Assuming that those trees do that sequestration thing instantly (they don't - it takes centuries for a sequoia to grow that large), we're talking about removing ~0.06% of the current CO2 levels from the atmosphere by doing what you describe.
Which means that in just a century, we can lower atmospheric CO2 from today's level to last week's level....
True enough. Having eight minutes of water for a shower is considered a luxury on one of the boats.
Try "turn water on long enough to get wet. soap up. turn water on long enough to rinse (note that it takes longer than that to get the water to come out hot). Done."
BLOCKQUOTE>Not detracting from what the colonists did, but they knew that they only needed to pack enough food and water for the voyage and the settlement time,
Which, presumably, is why some of the early colonies nearly starved, and some of them just disappeared, right?
In smaller vehicles it can be something like 1.3 MPG, which is fairly significant. But even if it's only 0.2 MPG, over the life of the car that's still a lot of gas.
Hmm...0.2 mpg savings. Over a 200,000 mile lifetime...
Assuming 30mpg, that works out to a 44 gallon savings over the life of the vehicle. Which means that if the vehicle costs an extra $200 for the sideview cameras, then it'll cost more than it'll save.
On the other hand, 1.3mpg savings would add up to a 275 gallon savings on the lifetime of the vehicle. Then the breakeven point for the cameras would be in the $1000 range, rather than the Note that the above approximations assume essentially zero average difference in cost of repairs/replacement for mirrors/cameras (in other words, they assume that both cost the same to replace and they both cost the same to replace/repair, OR that the differences cancel out), which is not necessarily a good assumption.
Humans are tied to Earth more strongly than science fiction would have you believe.
And you know this how?
It's not like we've ever experimented with living on another planet or anything.
And another thing, why is the National Academy acting like they have any control over NASA? It's not like they're an arm of the US Government or anything....
3) Under O, we have given back the nation to their citizens. IOW, it remains whole, though it is pretty much in civil war due to W/neo-con's occupation allowing AQ to sneak in (and no doubt it will be one for many military books on HOW TO NOT RUN A WAR).
It should, perhaps, be noted that the schedule for withdrawal from Iraq that O used was the one written (and agreed to by both Congress and the Iraqi government) by W a couple years earlier.
No, Obama didn't get us out of Iraq early, contrary to what you may have heard.
you know, accounting for the devaluation of the US dollar and all that?)
Alas, Fed policy changes with the winds, so anticpating the devaluation of the dollar is really hard to do.
Face it, ten years ago, would anyone have been believed if they'd said that the Fed would start printing a trillion dollars a year in (what was then) the near future?
It should be noted that there are also Christians who look at what Jesus had to say on the subject (basically, nothing), and don't worry about it too much. Note that the Old Testament is an interesting historical document, but it's not what Christianity is all about. In spite of the noise made about it by Atheists and Christians alike.
Plus the Lutherans who look at what Martin Luther had to say on the subject of marriage (it's the government's business who can marry whom and when, not the Church's (though the Church is in no way obligated to sanctify a marriage just because the government says it's okay)).
(plus many more from the air pollution from vehicles)
Citation?
If you're thinking about that "7,000,000 die from air pollution every year" article the other day, it should be noted that that was worldwide, and the air pollution in question was mostly (according to TFA) from cooking with the kind of stoves they use in Third World countries.
Yes, it's all well and good, but I don't see how you're going to help those with measles by installing backup cameras.:P
Hmm, $650 million per year invested in measles prevention to save 60 lives, or the same in backup cameras to save 15 lives. Which to do, which to do?
Not that I think that 60 deaths per year in a nation of 330,000,000 people is anything to get excited about, mind you. Remember, if everyone in the country knew 1000 other people (I don't), then the odds are still overwhelming against any single person knowing even ONE measles victim in their lifetime.
Indeed, it is ridiculous, although despite your focus on that theme, you don't seem to understand the real "why" of it....
And, indeed, I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with mandating backup cameras in cars by 2018. Or any other year, really.
What I have an issue with is "Today's decision will save lives and save money for consumers,", as one of the advocates for this mandate said. Yeah, it'll save lives. A dozen or so a year. No problems. But why say it'll save money when it would be cheaper just to treat the casualties than to put the cameras in?
Using the NHTSB estimates ($43 to upgrade models that already do backup cams to meet the new spec, $143 to put them in models that don't currently do that), we get an approximate cost to implement this mandate of $650 milllion annually.
Which will prevent ~15 deaths per year, and ~1200 serious injuries.
So, $40 million per death, or $$500,000 per injury. Seems to me it costs less than $500,000 to treat someone for an injury, so I'm not sure how this is going to "save money".
And 15 deaths is so trivial as to be ridiculous. Hell, we even have more measles deaths than that (60 on average, in years we don't have a massive outbreak like this year)....
You don't need a percentile change to have a problem - you just need a small decrease in vaccination (much less than one percent) to send herd immunity down the well.
Then we're in luck, since the last year that information is publicly available (2012) shows 0.8% INCREASE over just three years before. For MMR, of course.
It should also be noted that CDC considers 90% the target goal for immunizations to be considered effective. Which we're above (if only slightly), and have been for sixteen years.
Are you actually suggesting the the antivaxer (sorry, that's not politically correct - I mean the "pro-disease") movement has had zero impact on vaccination rates ?
No, but the Center for Disease Control thinks that vaccination rates (with the notable exception of Hib3 (whatever that is)) have been constant or increasing for the last two decades (as long as they've been keeping records).
I'm assuming that the Center for Disease Control is capable of figuring out vaccination rates - it's always possible that they're incompetent idiots, I suppose, but it's not the way to bet.
I stopped wearing a watch when I bought a phone that displayed the time. I *think* I still have my old watch in a drawer somewhere, but I can't imagine a reason I'd ever wear one again.
I was recently with my wife in the Philippines two and half weeks, and despite eating far much more, she lost weight, and I lost my belly.
In two and a half weeks??? You had a very small belly then, I take it? Because it's pretty hard to lose even ten pounds in that time-frame without stopping eating altogether.
Of course, just why it would suddenly go up a the same time vaccination rates are at such a massive low that we're dealing with major outbreaks of formerly all but eradicated diseases I'm not sure but I'm certain that you could understand if you had her PHD (Pretty Hump of Distraction).
Vaccination rates are at a "massive low"???
According to CDC, vaccination rates for MMR are about 90%, which is where they've been for the last couple decades.
As to "major outbreaks of all but eradicated diseases", the numbers I've seen for measles deaths is ~175, as compared to the ~200 for West Nile Virus. Hardly a "major outbreak" (though it was certainly played in the news like it was one - slow news day, no doubt).
Slashdot Mirror
Which means that in just a century, we can lower atmospheric CO2 from today's level to last week's level....
True enough. Having eight minutes of water for a shower is considered a luxury on one of the boats.
Try "turn water on long enough to get wet. soap up. turn water on long enough to rinse (note that it takes longer than that to get the water to come out hot). Done."
Well, it's important to me to be accurate within one second every three hundred million years!
Not sure how I'd manage if my time was only accurate to one second in ONE hundred million years....
BLOCKQUOTE>Not detracting from what the colonists did, but they knew that they only needed to pack enough food and water for the voyage and the settlement time,
Which, presumably, is why some of the early colonies nearly starved, and some of them just disappeared, right?
Mmmm...shrimp po-boys. Dressed, of course.
Well, now I know what I'm having for lunch.
Hmm...0.2 mpg savings. Over a 200,000 mile lifetime...
Assuming 30mpg, that works out to a 44 gallon savings over the life of the vehicle. Which means that if the vehicle costs an extra $200 for the sideview cameras, then it'll cost more than it'll save.
On the other hand, 1.3mpg savings would add up to a 275 gallon savings on the lifetime of the vehicle. Then the breakeven point for the cameras would be in the $1000 range, rather than the Note that the above approximations assume essentially zero average difference in cost of repairs/replacement for mirrors/cameras (in other words, they assume that both cost the same to replace and they both cost the same to replace/repair, OR that the differences cancel out), which is not necessarily a good assumption.
And you know this how?
It's not like we've ever experimented with living on another planet or anything.
And another thing, why is the National Academy acting like they have any control over NASA? It's not like they're an arm of the US Government or anything....
Which was, it must be noted, only eight years after the first American went into space.
It's now been 40+ years since a human went beyond LEO...which is sad.
It should, perhaps, be noted that the schedule for withdrawal from Iraq that O used was the one written (and agreed to by both Congress and the Iraqi government) by W a couple years earlier.
No, Obama didn't get us out of Iraq early, contrary to what you may have heard.
Obama is the only President to have admitted to ordering the assassination of American citizens.
Alas, Fed policy changes with the winds, so anticpating the devaluation of the dollar is really hard to do.
Face it, ten years ago, would anyone have been believed if they'd said that the Fed would start printing a trillion dollars a year in (what was then) the near future?
US Constitution, Article 3, Section 3. Learn it, love it, live it.
Plus the Lutherans who look at what Martin Luther had to say on the subject of marriage (it's the government's business who can marry whom and when, not the Church's (though the Church is in no way obligated to sanctify a marriage just because the government says it's okay)).
Citation?
If you're thinking about that "7,000,000 die from air pollution every year" article the other day, it should be noted that that was worldwide, and the air pollution in question was mostly (according to TFA) from cooking with the kind of stoves they use in Third World countries.
Hmm, $650 million per year invested in measles prevention to save 60 lives, or the same in backup cameras to save 15 lives. Which to do, which to do?
Not that I think that 60 deaths per year in a nation of 330,000,000 people is anything to get excited about, mind you. Remember, if everyone in the country knew 1000 other people (I don't), then the odds are still overwhelming against any single person knowing even ONE measles victim in their lifetime.
And, indeed, I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with mandating backup cameras in cars by 2018. Or any other year, really.
What I have an issue with is "Today's decision will save lives and save money for consumers,", as one of the advocates for this mandate said. Yeah, it'll save lives. A dozen or so a year. No problems. But why say it'll save money when it would be cheaper just to treat the casualties than to put the cameras in?
So, an average of 7 million cars sold each year.
About half already have these cameras.
Using the NHTSB estimates ($43 to upgrade models that already do backup cams to meet the new spec, $143 to put them in models that don't currently do that), we get an approximate cost to implement this mandate of $650 milllion annually.
Which will prevent ~15 deaths per year, and ~1200 serious injuries.
So, $40 million per death, or $$500,000 per injury. Seems to me it costs less than $500,000 to treat someone for an injury, so I'm not sure how this is going to "save money".
And 15 deaths is so trivial as to be ridiculous. Hell, we even have more measles deaths than that (60 on average, in years we don't have a massive outbreak like this year)....
And yet, air pollution levels in the USA are far below what they were 50 years ago.
So why is autism increasing when air pollution is decreasing?
Sorry, December to February does not "climate" make.
Probably for the same reason they omit words from sentences...
Somewhere between "they" and "everything" was an idea. Alas, it must be inferred, since it wasn't stated outright.
Then we're in luck, since the last year that information is publicly available (2012) shows 0.8% INCREASE over just three years before. For MMR, of course.
It should also be noted that CDC considers 90% the target goal for immunizations to be considered effective. Which we're above (if only slightly), and have been for sixteen years.
No, but the Center for Disease Control thinks that vaccination rates (with the notable exception of Hib3 (whatever that is)) have been constant or increasing for the last two decades (as long as they've been keeping records).
I'm assuming that the Center for Disease Control is capable of figuring out vaccination rates - it's always possible that they're incompetent idiots, I suppose, but it's not the way to bet.
I stopped wearing a watch when I bought a phone that displayed the time. I *think* I still have my old watch in a drawer somewhere, but I can't imagine a reason I'd ever wear one again.
In two and a half weeks??? You had a very small belly then, I take it? Because it's pretty hard to lose even ten pounds in that time-frame without stopping eating altogether.
Vaccination rates are at a "massive low"???
According to CDC, vaccination rates for MMR are about 90%, which is where they've been for the last couple decades.
As to "major outbreaks of all but eradicated diseases", the numbers I've seen for measles deaths is ~175, as compared to the ~200 for West Nile Virus. Hardly a "major outbreak" (though it was certainly played in the news like it was one - slow news day, no doubt).