Localities do have an interest in promoting things like public safety. If you want to put up a subdivision with no fire hydrants, zoning should prevent you from doing that.
I think you could be right about that. #EXXONKNEW is an example of spreading lies for market advantage. But so long as towns can zone to keep out fracking, they should be able to zone to keep out wind or solar too. They'll come around on the latter but the news on the former will only get worse.
Some have complained about the Copenhagen meeting but this success comes out of that meeting. President Obama understood that he could, with time, deal with China. He did, and now things are rolling.
Until there is a solution for nuclear waste, it is illegal to build nuclear power plants in California. Notice that when the sun shine, there is no need to use natural gas, so gas use is reduced. Your argument is mistaken.
"Drive advances in science, technology, aeronautics,
and space exploration to enhance knowledge,
education, innovation, economic vitality, and
stewardship of Earth." http://www.nasa.gov/sites/defa...
So, predictions for 5 years for the world and 25 years for one country. Where is the 30 year prediction? China is committed to peaking emissions by 2030 which is only 15 years off. Apparently, the first report you cited missed this and some other things as well. http://theenergycollective.com...
It is hard to find a prediction that coal use will increase for the next 30 years. Predictions that it will soon peak are common. http://e360.yale.edu/feature/p...
We use natural gas in home heating and in ethanol production and in generating electricity, And, with CAFE standards increasing and oil production rising, we are within spitting distance of energy independence. It is hard to see how we could use anything close to half our natural gas production to produce gasoline when it supplies so much in other areas and there is such a small way to go to eliminate oil imports. But, the ability to do gas-to-liquid easily makes an even stronger case for restricting exports of natural gas just as we do with oil and recognizing natural gas as a strategic resource.
As a strategic resource, we should build enough LNG export capacity in the US and enough import capacity in NATO to displace Russian gas supplies, and then let that sit idle. This would be similar to Israel having dibs on our strategic petroleum reserve. Russia would treat our allies much better as natural gas customers if we could take away their market at any time they put the squeeze on.
Cracking converts higher molecular weight hydrocarbons to lower molecular weight hydrocarbons, Upgrading is the term for the other direction. Maybe this is what you are thinking of? http://www.technologyreview.co...
All of the fossil fuels run on science. There is geology and chemistry and pollution control and how to make oil flow in a pipeline. If you school won't invest in fossil fuels, there is a chance you won't consider working for them either. The engineering and science may not get done as quickly and the industry may slow as a result of moral objections.
Well #6 says "This argument would have merit if there was much evidence to support it. When, for example, the Guardian asked the Wellcome Trust to give instances where engagement had produced change, it could not. And as campaigner Bill McKibben has pointed out, engagement is unlikely to persuade a company to commit to eventually putting itself out of business. In fact some market regulators, such as in the US, do not allow this kind of engagement. "
"There have been a handful of successful divestment campaigns in recent history, including those targeting violence in Darfur, tobacco advertising, and others, but the largest and most impactful one came to a head around the issue of South African Apartheid. By the mid-1980s, 155 campuses – including some of the most famous in the country – had divested from companies doing business in South Africa. 26 state governments, 22 counties, and 90 cities, including some of the nation’s biggest, took their money from multinationals that did business in the country. The South African divestment campaign helped break the back of the Apartheid government and usher in an era of democracy and equality." http://gofossilfree.org/what-i...
Slashdot Mirror
Greens prefer to work with scientists at the policy level but will use other approaches when needed.
Your point on correlations is not incorrect. It is just that the evidence for causation does not come from correlation.
RTFA. The strong evidence is from medicine.
The strong evidence is demonstrated nerological damage from lead.
I agree mostly, but for takeoffs near daycare or kindergarten, there is a problem.
The evidence is now very strong that leaded gasoline was responsible for much past violent crime. http://www.chicagotribune.com/...
Small airports next to elementary schools are probably creating future violent criminals.
Chia gardens lit by solar power still have photosynthesis.
It's a Koch bro front organization. http://realkochfacts.com/koch-...
Nuclear accident do cause cancer. However, federal jurstiction makes them exempt from zoning.
Localities do have an interest in promoting things like public safety. If you want to put up a subdivision with no fire hydrants, zoning should prevent you from doing that.
I think you could be right about that. #EXXONKNEW is an example of spreading lies for market advantage. But so long as towns can zone to keep out fracking, they should be able to zone to keep out wind or solar too. They'll come around on the latter but the news on the former will only get worse.
Some have complained about the Copenhagen meeting but this success comes out of that meeting. President Obama understood that he could, with time, deal with China. He did, and now things are rolling.
The change in climate change keeps changing so continued study is needed.
Until there is a solution for nuclear waste, it is illegal to build nuclear power plants in California. Notice that when the sun shine, there is no need to use natural gas, so gas use is reduced. Your argument is mistaken.
Cruz is originally from Alberta so his interest in tar sands and polluting the world is pretty natural to him.
"Drive advances in science, technology, aeronautics, and space exploration to enhance knowledge, education, innovation, economic vitality, and stewardship of Earth." http://www.nasa.gov/sites/defa...
So, predictions for 5 years for the world and 25 years for one country. Where is the 30 year prediction? China is committed to peaking emissions by 2030 which is only 15 years off. Apparently, the first report you cited missed this and some other things as well. http://theenergycollective.com...
It is hard to find a prediction that coal use will increase for the next 30 years. Predictions that it will soon peak are common. http://e360.yale.edu/feature/p...
We use natural gas in home heating and in ethanol production and in generating electricity, And, with CAFE standards increasing and oil production rising, we are within spitting distance of energy independence. It is hard to see how we could use anything close to half our natural gas production to produce gasoline when it supplies so much in other areas and there is such a small way to go to eliminate oil imports. But, the ability to do gas-to-liquid easily makes an even stronger case for restricting exports of natural gas just as we do with oil and recognizing natural gas as a strategic resource.
As a strategic resource, we should build enough LNG export capacity in the US and enough import capacity in NATO to displace Russian gas supplies, and then let that sit idle. This would be similar to Israel having dibs on our strategic petroleum reserve. Russia would treat our allies much better as natural gas customers if we could take away their market at any time they put the squeeze on.
Cracking converts higher molecular weight hydrocarbons to lower molecular weight hydrocarbons, Upgrading is the term for the other direction. Maybe this is what you are thinking of? http://www.technologyreview.co...
All of the fossil fuels run on science. There is geology and chemistry and pollution control and how to make oil flow in a pipeline. If you school won't invest in fossil fuels, there is a chance you won't consider working for them either. The engineering and science may not get done as quickly and the industry may slow as a result of moral objections.
Well #6 says "This argument would have merit if there was much evidence to support it. When, for example, the Guardian asked the Wellcome Trust to give instances where engagement had produced change, it could not. And as campaigner Bill McKibben has pointed out, engagement is unlikely to persuade a company to commit to eventually putting itself out of business. In fact some market regulators, such as in the US, do not allow this kind of engagement. "
New York is pretty comparable with Spain. TFA did look at other locations.
"There have been a handful of successful divestment campaigns in recent history, including those targeting violence in Darfur, tobacco advertising, and others, but the largest and most impactful one came to a head around the issue of South African Apartheid. By the mid-1980s, 155 campuses – including some of the most famous in the country – had divested from companies doing business in South Africa. 26 state governments, 22 counties, and 90 cities, including some of the nation’s biggest, took their money from multinationals that did business in the country. The South African divestment campaign helped break the back of the Apartheid government and usher in an era of democracy and equality." http://gofossilfree.org/what-i...