCl4 usage, but all the agribusiness is still producing excess methane.
what about ocean sink? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:26 · Score: 0

1) would have been absorbing gases from the air
2) source of carbon and chlorine, as a natural source
Re:Easy, India or China (and/or Russia) by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:45 · Score: 0

Russia is not exactly a good neighbour either. Especially over the last 6 months.
Russia is now like the shouting wino out the front of your apartment at 2AM in fact.
Would he comply?
"Argue with the numbers" 244++:1 vs. you by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:46 · Score: 0

"Great job posting about literally any other subject in the universe except hosts files." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 20, 2014 @09:41PM (#47717351)
Here's a list of upmodded posts of mine on varied topics I used to make Sardaukar86 "eat his words" last year http://it.slashdot.org/comment... that are on ALL SORTS of varied material... so, "wrong" on your part!
APK
P.S.=>

" Seriously. You may be saved from the Troll Side yet." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 20, 2014 @09:41PM (#47717351)
After the above, who's the troll here AND dead-up wrong to boot? Not I...
Now, "eat your words" (lol) & tell us: How did they taste with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH to ram them down + washing them down with "the bitter taste of SELF-defeat" also? "Inquiring minds want to know"...
... apk
1. Re:"Argue with the numbers" 244++:1 vs. you by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 16:54 · Score: 0
  
  No problem: I can handle you being a typical dick troll like you were in that reply, apk. Those are a dime a dozen here. What really chokes the life out of a discussion is your fucking hosts file spam, which thankfully you refrained from posting (whoa! two replies in a row now without a hosts reference? maybe this is an apk imposter).
  Sweet jesus, it's no wonder you don't have friends here. Not even people like mmell who apologized and reached out in friendship... but that's *your* fault, of course.
  You know, how do we even know your trolls are your own? I think you should consider digitally signing them. But then again, no mention of hosts files, so probably you're just another fake apk.
Still bullshit, always been bullshit by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 15:47 · Score: 0

It was never the CFCs in the first place. If it were, A) it would be the North Pole, not the South*; and B) the holes would actually be downwind of major metropolitan centers, not at the poles. Now, since the incredibly stupid and panicky outlawing of efficient coolants has not had any effect on the entirely natural thin spot in the ozone over the South Pole**, the idiots have to either admit they were wrong or search for something else to blame. Well, they couldn't admit they were wrong, could they?
* Look at a globe. Almost everyone lives in the Northern Hemisphere.
** Natural because ozone is unstable, breaks down on its own, is created by sunlight; and the SP has winter when the Earth is farthest from the Sun.
Lots of them in fact... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 16:09 · Score: 0

Pretty women, hot rods/sportscars, & the sport of Lacrosse (former NCAA lettering athlete & 1st string as a freshman for a National Champ (later though)), good books, animals (love cats, didn't used to, but now do & "dawgs" too), + home improvement work.
* :)
There's more, but those are a start above & beyond gardening... so maybe? The end IS near (hope not - I have "many miles to go before I sleep", hopefully, & goals to reach before then...).
APK
P.S.=> I don't "do drugs" though, as to your "smoking some of your gardening" comment though - sorry (it's not for me)... apk
Enlightening: I'll actually check into that... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 16:19 · Score: 0

The reason why is that I would *think* those fertilizers would help botanical sea-life, & thus, help animal life too (by providing for herbivores that carnivores would eat) - guess there's something to learn here then (which is not a wasted day IF/WHEN you can do that).
* NOT that I 'doubt you' but it seems to defy reason (unless sea plant life demands diff. types of nutrients I suppose).
APK
P.S.=> Thanks... apk
U.K.O.D. by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 16:19 · Score: 0

Undisputed King of the Ozone Destroyers, FTW.
Get yer freon here!!
Old Paulding County GA Dump still leaks the stuff by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 16:25 · Score: 0

It has been scheduled for clean up several times, and it always falls through. This is the result of dumping there decades ago.
The local government buys up the adjacent land just fast enough that no one can complain about the level in their soil.
How do you report this? Someone please report it, I couldn't find a reliable link to the interested parties (scientists), and don't trust the local goverment to have any interest in addressing the issue.
Also, it's my understanding that it is still used in dry cleaning. I bet the sealed machinery isn't used or maintained properly.
Truth != spam, & not selling anything so... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 17:21 · Score: 0

How're my posts on hosts spam? Show where I posted on them off topic &that it didn't apply to the subject @ hand??
I never have - I only post where they apply to the topic, on topic (usually for speed or security related posts, sometimes reliability or even anonymity - which, yes, hosts give you better than ANY single competitor, more efficiently, natively, & with less moving parts complexity + room for breakdown).
You say I have no friends here... ok:
From those 244++ upmodded posts??? I'd say I have MORE than a few friends here in fact as a counter-point to blow yours away (by a 244++:1 margin).
So "Argue with the Numbers", not I...
APK
P.S.=> Lastly - You're more than welcome to prove my points on hosts incorrect (nobody here EVER has, or will either) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... (Good luck - you'd need it & more like a MIRACLE in fact)...
... apk
1. Re:Truth != spam, & not selling anything so... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 21:10 · Score: 0
  
  You couldn't resist the dark side, could you? Cracked like a junkie with a balloon of smack sitting on the table next to him. Did it feel good to shoot up that link to the hosts post?
  Did you feel ashamed afterwards, but know deep in your heart you'll just do it all over again next time?
  Give it up before it's too late.
Re:Massive Environmental Damage by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 18:17 · Score: 0

Australians suffer the highest rates of skin cancer in the world. Being located close to the ozone hole over the Antarctic means they are exposed to higher levels of UV radiation.
Kiwi's are even closer...
Re:Massive Environmental Damage by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 19:18 · Score: 0

I was just thinking the same thing - I'm in Dunedin, not too many places in NZ even closer than that. Of course, there's always the southernmost tip of South America...
Re: Google it by storkus · 2014-08-20 19:19 · Score: 1

This is a very well known problem: most organic compounds, wherever they're found and whatever they may be, are easily halogenated (or less often substituted with other things, usually with bacterial help). Chlorine is by far the most common halogen and the most reactive electro-negative element outside of oxygen(#2) and fluorine(#1--fun stuff, watch the videos). I was going to waste bandwidth here, but here's a couple of Wikipedia links that explain things way better:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...
Bleach/Chlorine + any organic material equals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
which are Ozone-Depleting Chemicals, talked about here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O...
I remember a day when every geek/nerd knew what trichloroethane was as it made the best tape head cleaner, but times change...
Re:Enlightening: I'll actually check into that... by theshowmecanuck · 2014-08-20 19:29 · Score: 1

Nutrient pollution causes dead zones.

--
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Is it the military? It's them, isn't it? by pepsikid · 2014-08-20 22:21 · Score: 1

I mean, it's got to be the military. They can still burn radioactive PCB contaminated mattresses in open trenches out in the desert and call them "destroyed".
Quit projecting & answer the questions... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 23:48 · Score: 0

See subject-line & this http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> Lastly, just to remind you: YOU brought up hosts files here, not I... apk
"some unknown source" Yeah, right... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-20 23:56 · Score: 0

Guessing - without any research - I'm fairly confident that the major contributors, constituting the "unknown source" of this mess, include the US, China and Russia, plus a whole range of others, trailing far behind those three "leaders".
Because profits at the expense of everything else.
Obviously.
(I wish I was being sarcastic.)
Learned about "Eutrophication" by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 00:03 · Score: 0

Cyanobacteria too that appear to be "resource hogs" for light especially much how carniferous trees get taken out by deciduous ones in fact!
(I learned SOME on cyanobacteria in academia during a genetics class but the class did NOT get into THIS end of it)
That, as I said in my reply to you, ALMOST DEFIES "NORMAL LOGIC" in that if food supplies are large, for plants, that that would feed herbivores since you'd *think* plants would be prosperous, & thus keep THEM alive (and thus also, "ipso facto", that carnivores would be fed well also)...
However - food's 1 thing, but with PLANTS, light's another... a CRUCIAL INGREDIENT other... so your statements make sense (now @ least, after the read).
* Just goes to show you that I don't "know it all" & can stand to learn new things, AND, that "common-sense" reasoning doesn't *always* stand up to the test of what really happens... I didn't "think out" ALL the variables in the equation (that plants yes, need nutrients, but to process them for THEIR cycle of life, they also need light - which the cyanobacteria "hog up" @ the "top of their world/forest" like deciduous trees end up doing to carniferous ones in the end...).
(This DID surprise me)
APK
P.S. => Again - thanks! apk
Re:Easy, India or China (and/or Russia) by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 00:45 · Score: 0

So, the EU is a much better neighbor? Fucknut!
They. Just. Don't. Know. Here's what that means.. by fygment · 2014-08-21 00:57 · Score: 1

Some will blame humans.
Some will blame an unknown natural phenomenon.
Bottom line?
THEY DON'T KNOW.
And yet, despite yet another glaring example of the tenousness of our grasp of natural and human processes, people continue to think that the planet can be engineered to 'solve' climate change, etc.
Maybe the climate is changing, maybe it's not. Maybe it's human caused, maybe it's not. We just don't know. And maybe the wise person will hold off on acting in ignorance so they don't make things worse. The only reason not to wait is to profit from the fear mongering. And that's just wrong.

--
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
Just in time... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 01:27 · Score: 0

Oh look, another environmental issue to scare the public into rallying behind and give billions in research too.
Just as global warming is fading out, and long after acid rain is a distant memory.
What perfect timing
Silly engineering question by RogueWarrior65 · 2014-08-21 02:09 · Score: 1

Why don't we capture this supposed ozone-depleting chemical and spray it all over urban centers that are now showing rising levels of ozone?
Stepping Out on a Limb... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 02:11 · Score: 0

I'm going to step on a limb here and guess that it's probably fracking used in the oil business. Drilling an oil well releases significant amounts of Co2 and methane into the air, not to mention C1-C7 (if u get lucky).
It could be the US, you know by Muad'Dave · 2014-08-21 02:38 · Score: 1

Here's a link to the EPA Superfund site search for 'tetrachloride'. There are 215 results, some of which (chosen at random) seem to have a pretty nasty mix of contaminants of concern.

--
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Re:Old Paulding County GA Dump still leaks the stu by Muad'Dave · 2014-08-21 03:02 · Score: 1

Call the feds @ the EPA. I don't see anything in Paulding County in GA listed on their superfund search site.

--
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
In the ice? by phorm · 2014-08-21 03:05 · Score: 1

Something in the currently melting polar ice caps, perhaps. If it (or a chemical that breaks down into it) are in there in some form, they could be getting released as the ice melts.
A little carbon tet never hurt anyone by frog_strat · 2014-08-21 03:28 · Score: 1

I grew up drinking the stuff. Living in the Ohio River / West Virginia area, we would get these warnings that local chemical industries had accidentally spilled carbon tet into the Ohio River. We were told to boil the water. I was suspicious, I thought, either boiling doesn't separate the carbon tet, or it does, and we are all standing in our kitchens breathing it.

The town I grew up in had to dig up 18 inches of dirt, process the dirt, and put it back. I think it was paid for by Superfund.
Source not unknown by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 03:40 · Score: 0

And that "unknown" source is probably China...
Re:I got a hunch... by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 03:51 · Score: 0

it's those shifty-eyed cows, trying to destroy humanity. All the GM crops we've been feeding them has messed with the chemistry of their farts.
PLAUSIBLE
Or may be... by TemporalBeing · 2014-08-21 05:13 · Score: 1

...it's not anything man made. May be it's just a natural, environmental condition that no matter what we do will never really go away.

Seriously, who says that someone has to be behind it? A scientist? They've been trying that meme for years; and probably will continue that meme for years to come. It may just be that it's not human related in any manner.

But then, OMG, humans may not be at fault for AGW or Ozone Depletion...environmentalists can't have that.

Now, I'm not saying that we should not be good stewards and clean up after ourselves; make sure that industry waste is not properly disposed of, etc. We should. We should do our best to (as the Boy Scouts say) leave the area at least as clean as we found it.

--
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
Where From? by gpronger · 2014-08-21 06:04 · Score: 1

So, the main use of carbon tet was manufacturing the CFC's. this is replacing a chlorine with a fluorine. Done in a manufacturing facility. So, if this is due to it still being used for that purpose, you'd be able to look at the presence of the products. If plants have leaky manufacturing processes, you should see the carbon tet as well as the CFC's.

If I were to guess, it's degassing from old landfills.
Re:Massive Environmental Damage by Layzej · 2014-08-21 06:26 · Score: 1

NZ is right behind Australia for number of cancer cases. I tried to find stats for skin cancer only but was unable. A nation of heavy smokers would skew the results if looking at all cancers. Are Australians and New Zealanders heavy smokers?
Re:Enlightening: I'll actually check into that... by omnichad · 2014-08-21 08:54 · Score: 1

I would *think* those fertilizers would help botanical sea-life
Yes - it can cause an Algal Bloom. Blocking the sun and generally detrimental to all other sea life. Think of it like a HOSTS file for the ocean.
Re:They. Just. Don't. Know. Here's what that means by david_thornley · 2014-08-21 09:53 · Score: 1

The vast majority of smart people who intensively study such things say that the climate is changing, the planet is warming up, and it's mostly due to burning fossil fuels. You're at liberty to study what you like to confirm this.
I'd call any process that raised CO2 from 280ppm to 400ppm climate engineering. Why is any other form objectionable?
Not to mention that "not acting" and continuing to raise atmospheric CO2 is actually acting, and problems are usually easier to solve before they get really bad.

--
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Ozone Deplition by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 10:12 · Score: 0

Can't find the source my b*tt. The government has been spraying tiny particles of aluminum and other metaals including cobalt for years now. Look at the changes in the weather, or bury your head in the sand.
Replied to a similar reply before yours... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-21 11:01 · Score: 0

http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
Poland's STILL very conscious of polluting chemicals & factories as I noted though. They HAVE to be. It's a large part of their lives in farming, + storks migrating there for millenia for frogs (a staple of their diet) proves it since frogs often DIE OFF in less than 'clean' environs. They're a clear signal of CLEAN WATER & LAND... due to their thin permeable skins of amphibious beasts they are.
APK
P.S.=> Hosts are good for end users giving them back speed they paid for that ads rob (up to 40% of big sites' pages are a mass of ads, that have had TONS of times shown infecting users due to admen negligence or their redirectors, if not the site itself), security (vs. known malicious sites/servers-hosts/domains & even bad adbanners as I noted earlier), reliability (vs. downed dns and on a security front again, vs. dns poisoned ones) - no denying it, period (hope YOU learned something, I did in the 1st url above, & so? It's not a wasted day!)...
... apk
APK == junkie by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-24 07:01 · Score: 0

...and yet you couldn't resist the prompt, could you? Can't trust a junkie like you, well except to trust they will do anything to get their fix.
"Rinse, Lather, & Repeat" (quit projecting) by Anonymous Coward · 2014-08-25 01:54 · Score: 0

See subject-line & this link -> http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
* :)
(You keep running from the questions there, but it's obvious to *ANYONE* reading why... lol, you cannot get the best of me or truths & facts I use - period! You know it, I know it, & by now EVERYONE reading, knows it...)
APK
P.S.=> That's about all I have to say to a troll like you (the lowest of the LOW online) & sorry - I don't use/do drugs (they're for "projectionists" like you that waste their lives + time vs. doing good things like I did for others in my hosts file program that merely gives users what they want & need, which is MORE speed, security, reliability + more, more efficiently by far vs. browser addons & even fixes DNS redirect security issues (multiple bonuses))... apk