• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Twelve-Month Long Drop in Global Temperatures Wipes Out Century of Global Warming

raptor10

raptor10

Philosoraptor
Contributor
Is nuclear power 60 years old or 13.7 Billion? Science is nothing but the endless pursuit to master the tidal forces of nature.
 
Mumbles

Mumbles

Registered User
pilot
Contributor
The greenhouse emissions of every single internal combustion engine devised by man will never come close to the deposits of said emissions from MTs: Etna, Krakatoa, Pinatubo, St. Helens, et. al.., (despite the fear mongering of the high priest of eco-conciousness, Algore).. the arrogance to suggest that mankind has more influence over global climate than solar activity is lunacy, and the refusal of the left to have any rational discussion based on scientific method is fascist.
 
Bugsmasher

Bugsmasher

Another Non-qual SWO Ensign
wink said:
Homework assignment for all you smart college boys. How many nuclear power plants (pick a representative size, Palo Verde, Turkey Flat, San Onofre) will have to be built to make the U.S. oil and gas (natural) independent in electricity production alone? Conversely, consider the thousands of square miles of solar arrays and wind farms it will take to do the same.
Click to expand...

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat2p2.html

There's about 1000 GW total capacity for the US, of which ~478 GW is oil and gas. A decent size nuke reactor is about 1GW, so you'd have to build about another 500 of them to eliminate oil and gas from electricity production.

A quick calculation of electricity usage per year shows 4 trillion kilowatt hours for the US, which comes out to an average of 456 GW of power output. That's about 50% capacity, so you could maybe get away with building only about 250 nuclear reactors and keeping some gas plants online for surges.

While I would have absolutely no problem with us building hundreds of nuke plants, I doubt they are coming anytime soon (in that quantity at least). We're stuck with oil and gas until we run out it would seem, then probably coal takes over.
 
E

eddie

Working Plan B
Contributor
wink said:
No sir! The heart of the argument is whether humans are causing it, or more to the point, whether we will be ruined by fear mongers that insist on draconian policies to try to control the weather.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, that's more or less what I meant. I was thinking about it more from a purely scientific perspective, but of course we live in the real world with policy ramifications and such.

The great comedy of the whole thing is that majority of people who are "worried" and "doing their part" are really just maintaining a large charade and putting off "the inevitable" (provided you believe IT, the great evil warming thing, will happen). Again, I give you Carbon Credits.

That is what you were getting at with the nuclear plant homework, yes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top