The solar village

[zendog3]

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.

[JerryLBell]

The Top of the World retirement community already stresses solar power and very high insulation levels in their houses. It surprised us to hear that and yet see almost no solar power in houses in The Villages. We see plenty of solar water heating for swimming pools but very few solar panels for electricity. Given that The Villages outsells Top of the World (and everybody else in the retirment community), I wonder if they made the calculation that too few people are willing to pay the initial bump in housing prices to incorporate solar power to warrant widescale inclusion.

[golfing eagles]

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.

Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them

[B-flat]

Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them

I like your style!! Hmm you seemed to rattle a few cages too :popcorn:

[Michael G.]

Record Smashed at South Pole (https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/record-smashed-at-south-pole/vi-AAPaVbs?ocid=msedgntp)

[retiredguy123]

OP, are you suggesting that every house and building in an entire village have solar panels installed on the roof? Do you also want the taxpayers to fund tax credits for these systems? It would be much more efficient and effective for the power company to produce some of their power using solar panels at their plant. Solar systems for individual houses in The Villages are not sensible or cost effective.

[Number 10 GI]

There are more holes in the global warming hoax than in Swiss Cheese. Ole P.T.B was right.

[Gpsma]

Think the esteemed developer should get rid of the cattle they keep on land they already own. Why?..call it farm land and cheaper taxes.

Dont they know cow flatulence is killing the environment!!!.

All these cows are melting the polar ice caps and we will be drowning soon.

Solar power...as a young kid, i already knew that the sun had power. I burnt many an ant with a magnifying glass.

[Number 10 GI]

Think the esteemed developer should get rid of the cattle they keep on land they already own. Why?..call it farm land and cheaper taxes.

Dont they know cow flatulence is killing the environment!!!.

All these cows are melting the polar ice caps and we will be drowning soon.

Solar power...as a young kid, i already knew that the sun had power. I burnt many an ant with a magnifying glass.

I grew up on a farm where we had a lot of cows. They do not fart, they cannot fart! Cows have a ruminant stomach comprised of 4 separate compartments. If an animal with a ruminant stomach eats fresh clover hay, gas will build up in the stomach and eventually swell the stomach to where it will interfere with breathing and stop the heart causing death. The animal with a ruminant stomach cannot pass the gas. Horses are different case, they fart loudly and often.

[Mortal1]

*yawn* when science doesn't match up with your world view....just change the science eh?

[golfing eagles]

I like your style!! Hmm you seemed to rattle a few cages too :popcorn:

That was to be expected.

Unfortunately, the powers that be have inundated and permeated the people's thinking that they are not capable of discerning the reality of our climate.

Joseph Goebbels put it best:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."

[coffeebean]

OP, are you suggesting that every house and building in an entire village have solar panels installed on the roof? Do you also want the taxpayers to fund tax credits for these systems? It would be much more efficient and effective for the power company to produce some of their power using solar panels at their plant. Solar systems for individual houses in The Villages are not sensible or cost effective.

Besides not being cost effective, I think solar panels are unsightly and actually deface the home. We will NEVER have solar panels on any home we own.

[maxfl1]

Well, how about a lecture on subject from MIT scientist. Maybe you will learn something.
2018 Annual GWPF Lecture - Prof Richard Lindzen - Global Warming For The Two Cultures - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2q9BT2LIUA&list=WL&index=1)

[thevillages2013]

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.
Should include a picture of your roof that is obviously covered with solar panels. Wait, what do you mean you don’t have solar panels?

[maxfl1]

You are wrong about "most people." How about learning something from long time MIT scientist. Most of what you list are short term "weather" events. Not climate change. They lost the debate on "man made global warming" and had to leave that behind for "climate change." Now, of course there is climate change, but you guys leave out the sun and rotation of the earth.
Learn something here: 2018 Annual GWPF Lecture - Prof Richard Lindzen - Global Warming For The Two Cultures - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2q9BT2LIUA&list=WL&index=1)
And, I am sure if I was to meet you, I would see that you have solar panels (not sustainable or biodegradable), electric car and keep your thermostat at the low 80s, correct?

[mrrmauu]

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.

No thanks.

[maxfl1]

And, surely, you have a phd in the area. Would you like to hear from an MIT scientist on the subject. Go debate him:
2018 Annual GWPF Lecture - Prof Richard Lindzen - Global Warming For The Two Cultures - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2q9BT2LIUA&list=WL&index=1)
Learn something.

[Petersweeney]

Another stupid post to ignore

[DaleDivine]

There's a development on Lake Ella road jus past Rolling Acres that is totally solar powered...

:ho::ho::bigbow:

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Since the thermometer is only about 150 years or so, not more than 200 years, the historical records really don't exist, so climate change is based upon analysis and theory, and only that. but long term is really more than 200 years. . . .

The most likely reason for long term climate change is most likely related to changes which are too small to measure over thousands of years. . .

Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles and Their Role in Earth's Climate – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/)

however, there are regional climates which change due to human behavior, such as creating more heat sinks from city construction, so if anything might be the recent cause of surface global temperature rise, it comes from the heat sinks which humans have created by turning cattle fields into roads and houses. . .

remember, anything related to money or funding of any sort is subject to abuse. .

[golfing eagles]

If it was up to Al Gore, New York would be “New Venice”, a United States version of Old Venice in Italy. He did say that unless he could make Billions with his Carbon Credit scam, New York would be under water by 2010.

True, and the polar ice caps that he stated would be gone by 2010 are actually growing slightly. (receding in some places, growing in others but overall a net gain)

[joseppe]

As you often post on this website when those with no training or expertise attempt to speak with authority...

Did you get your PhD from Dr Google????

It is very interesting to see you using the language that the anti-vaxers use. Ideas shoved down your throat, using specious partially accurate information and totally misapplying it to this situation. Once again, the experts in this field are, like the experts in virology are in regards to Covid, nearly unanimous in their assessment of global climate change and the role humans have played in it. It is sad when your political agenda is in conflict with the overwhelming expert opinion and yet somehow on this topic you completely go as much off the rails as the Covid denier and the anti-vaccine groups do on their pet alternative explanations. I am sure you can even find the climate denier experts on You-tube and Breitbart to support your post. Pot, meet kettle.

Not to get in the middle of this, but a degree (ie. PHD) does not mean someone is 'smarter' or has more intelligence than those without a degree. IMHO

[Andyb]

Maybe these things are happening because we are getting closer to the rapture.

[Rooklift]

Yes put on 5 layers of masks that do not stop viruses. See if that works.

[Bay Kid]

Do we really know the damage solar panels will cause in the next 20-30 years?

[mambeg]

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.

Nothing is free. Remember all solar panels will be in land fills in about 25 years, they do not last forever. China burns tons of coal fired mills to make the panels. The electrical infrastructure in the USA is about 1/2 of what we need at this point to charge the anticipated electrical cars we will all owns some day. Solar and wind generation will not be enough. If you want to do something, start at home. Look at the garbage we all throw out. All bought and paid for and will end up in a land fill or burnt.

[Wilson02852]

THE FACTS: Cows fart. That contributes to global warming. But cow burps are worse for the climate.

“Cows are pretty disgusting eaters, with methane coming from both ends,” said Christopher Field at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment. “But most of it comes from burping.”

Field cited the “classic quote from the technical literature” on the topic: “Of the CH4 (methane) produced by enteric fermentation in the forestomach 95% was excreted by eructation (burp), and from CH4 produced in the hindgut 89% was found to be excreted through the breath.’”

In a nutshell, belches are bad news.

At Tuscia University in Viterbo, Italy, environmental scholar Giampiero Grossi said methane emitted by ruminant livestock accounts for about 5.5% of the greenhouse gasses that come from human activity. More than 70% of livestock emissions are from cattle, he said.

“Ruminants are a significant source of methane,” which traps more heat than carbon dioxide but doesn’t last as long in the air, said Kristie Ebi, director of the Center for Health and the Global Environment at the University of Washington in Seattle. “The belches have to do with digesting their food” in the stomach compartments, not intestines, and that fermentation produces methane.

[fritzy]

Timeline Photos (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10159734183361096&set=a.10154002045296096&__cft__%5B0%5D=AZUHg-OZPfhAPVoEYX2WYyDRakUZGQL4QNpj_afRpUCBGgzmmQJabaR9 0lCA3EWFh5EiO0YB0CclxvZvnHjJaG6-SHQrrCsksR42S-tqLlt75bRpDh6dp7JNoxoQISfOpzwQbWlibLBbZ9E8m2RByKzA lylaSjqiilMCM3w1kaYQMw&__tn__=EH-y-R)

[biker1]

The “science” is not understood by most people. Most get it wrong. In fact, the term “greenhouse effect” is misleading as the physics of why a greenhouse stays warm is different than the physics in the theory of anthropogenic warming. For the record, there has been anthropogenic warming. This is indisputable. Exactly how much is hard to say - probably not a lot. It is difficult to know exactly where we are since some surface observations have been homogenized. Anthropogenic warming is also a permutation on the longer time scale natural climate variability. For example, we are still in an interglacial period and will continue to experience warming. So, here is the exact science and the theory. Increases in CO2, from whatever source, impact the net longwave radiative loss to space. This is pretty well understood and can be calculated with some precision. However, this will not cause enough warming to be of concern. This warming must produce a positive feedback on the atmospheric/oceanic system to force enough additional warming, to be of concern. This is what climate models attempt to simulate. A climate model is a computer program that integrates the equations that describe the atmospheric, oceanographic, and land properties forward in time. The problem is that, in my opinion, the models are still a research effort and not ready for use as a tool for developing public policy. The models have had some issues with anomalous warming in the mid tropospheric equatorial regions during retrospective runs. There is no guarantee that the models have the physics correct. The interactions are subtle. For example, if you create some initial warming then the atmosphere can hold more moisture and this can result in more clouds that reflect more solar radiation and lead to cooling. But the clouds will also impact the longwave radiation and lead to warming. In the atmosphere, negative feedbacks are the norm: you “push” the system and it rebounds instead of amplifying the initial “push”. You have to believe that positive feedbacks are dominant over negative feedbacks to have faith in climate model predictions of significant anthropogenic warming. So, why have so many people pushed the panic button? One possibility is that the climate model simulations are correct, to some degree. I suspect we will wind up on the lower limit of the projections, as a worst case scenario, and man will adapt, as he always has. Another possibility is the political angle. I’ll let others expand on that.


You must be new here.

To grasp global warming, you have to believe in science - this is The Villages where 95% of the posters here obtained their degrees from that esteemed institution of learning, Trump University.

[RICH1]

Go ahead OP.. go solar ...
does anybody ever price this stuff before making a comment like this?
The last place in the world Solar would pay off , is in a retirement community...

[Jerseyborn]

OP, are you suggesting that every house and building in an entire village have solar panels installed on the roof? Do you also want the taxpayers to fund tax credits for these systems? It would be much more efficient and effective for the power company to produce some of their power using solar panels at their plant. Solar systems for individual houses in The Villages are not sensible or cost effective.

We're from NJ where solar is installed for free with the company taking a %of the profits from the energy collected. Super surprised this is not available in the Sunshine State

[Lindaws]

Don’t agree

[john1006]

This article cherry picks stats. Such as most experts, without identifying who those "experts" work with or are paid by. Further if you go back through the past 25 years you will find those that were hotter and had more storms. As usual this type of climate change commentary is based on selected experts with things that "most" people believe.

[toeser]

While I'm not sure that any one political party has a monopoly on this farce, it is correct to refer to it as a farce. Now, I know the true believers don't want to hear anything other than we need to combat "climate change" and save the planet, the following link is to an article on ABC news that gives a relatively simplistic explanation of our current climate period. The paleoclimatologist they cite differs a little from his colleagues in that he feels we would already be headed for another period of glaciation if it wasn't due to carbon emissions (mostly agriculture in Asia over the last 8,000 years, not your SUV), overall it is a pretty reasonable article.

What causes an ice age and what would happen if the Earth endured another one? - ABC News (https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-06-15/what-is-an-ice-age-explainer/7185002#:~:text=But%20in%20terms%20of%20the%20long %20history%20of,just%20in%20a%20slightly%20warmer% 20period%2C%20an%20interglacial.)

Excellent article. Thanks for the link.

[Chi-Town]

Bad advice - windmills cause cancer. Must be true, was told this by a stable genius

Mr. Ed or the other one?

[Win1894]

The premise that solar is the savior of the planet is irritatingly ignorant. Do the physics. It's not green and it's not renewable. You've been sold a bill of goods. First, where do you think most PV cells come from - China. Second, what are you going to do for power when the sun don't shine or at night? Batteries you say - not possible. The battery capacity would have to be so massive it would shift the Earth's orbit.

So, after the 20 year lifespan of a solar panel, then what? There is no recycling capacity for solar panels, and what about all the heavy metals in the PV cells? When you need a new roof do you really want to pay for your inefficient solar array to be removed and then reinstalled over the new roof, and let's not even get into roof leaks or panels shorting out before their full lifespan. Oh, and did you know that solar panels lose between 1 to 2 percent of their efficiency every year?

So, on a sunny day you have all these panels producing electricity. What are you going to do with the excess capacity since it cannot be stored? then the sun goes down and BOOM now you have to stoke up the coal plant. Not an easy thing to do if you know anything about power generation.

There is only one solution even if you don't believe the dire predictions about global warming/climate change and that is to invest in 4th generation nuclear power run on Thorium (which we have at least a 1000 year supply in the US). It's clean, efficient, incredibly safe, virtually no waste , and non-proliferative. Additionally, its excess power can be used to purify water, and pull carbon dioxide out the the air and reduce it to hydrocarbon fuels - now that's renewable energy!

[Ptmckiou]

Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them

The earth does run in cycles. Most definitely….BUT, what you seem to always miss in the science is that since the industrial age, where man has created the combustion engine, science has tracked that the cycle has accelerated significantly. Is that a coincidence? No such thing as a coincidence in science. Mankind has added additional stress to those normal cycles. Thereby, mankind needs to curb their contribution to the cycles to stop its accelerating. Plus, that’s just common sense that you add extra CO2 to the earth, it’s going to have a reaction. Cause and effect. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see it.

[Ksfirefighter]

Just follow the money!

[toeser]

Since the thermometer is only about 150 years or so, not more than 200 years, the historical records really don't exist, so climate change is based upon analysis and theory, and only that. but long term is really more than 200 years. . . .

The most likely reason for long term climate change is most likely related to changes which are too small to measure over thousands of years. . .

Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles and Their Role in Earth's Climate – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/)

however, there are regional climates which change due to human behavior, such as creating more heat sinks from city construction, so if anything might be the recent cause of surface global temperature rise, it comes from the heat sinks which humans have created by turning cattle fields into roads and houses. . .

remember, anything related to money or funding of any sort is subject to abuse. .


The heat sink idea is totally valid and proven on a small scale by my incessant nighttime bike riding in multiple areas. Official thermometers tend to be in built up areas. As an example, I believe the official temperature for The Villages is from the east side of Sumter Landing. When I ride through that area, the thermometer on my bike almost always agrees with reported temperatures within a degree or so. However, if I ride up to the polo fields the temperature will usually be as much as 5 to 10 degrees cooler then that being reported for The Villages.

This happens in city after city, thus I believe our reported overnight low temperatures are considerably overstated.

[OrganicGal]

It is definitely time for the Villages to not just think about.... but act on decisions that have a positive environmental impact and lead by example. Solar is a beginning. We have the perfect climate for moving forward more aggressively. We have a responsibility to future generations. And no one seems to be addressing all the sprinklers that run throughout the day... in the middle of the day burning the grass and the worst are the sprinklers running in the middle of rainstorms! And then their is the fact that the Villages are the pesticide capital of the world.






This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.

[Tadpole]

❣️🥰❤️ THANK YOU, THANK YOU❣️ This is SO WELL said and written that I'm saving it to respond to the *%(*)*& climate goofs.

[Ksfirefighter]

They will all be in the landfill

[biker1]

Sprinklers in the common areas often run during rainstorms because the level of the retention ponds is being managed. Most of the water for common area irrigation comes from the retention ponds and their levels need to be managed. Irrigation of residences during rainstorms could be an issue with the rain sensor or the rain sensor is functioning correctly but enough rain hasn’t fallen yet to trip it. Irrigation during the day doesn’t burn grass.


It is definitely time for the Villages to not just think about.... but act on decisions that have a positive environmental impact and lead by example. Solar is a beginning. We have the perfect climate for moving forward more aggressively. We have a responsibility to future generations. And no one seems to be addressing all the sprinklers that run throughout the day... in the middle of the day burning the grass and the worst are the sprinklers running in the middle of rainstorms! And then their is the fact that the Villages are the pesticide capital of the world.

[Ksfirefighter]

If you want to really create a change, go after the biggest users and polluters, like China!
They don’t really care about the environment. Just churning out cheap crap that nobody ever really needs.
If you want a change, stop buying from them and support those who are like minded. If nobody buys the crap they produce then production will fall and less pollution.

[Notsocrates]

I grew up on a farm where we had a lot of cows. They do not fart, they cannot fart! Cows have a ruminant stomach comprised of 4 separate compartments. If an animal with a ruminant stomach eats fresh clover hay, gas will build up in the stomach and eventually swell the stomach to where it will interfere with breathing and stop the heart causing death. The animal with a ruminant stomach cannot pass the gas. Horses are different case, they fart loudly and often.
1. Cows cannot digest grass (cellulose) because they lack the enzyme, cellulase, needed to metabolize that carbohydrate.

2. They are able to nourish themselves by having gut bacteria who do have cellulase. The end product of this metabolism is called carbon dioxide and is passed via the rectum which is called a fart.

[retiredguy123]

If you want to really create a change, go after the biggest users and polluters, like China!
They don’t really care about the environment. Just churning out cheap crap that nobody ever really needs.
If you want a change, stop buying from them and support those who are like minded. If nobody buys the crap they produce then production will fall and less pollution.
I agree with your concept, but I don't think it is possible to stop buying products made in China or other polluting countries.

[WhoDat]

And, surely, you have a phd in the area. Would you like to hear from an MIT scientist on the subject. Go debate him:
2018 Annual GWPF Lecture - Prof Richard Lindzen - Global Warming For The Two Cultures - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2q9BT2LIUA&list=WL&index=1)
Learn something.

Thank you. Great video.

[MrFlorida]

Things change naturally, ask the dinosaurs.

[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

Every time I hear that one about sprinklers burning your lawn or flowers I have to laugh , if that were true with all the rain showers we have there would be no grass or flowers , but it is a waste of money watering your yard during day and of no help

[Pachine58]

Solar panels will make great freebies in the hurricane winds. Good luck evacuating in your electric car in bumper to bumper traffic. And how you going to charge it up after a storm when power has been out for days?

So many holes in the pie in sky green dreams.. nuclear and fossil fuels work…period.

[pablo cruze]

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.
I plan to install solar on my home, after I complete my other projects. My reason is to reduce my monthly costs, so I will need to make sure the business case is solid. I know the component costs are coming down, and the efficiency is going up. There is tax credit to offset the investment.

Problem is that there are a bunch of sales people from different companies that don't know what they are talking about. The don't know anything about the systems that they are trying to pawn. Their spiel is to say that you will get it for free, in that your monthly payment to them will be the same or less than the cost of paying your current electric bill. The roll in the tax credit to make it look good. Their system cost is triple of what it should actually cost. If the developer were negotiate a system with a supplier, it would be much more cost effective.

Oh, also even if I use 0.00 KW in a month, I still need to pay SECO $1 per day. What a scam.

Of course the solar system is clean and green, but money talks. If a new home were to have the solar power installed, the cost to build the home would increase about $8000 on average, but they could charge $13K - $14K extra to the home buyer, and it would still be a good value to the homebuyer, while the developer makes more profit. If they want to do a whole village like this or at least a section of a village, it would be pretty cool. Better yet, if they could let customers spec if they what the system or not, and perhaps let them chose the system capacity, or even if they want storage batteries to use stored energy at night.

I know people that spend a lot to have a backup generator; putting that invested amount toward solar energy production is financially more sensible.

[jimjamuser]

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.
I wish that you would run for local politics. But, you are too idealistic about TV Land. It is set up to make $$$$ and not for social good! It is one of the most backward places that I have ever lived in! Like dark-ages backward. Sit down in a foldup chair in ANY residential TV Land street with pretty much Golf Car traffic. Wait until a Golf Car goes past you for about 60 feet. Then start taking deep breaths and use your nose. Most are gas Golf Cars and unless brand new will smell like you poured gasoline on your own shirt! They STINK, STINK, STINK, AND MORE STINK. The drivers are moving into fresh air so they do NOT realize what a terrible thing they are doing to TV Landers and even the upper atmosphere. Notice that when a regular car or small truck goes by they don't stink sometimes NOT at all. And what are the health effects on an older population, some with allergies, asthma, or other serious problems?

But GOLF is KING in TV land. So, no one BETTER say a bad word about the polluting machines called golf cars. And put the screws to the environment even though these small gas machines are polluting more than the larger smog control devices protected large vehicles. And then there is the LAWN MOWER polluting MACHINES BURNING gasoline. And the 2-STROKE 120 DB noise blasting leaf blowers - do THEY get a pass. I know that there are a bizzillion OIL lobbyists pushing for more gas usage - but this is BEYOND ridiculous!

So, if they can't fix what is right in front of their nose? - How can I expect them to fix or be in ANY way helpful in combating global warming. Not going to happen in this state - in this lifetime. They might talk some words about getting with a GREEN program. But, the real GREEN is what will be priority numero uno! So good luck and when you tire of changing those minds - please join MY club for the jousting of windmills!

[HORNET]

Global changes are on frequencies, Democrats believe that if they throw enough of our tax dollars out they will become richer and they know that it is a scam that they started during Gore’s time!

[Number 10 GI]

1. Cows cannot digest grass (cellulose) because they lack the enzyme, cellulase, needed to metabolize that carbohydrate.

2. They are able to nourish themselves by having gut bacteria who do have cellulase. The end product of this metabolism is called carbon dioxide and is passed via the rectum which is called a fart.

Have you ever lived on a farm with cattle? I did and I never heard a cow fart.

[JMintzer]

I wish that you would run for local politics. But, you are too idealistic about TV Land. It is set up to make $$$$ and not for social good! It is one of the most backward places that I have ever lived in! Like dark-ages backward. Sit down in a foldup chair in ANY residential TV Land street with pretty much Golf Car traffic. Wait until a Golf Car goes past you for about 60 feet. Then start taking deep breaths and use your nose. Most are gas Golf Cars and unless brand new will smell like you poured gasoline on your own shirt! They STINK, STINK, STINK, AND MORE STINK. The drivers are moving into fresh air so they do NOT realize what a terrible thing they are doing to TV Landers and even the upper atmosphere. Notice that when a regular car or small truck goes by they don't stink sometimes NOT at all. And what are the health effects on an older population, some with allergies, asthma, or other serious problems?

But GOLF is KING in TV land. So, no one BETTER say a bad word about the polluting machines called golf cars. And put the screws to the environment even though these small gas machines are polluting more than the larger smog control devices protected large vehicles. And then there is the LAWN MOVER polluting MACHINES BURNING gasoline. And the 2-STROKE 120 DB noise blasting leaf blowers - do THEY get a pass. I know that there are a bizzillion OIL lobbyists pushing for more gas usage - but this is BEYOND ridiculous!

So, if they can't fix what is right in front of their nose? - How can I expect them to fix or be in ANY way helpful in combating global warming. Not going to happen in this state - in this lifetime. They might talk some words about getting with a GREEN program. But, the real GREEN is what will be priority numero uno! So good luck and when you tire of changing those minds - please join MY club for the jousting of windmills!

You moved into a golf course/golf cart community and you're surprised there are a lot of golf courses and golf carts?

I wish I could think of some way, just some thing you could do to make you happy...

[Number 10 GI]

I did some quick searching and found that and there are an estimated 989 million head of cattle in the world and 7.8 billion humans. So who do you think is generating the most methane from farts. A human on the average passes gas 10 to 18 times a day, that's a lot of gas.

[zendog3]

Wow! I was aware there were still people who disagreed that global climate change was a fact and that people were the primary cause, but I am amazed by the passion of some readers.

Your opinion was common in the '70s, but the consensus among scientists studying climate has moved. Perhaps you should take another look at the science.

It is not reasonable to expect any reader of this list to read all the primary science. Instead, we must select our sources and evaluate not the scientific research but the authority of the source. Bush, Gore, Trump, Hannity, Biden, etc., are not the people we should trust in matters where there is a scientific answer. Because the stakes are so high, we need to consider the words and writings of scientists researching this field.

I refer you to Wikipedia for a summary, where a long and meticulously documented article is waiting.

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change)

People violently opposed to the idea of global warming will not read an article that attacks their fundamental beliefs. People skeptical may look at the charts and graphs. However, anyone with faith in science who reads the report can not help but be persuaded by the consensus statement quoted here:

Academic studies of scientific agreement on human-caused global warming among climate experts (2010–2019) reflect that the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science.[302][303]
There is an overwhelming scientific consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases, with 90–100% (depending on the exact question, timing and sampling methodology) of publishing climate scientists agreeing.[304] The consensus has grown to 100% among research scientists on anthropogenic global warming as of 2019.[305] No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.[306] Consensus has further developed that some form of action should be taken to protect people against the impacts of climate change, and national science academies have called on world leaders to cut global emissions.[307]

The Wikipedia article is backed with pages and pages of citations to original scientific papers.

Most of us will die in a world where the earth's temperature is still rising and climate catastrophe is growing. It is for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren that we need to act now.

[jimjamuser]

Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them
Solar power, wind power, tide power, electric generation from waterfalls, even nuclear power (if we can keep it under control) - they are all better than coal or oil and gasoline. And why make the middle east wealthy and powerful - they NEVER did anything for us except cause us problems?

[zendog3]

I wish that you would run for local politics. But, you are too idealistic about TV Land. It is set up to make $$$$ and not for social good! It is one of the most backward places that I have ever lived in! Like dark-ages backward. Sit down in a foldup chair in ANY residential TV Land street with pretty much Golf Car traffic. Wait until a Golf Car goes past you for about 60 feet. Then start taking deep breaths and use your nose. Most are gas Golf Cars and unless brand new will smell like you poured gasoline on your own shirt! They STINK, STINK, STINK, AND MORE STINK. The drivers are moving into fresh air so they do NOT realize what a terrible thing they are doing to TV Landers and even the upper atmosphere. Notice that when a regular car or small truck goes by they don't stink sometimes NOT at all. And what are the health effects on an older population, some with allergies, asthma, or other serious problems?

But GOLF is KING in TV land. So, no one BETTER say a bad word about the polluting machines called golf cars. And put the screws to the environment even though these small gas machines are polluting more than the larger smog control devices protected large vehicles. And then there is the LAWN MOVER polluting MACHINES BURNING gasoline. And the 2-STROKE 120 DB noise blasting leaf blowers - do THEY get a pass. I know that there are a bizzillion OIL lobbyists pushing for more gas usage - but this is BEYOND ridiculous!

So, if they can't fix what is right in front of their nose? - How can I expect them to fix or be in ANY way helpful in combating global warming. Not going to happen in this state - in this lifetime. They might talk some words about getting with a GREEN program. But, the real GREEN is what will be priority numero uno! So good luck and when you tire of changing those minds - please join MY club for the jousting of windmills!
Many folks on this list have said the developer is only interested in money. I could not disagree more.

The lot my house is built on backs to a golf course and pond. I paid about $100,000 for that view. I drive about one-quarter of a mile on Hillsborough beside the same view when I leave my home. The developer is not stupid. They knew they could have moved the street and sold every sixty feet of that view for $100,000. The developer, long ago, made more money than they will ever spend. Some rich man once said, “After a certain amount, money is only a way to keep score.”

I believe one of the primary interests of the developer is their legacy. When the members of the family, like their parents before them, die, I think they want to be remembered, not for their immense wealth, but for the community they created. That is why tie idea of a solar village is a possibility.

[golfing eagles]

Wow! I was aware there were still people who disagreed that global climate change was a fact and that people were the primary cause, but I am amazed by the passion of some readers.

Your opinion was common in the '70s, but the consensus among scientists studying climate has moved. Perhaps you should take another look at the science.

It is not reasonable to expect any reader of this list to read all the primary science. Instead, we must select our sources and evaluate not the scientific research but the authority of the source. Bush, Gore, Trump, Hannity, Biden, etc., are not the people we should trust in matters where there is a scientific answer. Because the stakes are so high, we need to consider the words and writings of scientists researching this field.

I refer you to Wikipedia for a summary, where a long and meticulously documented article is waiting.

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change)

People violently opposed to the idea of global warming will not read an article that attacks their fundamental beliefs. People skeptical may look at the charts and graphs. However, anyone with faith in science who reads the report can not help but be persuaded by the consensus statement quoted here:

Academic studies of scientific agreement on human-caused global warming among climate experts (2010–2019) reflect that the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science.[302][303]
There is an overwhelming scientific consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases, with 90–100% (depending on the exact question, timing and sampling methodology) of publishing climate scientists agreeing.[304] The consensus has grown to 100% among research scientists on anthropogenic global warming as of 2019.[305] No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.[306] Consensus has further developed that some form of action should be taken to protect people against the impacts of climate change, and national science academies have called on world leaders to cut global emissions.[307]

The Wikipedia article is backed with pages and pages of citations to original scientific papers.

Most of us will die in a world where the earth's temperature is still rising and climate catastrophe is growing. It is for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren that we need to act now.

First---Wikipedia??????. Pllleeeezzzzzzeeeeeee

Second----all those "original scientific papers" were paid for by.....wait for it.....government grants.

Third, unless you grandchildren live to be 15,000 years old, they have nothing to worry about.

just goes to prove P.T. Barnum was right

[jimjamuser]

OP, are you suggesting that every house and building in an entire village have solar panels installed on the roof? Do you also want the taxpayers to fund tax credits for these systems? It would be much more efficient and effective for the power company to produce some of their power using solar panels at their plant. Solar systems for individual houses in The Villages are not sensible or cost effective.
If someone believes that solar panels are NOT sensible, then it is also NOT sensible to have had children and grandchildren and then great-grandchildren that will suffer in their lungs for oil-derived fuel when an electric car or truck is non-polluting, in itself and at the factory that produces it. They are simpler to build and last longer and are easier to maintain. That's about a win/ win/ win/win! The only other solution to US pollution is to MANDATE each married couple to have a maximum of 2 children. And, I know how much you-all LOVE MANDATES.
.......And, of course, those grandchildren WILL fall prey to a famous old philosopher that said, " wars and petulance" will control the levels of population". So, teach those grandchildren to shoot - they will have the unwashed hordes coming for their fat-city wealth and take it away (AND their lives). So, don't buy a Prius or a Tesla - and from heaven or wherever, you can watch them perish!

[retiredguy123]

If someone believes that solar panels are NOT sensible, then it is also NOT sensible to have had children and grandchildren and then great-grandchildren that will suffer in their lungs for oil-derived fuel when an electric car or truck is non-polluting, in itself and at the factory that produces it. They are simpler to build and last longer and are easier to maintain. That's about a win/ win/ win/win! The only other solution to US pollution is to MANDATE each married couple to have a maximum of 2 children. And, I know how much you-all LOVE MANDATES.
.......And, of course, those grandchildren WILL fall prey to a famous old philosopher that said, " wars and petulance" will control the levels of population". So, teach those grandchildren to shoot - they will have the unwashed hordes coming for their fat-city wealth and take it away (AND their lives). So, don't buy a Prius or a Tesla - and from heaven or wherever, you can watch them perish!
I didn't say that solar panels are not sensible. I said that solar panels attached to an asphalt shingle roof in The Villages to provide an inadequate amount of electricity for an individual house is not sensible or cost effective.

[jimjamuser]

I grew up on a farm where we had a lot of cows. They do not fart, they cannot fart! Cows have a ruminant stomach comprised of 4 separate compartments. If an animal with a ruminant stomach eats fresh clover hay, gas will build up in the stomach and eventually swell the stomach to where it will interfere with breathing and stop the heart causing death. The animal with a ruminant stomach cannot pass the gas. Horses are different case, they fart loudly and often.
I did NOT know that ........thank you........I was believing the cow-exit-gas theory. Now I will put my dunce cap on and sit in a corner and meditate on why it is known that the Atlantic ocean is rising and temperature is rising and 97% of all scientists believe that the rise is man-made!

[NoMoSno]

If someone believes that solar panels are NOT sensible, then it is also NOT sensible to have had children and grandchildren and then great-grandchildren that will suffer in their lungs for oil-derived fuel when an electric car or truck is non-polluting, in itself and at the factory that produces it. They are simpler to build and last longer and are easier to maintain. That's about a win/ win/ win/win! The only other solution to US pollution is to MANDATE each married couple to have a maximum of 2 children. And, I know how much you-all LOVE MANDATES.
.......And, of course, those grandchildren WILL fall prey to a famous old philosopher that said, " wars and petulance" will control the levels of population". So, teach those grandchildren to shoot - they will have the unwashed hordes coming for their fat-city wealth and take it away (AND their lives). So, don't buy a Prius or a Tesla - and from heaven or wherever, you can watch them perish!
Does your house run on solar panels?

[Neils]

Fossils do not lie!!! Cooling and warming cycles are normal and not man made.
Follow the science

[jimjamuser]

That was to be expected.

Unfortunately, the powers that be have inundated and permeated the people's thinking that they are not capable of discerning the reality of our climate.

Joseph Goebbels put it best:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
Interesting Goebbels quote. Reminds me of the same philosophy that lawyer Roy Cohen exposed and lived by.

[jimjamuser]

Besides not being cost effective, I think solar panels are unsightly and actually deface the home. We will NEVER have solar panels on any home we own.
And it is also going to be "unsightly' when hordes of starving peasants storm NORTHWARD and throw / evict all the people in Florida and the rest of the US. Same thing will be happening in Europe! We will be dead, but our grandkids will be alive (for a while) and maybe we will be able to root for them as they try to cross the Canadian border and NOT get shot or imprisoned by the Canadian Mounties. Come on Jason don't give up, stay hidden in that cave. OH NO! I hope he is only wounded.
.....And windmills are unsightly, but don't worry, the Florida Tourist Industry lobbyists will prevent those ("unsightly") terrible, noisy machines. At least solar panels are quiet!

[thevillages2013]

I did some quick searching and found that and there are an estimated 989 million head of cattle in the world and 7.8 billion humans. So who do you think is generating the most methane from farts. A human on the average passes gas 10 to 18 times a day, that's a lot of gas.

Pull my finger:bigbow:

[NoMoSno]

And it is also going to be "unsightly' when hordes of starving peasants storm NORTHWARD and throw / evict all the people in Florida and the rest of the US. Same thing will be happening in Europe! We will be dead, but our grandkids will be alive (for a while) and maybe we will be able to root for them as they try to cross the Canadian border and NOT get shot or imprisoned by the Canadian Mounties. Come on Jason don't give up, stay hidden in that cave. OH NO! I hope he is only wounded.
.....And windmills are unsightly, but don't worry, the Florida Tourist Industry lobbyists will prevent those ("unsightly") terrible, noisy machines. At least solar panels are quiet!
Loosen up the tinfoil.

[jimjamuser]

Maybe these things are happening because we are getting closer to the rapture.
Good one! That made me laugh - a good hearty laugh, thanks!

[jimjamuser]

Nothing is free. Remember all solar panels will be in land fills in about 25 years, they do not last forever. China burns tons of coal fired mills to make the panels. The electrical infrastructure in the USA is about 1/2 of what we need at this point to charge the anticipated electrical cars we will all owns some day. Solar and wind generation will not be enough. If you want to do something, start at home. Look at the garbage we all throw out. All bought and paid for and will end up in a land fill or burnt.
AS to junk thrown out. Toys could be made from wood, which is a natural renewable, instead of plastic - which is based on oil, which is a finite quantity. Lots of things are and can be made out of wood. Because of global warming and overpopulation, the US is losing much of its valuable, renewable, wood resources. We worry greatly about oil spills and oil is a short-term, limited resource. It is US land and forests that we should be worried about. And because of global warming, our forests have more insect pests in them than ever before - it is a bad cycle that we are in!
..... And I could be, just as well, talking about WATER - that is being wasted on pecans and other water-wasting crops.

[jimjamuser]

We're from NJ where solar is installed for free with the company taking a %of the profits from the energy collected. Super surprised this is not available in the Sunshine State
Don't be surprised......going from the Northeast to Florida......is like going on a fast time train back toward the dark ages. Well at least We have the Sales Tax, which is bad - but we can sluff most of it off onto the tourists.

[Number 10 GI]

I did NOT know that ........thank you........I was believing the cow-exit-gas theory. Now I will put my dunce cap on and sit in a corner and meditate on why it is known that the Atlantic ocean is rising and temperature is rising and 97% of all scientists believe that the rise is man-made!

Tell me how the ocean can be higher in the Atlantic and the other oceans aren't. Approximately 71% of the world is covered by water. All these oceans are connected to each other, so if one rises so will the rest. If 50 people go into a swimming pool at one end does the water not rise equally at the other end?
That 97% of all scientists is total BS, it is an invented number. There is no way you are going to get 97% of any group to agree on anything.

[jimjamuser]

❣️🥰❤️ THANK YOU, THANK YOU❣️ This is SO WELL said and written that I'm saving it to respond to the *%(*)*& climate goofs.
Only since there are only 2 sides here, then which side IS the nasty, dreaded "climate goofs"? Since THAT logically depends on which side someone is on?

[fcgiii]

I did NOT know that ........thank you........I was believing the cow-exit-gas theory. Now I will put my dunce cap on and sit in a corner and meditate on why it is known that the Atlantic ocean is rising and temperature is rising and 97% of all scientists believe that the rise is man-made!
There are six major sources of atmospheric methane: emission from anaerobic decomposition in (1) natural wetlands; (2) paddy rice fields; (3) emission from livestock production systems (including intrinsic fermentation and animal waste); (4) biomass burning (including forest fires, charcoal combustion, and firewood burning); (5) anaerobic decomposition of organic waste in landfills; and (6) fossil methane emission during the exploration and transport of fossil fuels.

90 to 95 percent of the methane released by cows comes out of their mouths, while 5 to 10 percent is released in the form of manure and flatulence.

[jimjamuser]

If you want to really create a change, go after the biggest users and polluters, like China!
They don’t really care about the environment. Just churning out cheap crap that nobody ever really needs.
If you want a change, stop buying from them and support those who are like minded. If nobody buys the crap they produce then production will fall and less pollution.
Wish granted! China's production has been dropping off lately because of the backup at US ports for unloading products. China won't make what it can't sell quickly. And US vehicle production and other line production has slowed down big-time because we depend on just-in-time delivery of PARTS. So, now we have just-in-time gotten out of time and way-behind-time and nobody gets their new Chevy or Ford. so sad! And that hurts China and hurts the US stock market. Which hurts the US economy and labor, in general.
....Don't know if it IS affecting Europe or not?

[jimjamuser]

You moved into a golf course/golf cart community and you're surprised there are a lot of golf courses and golf carts?

I wish I could think of some way, just some thing you could do to make you happy...
Having ALL ELECTRIC GOLF CARTS and electric mowers would make me and our mother (mother earth) VERY happy. I am doing my part and getting BOTH! Now it is your turn to be nice to Mother! And my mower is a 20-inch push Kobalt that is quiet as a"Dream Machine". She pushes easily and never refuses me (to start). I named her ....Ginger Peachy! And she has long sharp nails.....I mean blade. What more can a tool-man desire?

[JMintzer]

I did some quick searching and found that and there are an estimated 989 million head of cattle in the world and 7.8 billion humans. So who do you think is generating the most methane from farts. A human on the average passes gas 10 to 18 times a day, that's a lot of gas.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/Awuqdc4Rj6MbS/giphy.gif

[JMintzer]

Wow! I was aware there were still people who disagreed that global climate change was a fact and that people were the primary cause, but I am amazed by the passion of some readers.

Your opinion was common in the '70s, but the consensus among scientists studying climate has moved. Perhaps you should take another look at the science.

It is not reasonable to expect any reader of this list to read all the primary science. Instead, we must select our sources and evaluate not the scientific research but the authority of the source. Bush, Gore, Trump, Hannity, Biden, etc., are not the people we should trust in matters where there is a scientific answer. Because the stakes are so high, we need to consider the words and writings of scientists researching this field.

I refer you to Wikipedia for a summary, where a long and meticulously documented article is waiting.

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change)

People violently opposed to the idea of global warming will not read an article that attacks their fundamental beliefs. People skeptical may look at the charts and graphs. However, anyone with faith in science who reads the report can not help but be persuaded by the consensus statement quoted here:

Academic studies of scientific agreement on human-caused global warming among climate experts (2010–2019) reflect that the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science.[302][303]
There is an overwhelming scientific consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases, with 90–100% (depending on the exact question, timing and sampling methodology) of publishing climate scientists agreeing.[304] The consensus has grown to 100% among research scientists on anthropogenic global warming as of 2019.[305] No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.[306] Consensus has further developed that some form of action should be taken to protect people against the impacts of climate change, and national science academies have called on world leaders to cut global emissions.[307]

The Wikipedia article is backed with pages and pages of citations to original scientific papers.

Most of us will die in a world where the earth's temperature is still rising and climate catastrophe is growing. It is for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren that we need to act now.

People "violently" opposed?

Gimme a break...

[The Caretaker]

Maybe California would be a better place for you to retire.

[JMintzer]

I did NOT know that ........thank you........I was believing the cow-exit-gas theory. Now I will put my dunce cap on and sit in a corner and meditate on why it is known that the Atlantic ocean is rising and temperature is rising and 97% of all scientists believe that the rise is man-made!

More lies... 97% of scientists DO NOT agree about climate change...

Fact Checking The Claim Of 97% Consensus On Anthropogenic Climate Change (https://www.forbes.com/sites/uhenergy/2016/12/14/fact-checking-the-97-consensus-on-anthropogenic-climate-change/?sh=5008e8d51157)

[JMintzer]

Does your house run on solar panels?

Or is he one of those "Do as I say, not as I do" kinda guys?

[JMintzer]

Good one! That made me laugh - a good hearty laugh, thanks!

Same can be said for most of your posts! Thanks!

[JMintzer]

Having ALL ELECTRIC GOLF CARTS and electric mowers would make me and our mother (mother earth) VERY happy. I am doing my part and getting BOTH! Now it is your turn to be nice to Mother! And my mower is a 20-inch push Kobalt that is quiet as a"Dream Machine". She pushes easily and never refuses me (to start). I named her ....Ginger Peachy! And she has long sharp nails.....I mean blade. What more can a tool-man desire?

Yes, let's have solar Golf Carts and Lawn mowers! Because, you know, electricity is free and doesn't cause any pollution!

[CoachKandSportsguy]

Oh, also even if I use 0.00 KW in a month, I still need to pay SECO $1 per day. What a scam.

Really? so who pays for your electricity delivery when the sun and wind and battery doesn't have enough?
True that at a certain point, the legacy electrical grid becomes the backup system, but everyone readily admits that backup systems are expensive. So yes, you have pay towards the maintenance of the poles and wires for the delivery of legacy electricity, whehter you use it or not. . . yes, you have to pay to play and have access when you need it. You are not entitled for free delivery because you bought solar panels, unless you opt for a gas generator instead of mass produced and distributed energy.

[Lil GTO]

Thank you! Thank you Thank you Thank you.

We could all start ringing bikes and walking quit using fossil fuels all together ground every airplane tomorrow globally and not have enough affect on the weather to stop or even remotely slow down what makes our planet work.



Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them

[Laker14]

And, surely, you have a phd in the area. Would you like to hear from an MIT scientist on the subject. Go debate him:
2018 Annual GWPF Lecture - Prof Richard Lindzen - Global Warming For The Two Cultures - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2q9BT2LIUA&list=WL&index=1)
Learn something.

Thank you for the link. I enjoyed the lecture. He is very knowledgable, has a lot of bona-fides to back up his opinions, and I learned a few things from listening to him.
I hope he's correct because I don't think the climate-changers can ever win this battle. If the climate-changers are correct in their most pessimistic predictions, then mankind is in for a lot of suffering in the not-too-distant future.
I did a little background checking and there are a few points that may put a dent in his credibility.
He has received money from the fossil fuel industry to present his message.
The group he was lecturing to, the GWPF (Global Warming Policy Foundation) is essentially a lobbying group for the fossil fuel industry. They have repeatedly and steadfastly refused to identify their sources of funding.

In the lecture he bemoans the "politicization" of the climatology science, yet he eventually voices repeatedly, his own political slant.

So once again we are faced with a politicized agenda, purporting to be unbiased science. But is it? I don't think it is. It may be correct, or it may be incorrect in it's conclusions, but it is most definitely not unbiased.
We all have filters. We all too easily dismiss the science that doesn't jibe with our beliefs, and declare it "liberal" or "radical right wing". We choose to believe what we hear on CNN or FOX depending upon our beliefs going in, not swayed by the verbiage. We can dismiss the verbiage easily because it does not align with our hard-wired belief system.

This guy is no different. If you are a climate change denier then he makes great sense. If you are a believer in climate change then you can point to other equally qualified scientists who disagree with his conclusions, and say "see? I was right!"

[DaleDivine]

I wish that you would run for local politics. But, you are too idealistic about TV Land. It is set up to make $$$$ and not for social good! It is one of the most backward places that I have ever lived in! Like dark-ages backward. Sit down in a foldup chair in ANY residential TV Land street with pretty much Golf Car traffic. Wait until a Golf Car goes past you for about 60 feet. Then start taking deep breaths and use your nose. Most are gas Golf Cars and unless brand new will smell like you poured gasoline on your own shirt! They STINK, STINK, STINK, AND MORE STINK. The drivers are moving into fresh air so they do NOT realize what a terrible thing they are doing to TV Landers and even the upper atmosphere. Notice that when a regular car or small truck goes by they don't stink sometimes NOT at all. And what are the health effects on an older population, some with allergies, asthma, or other serious problems?

But GOLF is KING in TV land. So, no one BETTER say a bad word about the polluting machines called golf cars. And put the screws to the environment even though these small gas machines are polluting more than the larger smog control devices protected large vehicles. And then there is the LAWN MOWER polluting MACHINES BURNING gasoline. And the 2-STROKE 120 DB noise blasting leaf blowers - do THEY get a pass. I know that there are a bizzillion OIL lobbyists pushing for more gas usage - but this is BEYOND ridiculous!

So, if they can't fix what is right in front of their nose? - How can I expect them to fix or be in ANY way helpful in combating global warming. Not going to happen in this state - in this lifetime. They might talk some words about getting with a GREEN program. But, the real GREEN is what will be priority numero uno! So good luck and when you tire of changing those minds - please join MY club for the jousting of windmills!

You sure sound like a politician...
:blahblahblah::blahblahblah::blahblahblah:

[DaleDivine]

[QUOTE=Win1894;2014180]The premise that solar is the savior of the planet is irritatingly ignorant. Do the physics. It's not green and it's not renewable. You've been sold a bill of goods. First, where do you think most PV cells come from - China. Second, what are you going to do for power when the sun don't shine or at night? Batteries you say - not possible. The battery capacity would have to be so massive it would shift the Earth's orbit.

UMMMM, where would this extra weight come from if it's not already on/in the earth...
:boom::popcorn::popcorn:

[jswirs]

Here we have "some" scientist declaring that humans are responsible for global warming, and those who disagree refuse to "follow (that) science", and are fee to follow the science they believe is correct.
However, regarding virology, we have "some" scientist that disagree with the vaccine for Covid, but those who agree to "follow (that) science" are are demonized.

Yes, I know there are differences in this analogy, but to some degree the correlation sill exist. It's almost humorous to watch folks agree with whatever science happens to fit well with their own particular agenda.

[Two Bills]

It has been proven that Greta Thunberg is making a real difference to climate change.
Every time she comes on the TV approximately 1 million people switch it off.

[jimjamuser]

Wow! I was aware there were still people who disagreed that global climate change was a fact and that people were the primary cause, but I am amazed by the passion of some readers.

Your opinion was common in the '70s, but the consensus among scientists studying climate has moved. Perhaps you should take another look at the science.

It is not reasonable to expect any reader of this list to read all the primary science. Instead, we must select our sources and evaluate not the scientific research but the authority of the source. Bush, Gore, Trump, Hannity, Biden, etc., are not the people we should trust in matters where there is a scientific answer. Because the stakes are so high, we need to consider the words and writings of scientists researching this field.

I refer you to Wikipedia for a summary, where a long and meticulously documented article is waiting.

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change)

People violently opposed to the idea of global warming will not read an article that attacks their fundamental beliefs. People skeptical may look at the charts and graphs. However, anyone with faith in science who reads the report can not help but be persuaded by the consensus statement quoted here:

Academic studies of scientific agreement on human-caused global warming among climate experts (2010–2019) reflect that the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science.[302][303]
There is an overwhelming scientific consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused mainly by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases, with 90–100% (depending on the exact question, timing and sampling methodology) of publishing climate scientists agreeing.[304] The consensus has grown to 100% among research scientists on anthropogenic global warming as of 2019.[305] No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.[306] Consensus has further developed that some form of action should be taken to protect people against the impacts of climate change, and national science academies have called on world leaders to cut global emissions.[307]

The Wikipedia article is backed with pages and pages of citations to original scientific papers.

Most of us will die in a world where the earth's temperature is still rising and climate catastrophe is growing. It is for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren that we need to act now.
I agree with the contents of this post.

[jimjamuser]

Many folks on this list have said the developer is only interested in money. I could not disagree more.

The lot my house is built on backs to a golf course and pond. I paid about $100,000 for that view. I drive about one-quarter of a mile on Hillsborough beside the same view when I leave my home. The developer is not stupid. They knew they could have moved the street and sold every sixty feet of that view for $100,000. The developer, long ago, made more money than they will ever spend. Some rich man once said, “After a certain amount, money is only a way to keep score.”

I believe one of the primary interests of the developer is their legacy. When the members of the family, like their parents before them, die, I think they want to be remembered, not for their immense wealth, but for the community they created. That is why tie idea of a solar village is a possibility.
More money is the key to MORE POWER. Was Bezos satisfied, was the Kock Bros satisfied, was Jack Welsh, what about S. Adelson? Power, power, and more power!!!!!!!!

[jimjamuser]

Tell me how the ocean can be higher in the Atlantic and the other oceans aren't. Approximately 71% of the world is covered by water. All these oceans are connected to each other, so if one rises so will the rest. If 50 people go into a swimming pool at one end does the water not rise equally at the other end?
That 97% of all scientists is total BS, it is an invented number. There is no way you are going to get 97% of any group to agree on anything.
True about the together rise. I only know that measurements were taken on the Atlantic side..I am sure that someone has done it on the Pacific side. Please.....that was just a throw-away detail.

[jimjamuser]

It has been proven that Greta Thunberg is making a real difference to climate change.
Every time she comes on the TV approximately 1 million people switch it off.
I love Greta. She IS the future and we will be "blowing in the wind".

[irishwonone]

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.
Ha, what an original idea. Maybe President Obama could head up the committee along with the former President of Solyndra. They have a proven record!

[JMintzer]

I love Greta. She IS the future and we will be "blowing in the wind".

Well, there is certainly a lot of "hot air" blowing in this thread...

[ttc1991@aol.com]

Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them
You took the words right out of my mouth!

[Laker14]

Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/)

the above link cites the following organizations as supporting the claim that the climate is warming, and that human activities are a major, if not THE major drivers:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Physical (Physics) Society
The Geological Society of America

So what is it that makes you so sure your science is more accurate and reliable than the science of these organizations ?

[retiredguy123]

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/)

the above link cites the following organizations as supporting the claim that the climate is warming, and that human activities are a major, if not THE major drivers:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Physical (Physics) Society
The Geological Society of America

So what is it that makes you so sure your science is more accurate and reliable than the science of these organizations ?
Common sense

[Laker14]

Common sense

Wow. That is a really weak answer. If that's all you got, you got nothing, especially not common sense.

You may as well have said "because I say so".

[JMintzer]

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/)

the above link cites the following organizations as supporting the claim that the climate is warming, and that human activities are a major, if not THE major drivers:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Physical (Physics) Society
The Geological Society of America

So what is it that makes you so sure your science is more accurate and reliable than the science of these organizations ?

You link references that well debunked "97%", multiple times... Proving it's not a serious piece...

[golfing eagles]

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/)

the above link cites the following organizations as supporting the claim that the climate is warming, and that human activities are a major, if not THE major drivers:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Physical (Physics) Society
The Geological Society of America

So what is it that makes you so sure your science is more accurate and reliable than the science of these organizations ?

Easy. I'm not taking grant money from a federal government that clearly has a political agenda to purport, and I'm citing pure paleoclimatology and experts who are not supported by the government as well. Try reading the rather simplistic summary by ABC news (hardly a conservative media outlet) that I posted a link to a page or two back.

[retiredguy123]

Wow. That is a really weak answer. If that's all you got, you got nothing, especially not common sense.

You may as well have said "because I say so".
I do have common sense. It tells me that, if the planet needs to be saved, it needs to be a global initiative. But, all of the organizations you cited have "America" in their name. Our country only represents about 5 percent of the planet's population. So, where do the rest of the countries stand on the issue?

[golfing eagles]

I do have common sense. It tells me that, if the planet needs to be saved, it needs to be a global initiative. But, all of the organizations you cited have "America" in their name. Our country only represents about 5 percent of the planet's population. So, where do the rest of the countries stand on the issue?

Another softball question... Since all the "climate accords" have the U.S. footing a disproportionately large share of the cost, I think everyone can easily guess where other countries stand.

[Win1894]

[QUOTE=Win1894;2014180]The premise that solar is the savior of the planet is irritatingly ignorant. Do the physics. It's not green and it's not renewable. You've been sold a bill of goods. First, where do you think most PV cells come from - China. Second, what are you going to do for power when the sun don't shine or at night? Batteries you say - not possible. The battery capacity would have to be so massive it would shift the Earth's orbit.

UMMMM, where would this extra weight come from if it's not already on/in the earth...
:boom::popcorn::popcorn:

OK, so let me restate the point for those who have difficulties with hyperbole. To provide any kind of electrical storage capacity to the grid to operate when the sun isn't producing electricity (which is most of the time) would be prohibitively massive and extraordinarily expensive, and therefore unworkable.

[NoMoSno]

If everybody started driving electric vehicles tomorrow our electric grid would collapse.
California can barely keep the lights on when there is a spike in AC use.

[jswirs]

Easy. I'm not taking grant money from a federal government that clearly has a political agenda to purport, and I'm citing pure paleoclimatology and experts who are not supported by the government as well. Try reading the rather simplistic summary by ABC news (hardly a conservative media outlet) that I posted a link to a page or two back.

Hmmmm....Sounds so similar to those who question the validity of the Covid vaccine and Dr. F. Interesting isn't it, how some folks can apply reasoning and logic in one area of science, but that same reasoning and logic cannot be applied to another area of science. It's all about whatever agenda promotes certain beliefs.

[golfing eagles]

Hmmmm....Sounds so similar to those who question the validity of the Covid vaccine and Dr. F. Interesting isn't it, how some folks can apply reasoning and logic in one area of science, but that same reasoning and logic cannot be applied to another area of science. It's all about whatever agenda promotes certain beliefs.

That made no sense whatsoever

[jimjamuser]

Scientific Consensus | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/)

the above link cites the following organizations as supporting the claim that the climate is warming, and that human activities are a major, if not THE major drivers:
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Meteorological Society
American Physical (Physics) Society
The Geological Society of America

So what is it that makes you so sure your science is more accurate and reliable than the science of these organizations ?
Big FAT Amen on that post. That IS a be-all and end-all FINALIZATION about these misguided, strange, science-denying posts that the science-deniers are using to PRETEND that humans do NOT affect Earth's climate. They are figuratively urinating on their own mother - Mother Earth!!!!! What a pathetic human thing to DO! And they are LOUD and PROUD about their misinformation. I believe that their motivation is to RATIONALIZE the raping of the US's GREEN plains and forests and waters for personal greed and profits. And to rationalize that they are NOT terrible people (monsters really) passing a dead US and planet on to their great-grandchildren. And show off your ignorance by "HATING-ON" Greta Thunberg! This issue has been OFFICIALLY answered to perfection and certitude by this post! Further debate by the anti-global warming effects by humans is rendered null and void - moot, and FUTILE!!!!!!

[jimjamuser]

Maybe California would be a better place for you to retire.
I think now that I will pick France. High taxes for the wealthy (that can afford them) and LOW taxes for the real people, the lower and middle class. (yes, they STILL have a middle class, unlike the US of the 1%). France has Universal Health Care, good pre-schools, good maturity and paternity leave, good wine and better restaurants than the US, healthier foods, they play great soccer, and they have hot babes and more nude beaches.
.....See yah, I am packing up as we speak!

[golfing eagles]

Big FAT Amen on that post. That IS a be-all and end-all FINALIZATION about these misguided, strange, science-denying posts that the science-deniers are using to PRETEND that humans do NOT affect Earth's climate. They are figuratively urinating on their own mother - Mother Earth!!!!! What a pathetic human thing to DO! And they are LOUD and PROUD about their misinformation. I believe that their motivation is to RATIONALIZE the raping of the US's GREEN plains and forests and waters for personal greed and profits. And to rationalize that they are NOT terrible people (monsters really) passing a dead US and planet on to their great-grandchildren. And show off your ignorance by "HATING-ON" Greta Thunberg! This issue has been OFFICIALLY answered to perfection and certitude by this post! Further debate by the anti-global warming effects by humans is rendered null and void - moot, and FUTILE!!!!!!

Unfortunately, we have to part ways on this one. THE science is that we are in and ice age with cyclical periods of glaciation and interglacial thaws that have repeated themselves every 60-90,000 years. Period. PERIOD. THAT is the science.

As far as human activity goes, THE SCIENCE is that we have had/are having a MINIMAL effect on these overwhelmingly powerful forces of the sun, and what effect we have had is related to 8,000 years of agriculture in Asia and NOT YOUR SUV, and even at that at best all we have done is delay the next period of glaciation by 3-5,000 years

The POLITICS is that the powers that be WANT to have us believe all this garbage about "climate change" for God knows what reason (other than to spend $100 trillion to "combat" it). To that end, they have financed the "scientists" that will publish papers and give interviews that agree with their agenda through government grants, and shut out those that tell the truth that it is all nonsense and beyond our influence and control.

So, in summary, all "these misguided, strange, science-denying posts that the science-deniers are using to PRETEND that humans do NOT affect Earth's climate. " are coming from those that have bought into this climate change nonsense, not those of us who are familiar with THE SCIENCE of paleoclimatology.

[retiredguy123]

Can someone please post another country's (other than the USA) scientific view of climate change and how many trillions of dollars they plan to spend to save the planet?

[golfing eagles]

I think now that I will pick France. High taxes for the wealthy (that can afford them) and LOW taxes for the real people, the lower and middle class. (yes, they STILL have a middle class, unlike the US of the 1%). France has Universal Health Care, good pre-schools, good maturity and paternity leave, good wine and better restaurants than the US, healthier foods, they play great soccer, and they have hot babes and more nude beaches.
.....See yah, I am packing up as we speak!

Wow, didn't realize that only the low class were "real people".

As far as France goes, I thought you were in love with Portugal. That being said, France is the armpit of Europe. Why are the streets of Paris lined with trees?----because German soldiers like marching in the shade. What is the French National Military Salute?----Hands over head with rifle on ground in front of them. And I forgot the French term for "take our country but leave us alone to make our creamy sauces". This is a country that sent their ambassador to the Cameroons to lobby against the US in favor of Iraq. Ever visit Normandy and see the tens of thousands of crosses marking the grave of US servicemen who gave their lives liberating France. This is a country that should be on its knees thanking us ever day for what we did and NEVER EVER stand against us.

Pardon the rant but an uncle and a cousin died on Omaha Beach

PS: They DO have much better wine and restaurants, but their "national healthcare" is a total joke. Argue that if you want, but when was the last time you heard of a head of state or a billionaire flocking to France for medical care instead of NY or Boston????

[jimjamuser]

More money is the key to MORE POWER. Was Bezos satisfied, was the Kock Bros satisfied, was Jack Welsh, what about S. Adelson? Power, power, and more power!!!!!!!!
POWER evolves into their RELIGION - I don't know why, I would just retire at 35 like most of them could and did NOT.

[golfing eagles]

Can someone please post another country's (other than the USA) scientific view of climate change and how many trillions of dollars they plan to spend to save the planet?

I'm sorry, I think you misspelled "receive" as s-p-e-n-d:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[jimjamuser]

Wow. That is a really weak answer. If that's all you got, you got nothing, especially not common sense.

You may as well have said "because I say so".
I agree with the logic of this post

[NoMoSno]

Can someone please post another country's (other than the USA) scientific view of climate change and how many trillions of dollars they plan to spend to save the planet?
China's contribution is opening more coal-fired power plants:
Climate Change: China Plans 43 New Coal-Fired Power Plants | Time (https://time.com/6090732/china-coal-power-plants-emissions/)

[Laker14]

Easy. I'm not taking grant money from a federal government that clearly has a political agenda to purport, and I'm citing pure paleoclimatology and experts who are not supported by the government as well. Try reading the rather simplistic summary by ABC news (hardly a conservative media outlet) that I posted a link to a page or two back.


I've gone back through the pages and I can't find that link, can you repost it for me?
Thanks.

As far as your belief that any government sponsored research is tainted, by an "agenda", what about research funded by the fossil fuel industry?
Are you believing that the fossil fuel industry has no money leveraged into the Federal Government, and exerts no pressure on the governmentally funded science? That seems far fetched to me.
Can we find some science not funded by either?

[jimjamuser]

I do have common sense. It tells me that, if the planet needs to be saved, it needs to be a global initiative. But, all of the organizations you cited have "America" in their name. Our country only represents about 5 percent of the planet's population. So, where do the rest of the countries stand on the issue?
The US does have only 5% of the world's population, but about 20% of the world's wealth, which makes us listened to by the world and we are their spiritual leaders for the concept of Democracy and the COMMON MAN! _ that has been true except recently as we have become world laughingstocks! Mostly caused by prior greed in our Capital City, but EVEN lately with a STUPID pull-out of Afghanistan and an EVEN stupider pull-out leaving our FRIENDS the Kurds to die!
........And the initial CV response was so weak as to be laughable and maybe even criminal!

[jimjamuser]

[QUOTE=DaleDivine;2014523]

OK, so let me restate the point for those who have difficulties with hyperbole. To provide any kind of electrical storage capacity to the grid to operate when the sun isn't producing electricity (which is most of the time) would be prohibitively massive and extraordinarily expensive, and therefore unworkable.
if we are going to talk about "wasted electrical power" I would start tearing down the massive server farms of BitCoin that waste tons of energy. I would lose them before losing one Toyota Prius. I can't relate to criminals and quasi-criminals hiding their money and transactions.....bad, bad, and very bad!

[biker1]

Don't know if the following is true or not but it is an interesting, if not startling, number.

The most reputable such estimate comes from the University of Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index, according to which the global bitcoin network currently consumes about 80 terawatt-hours of electricity annually, roughly equal to the annual output of 23 coal-fired power plants, or close to what is consumed by the nation of Finland.

[QUOTE=Win1894;2014753]
if we are going to talk about "wasted electrical power" I would start tearing down the massive server farms of BitCoin that waste tons of energy. I would lose them before losing one Toyota Prius. I can't relate to criminals and quasi-criminals hiding their money and transactions.....bad, bad, and very bad!

[jimjamuser]

Sorry! Too bad! I enjoyed the pre-parting of the ways and the seas! Sticks and stones MAY break my bones, but BIG WORDS like paleoclimatologyicalnessly-on-vacation-or-otherwise, can NEVER hurt me. I will respectfully agree to disagree with that one out of respect for your biggy brainy, but not your condescending and humid condensationatinglyness "tude" about all things right and good about those commie, hippy, LIBERALS, who we love to hate on!

[Tbrazie]

Please tell me that is a tongue in cheek joke, please. No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats, although PT Barnum was right when he said that there is one born every minute. I have explained at least a dozen times that we have been in an ice age for 4+ million years with cyclical periods of glaciation and thaws (and therefore periods of warming and cooling). We have been through both the warming and cooling limbs of this cycle at least 2 dozen times in that period and 2 things are true-----
1) we are still here
2) It HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUV'S OR ANY OTHER ACTIVITY OF MAN

Our kids and grandkids?????? Not likely, although our descendants in about 15,000 years will live at the peak of the warming cycle and our coastal cities will be under 100 feet of water. But don't break out the sunscreen and swim trunks just yet, because 30,000 years after that, NY City will again be under 2 miles of ice.

But, if anyone doesn't understand the simple science behind paleoclimatology, then by all means let's spend 100 trillion dollars over the next 40 years to combat "global warming" What a joke!

PS: This is not to denigrate solar power---it is a good thing and there are plenty of reasons to utilize it. However "global warming" is NOT one of them
I am a scientist and I agree with you completely. Solar is fine. CO2 is not the problem The head of the Academy of science actually resigned over this issue. The sun is in charge. The whole carbon BS is about transferring money from one pocket to another by manipulation of the people

[Laker14]

I do have common sense. It tells me that, if the planet needs to be saved, it needs to be a global initiative. But, all of the organizations you cited have "America" in their name. Our country only represents about 5 percent of the planet's population. So, where do the rest of the countries stand on the issue?

the IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is the UN body for assessing the science related to climate change. Since you are skeptical of any organization that has the word "American" in it, perhaps you'll feel more comfortable with the findings of this group.
IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (https://www.ipcc.ch)

They conclude that anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gasses is a substantial contributing factor to global warming.
Is that international enough for you?(actually, if I read it correctly, they establish that there is a 60% chance of it being a contributing factor. Or maybe a 60% chance of the pessimistic forecasts coming true.

I am editing this post, but not erasing the original sentence which I am amending in red.

[Laker14]

[QUOTE=DaleDivine;2014523]

OK, so let me restate the point for those who have difficulties with hyperbole. To provide any kind of electrical storage capacity to the grid to operate when the sun isn't producing electricity (which is most of the time) would be prohibitively massive and extraordinarily expensive, and therefore unworkable.

Is your point that since we don't have a current workable solution to the problem of man-made greenhouse gasses warming up the planet, that it isn't a problem?

This seems to be a common way to derail the discussion from whether or not it is a problem, to "well your solutions aren't workable".
Those are two different issues.

[Laker14]

I am a scientist and I agree with you completely. Solar is fine. CO2 is not the problem The head of the Academy of science actually resigned over this issue. The sun is in charge. The whole carbon BS is about transferring money from one pocket to another by manipulation of the people

What is your science background?
What science do you choose to believe is unbiased, and accurate, that leads you to the conclusion that worrying about carbon emissions is BS?

[Ben Franklin]

Florida's first solar community is just outside of Fort Myers.

Sustainable City | About Us | Babcock Ranch, Florida (https://www.babcockranch.com/about-us/)

[biker1]

I am not sure who you are referring to. Is it this person, who resigned over questions about her resume?

Embattled head of American Academy of Arts and Sciences resigns after questions about resume (https://www.boston.com/uncategorized/noprimarytagmatch/2013/07/25/embattled-head-of-american-academy-of-arts-and-sciences-resigns-after-questions-about-resume/)

I am a scientist and I agree with you completely. Solar is fine. CO2 is not the problem The head of the Academy of science actually resigned over this issue. The sun is in charge. The whole carbon BS is about transferring money from one pocket to another by manipulation of the people

[jimjamuser]

Wow, didn't realize that only the low class were "real people".

As far as France goes, I thought you were in love with Portugal. That being said, France is the armpit of Europe. Why are the streets of Paris lined with trees?----because German soldiers like marching in the shade. What is the French National Military Salute?----Hands over head with rifle on ground in front of them. And I forgot the French term for "take our country but leave us alone to make our creamy sauces". This is a country that sent their ambassador to the Cameroons to lobby against the US in favor of Iraq. Ever visit Normandy and see the tens of thousands of crosses marking the grave of US servicemen who gave their lives liberating France. This is a country that should be on its knees thanking us ever day for what we did and NEVER EVER stand against us.

Pardon the rant but an uncle and a cousin died on Omaha Beach

PS: They DO have much better wine and restaurants, but their "national healthcare" is a total joke. Argue that if you want, but when was the last time you heard of a head of state or a billionaire flocking to France for medical care instead of NY or Boston????
Your Uncle and Cousin were good patriots, sorry! That was good about the tree-lined Paris Streets. Maybe I can get a job pruning them, but maybe in a smaller town near a nude beach, I hear they are popular. If only I were 20 years younger, maybe I could have gotten a date. Now I only get dates at Publix. (Packaged kind) Better Iraq than Iran. And I believe that the French trade extensively with Iraq.
....Real people, yes only the bottom, common people - ALL the others are gingerbread people!
....I'm going to rock down to Electric Avenue and look for Remulack.....a small town in France!

[jimjamuser]

I am a scientist and I agree with you completely. Solar is fine. CO2 is not the problem The head of the Academy of science actually resigned over this issue. The sun is in charge. The whole carbon BS is about transferring money from one pocket to another by manipulation of the people
And then there IS the deforestation of the Brazilian rainforest. Of course, THAT has had just a tinny, tiny, little effect on Global Warming. And when I touch my hand on a somewhat dark car that has been in the Florida sun, I just IMAGINE that I get burned. And I also must be imagining that 30 years ago I did not!
>......Imagine there is NO Global Warming
I wonder if you can
no heat stroke to die for?

[jimjamuser]

the IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is the UN body for assessing the science related to climate change. Since you are skeptical of any organization that has the word "American" in it, perhaps you'll feel more comfortable with the findings of this group.
IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (https://www.ipcc.ch)

They conclude that anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gasses is a substantial contributing factor to global warming.
Is that international enough for you?
Good enough for Government work (and little old - myself!

[jdulej]

Fossils do not lie!!! Cooling and warming cycles are normal and not man made.
Follow the science
I thought every good Christian was taught that all the info you are taught about fossils was the lie. The earth is like 5,000 years old.
Now I'm really confused.

[jimjamuser]

[QUOTE=Win1894;2014753]

Is your point that since we don't have a current workable solution to the problem of man-made greenhouse gasses warming up the planet, that it isn't a problem?

This seems to be a common way to derail the discussion from whether or not it is a problem, to "well your solutions aren't workable".
Those are two different issues.
There are several possible solutions that would be "workable". But, many are NOT really acceptable to a big majority of people including the ones propagandized by big oil and foreign governments that want the US to devolve into "chaos".
.......My personal solution FAV would be to SLOWLY decrease US POPULATION (because being one of 2 big polluters) by advertising and a tax credit method - namely, couples having more than 2 children get taxed heavily. and those couples having 1 or 2 children get BIG, BIG tax credits. No additional charge to the Federal revenue - just pay the credits from the charges to the 3 plus children-families! A win for the planet and a possible win for revenue increases.
......Also, ALL who complain about the National Debt should like the possibility of more revenue to pay off the debt........another win/win. Notice me patting myself on the back! Send me to Congress.....I will REALLY shake things up!

[jimjamuser]

Florida's first solar community is just outside of Fort Myers.

Sustainable City | About Us | Babcock Ranch, Florida (https://www.babcockranch.com/about-us/)
so, now all they have to worry about is "Red Tide". and that's NOT washer Tide in a Red box!

[Laker14]

Good enough for Government work (and little old - myself!

I edited that post, BTW. I think they are holding that there is a 60% chance of global warming being significantly human caused.
Which I think goes to the point that the "science" is iffy either way.

My take on it is that the data may be well agreed upon, but the conclusions are up for argument, and that it's damn hard to find a conclusion that hasn't been, if not bought and paid for, at the very least, heavily influenced by $$, on either side.

I have no problem with anyone deciding for themselves who is right and who is wrong, but I take issue with people who claim to "know the science" better than anyone else, and deny that their take on the issue isn't pre-determined by who they have decided, before hearing the evidence and the thinking, is on the take, one way or the other.

Furthermore, as I stated previously, I don't think it matters who is right and who is wrong. There is too much money being made with the status quo, and too much resistance from those living comfortable fossil fuel supplied lives to change the status quo, for there ever to be meaningful change before a catastrophic outcome is realized.

[golfing eagles]

Your Uncle and Cousin were good patriots, sorry! That was good about the tree-lined Paris Streets. Maybe I can get a job pruning them, but maybe in a smaller town near a nude beach, I hear they are popular. If only I were 20 years younger, maybe I could have gotten a date. Now I only get dates at Publix. (Packaged kind) Better Iraq than Iran. And I believe that the French trade extensively with Iraq.
....Real people, yes only the bottom, common people - ALL the others are gingerbread people!
....I'm going to rock down to Electric Avenue and look for Remulack.....a small town in France!

au revoir:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

The premise that solar is the savior of the planet is irritatingly ignorant. Do the physics. It's not green and it's not renewable. You've been sold a bill of goods. First, where do you think most PV cells come from - China. Second, what are you going to do for power when the sun don't shine or at night? Batteries you say - not possible. The battery capacity would have to be so massive it would shift the Earth's orbit.

So, after the 20 year lifespan of a solar panel, then what? There is no recycling capacity for solar panels, and what about all the heavy metals in the PV cells? When you need a new roof do you really want to pay for your inefficient solar array to be removed and then reinstalled over the new roof, and let's not even get into roof leaks or panels shorting out before their full lifespan. Oh, and did you know that solar panels lose between 1 to 2 percent of their efficiency every year?

So, on a sunny day you have all these panels producing electricity. What are you going to do with the excess capacity since it cannot be stored? then the sun goes down and BOOM now you have to stoke up the coal plant. Not an easy thing to do if you know anything about power generation.

There is only one solution even if you don't believe the dire predictions about global warming/climate change and that is to invest in 4th generation nuclear power run on Thorium (which we have at least a 1000 year supply in the US). It's clean, efficient, incredibly safe, virtually no waste , and non-proliferative. Additionally, its excess power can be used to purify water, and pull carbon dioxide out the the air and reduce it to hydrocarbon fuels - now that's renewable energy!

Erm - you're wrong. There's really no other way to express that.

Not only can you store solar energy, but most houses in the north that have solar energy, also have the means to store it. They're called solar batteries. They're an actual thing and they exist expressly to store energy collected from solar panels.

Those who don't have batteries, have their solar system hooked up to the utility's company grid, which produces energy for all the customers on the grid. This results in the solar customer receiving a credit from the utility company for any UNused energy, and significantly reduced cost for any energy drawn from the pool.


As for the actual topic: there already is a "green" solar community near the Villages, right in Lady Lake. It's called Green Key Village. The homes aren't just solar-panels on the roofs, they're also amazingly energy-efficient, and advertise that most homes have a net-zero energy expense. In other words, their homes produce more energy to the grid than the average home uses in a year.

The benefit to adding solar to existing homes in the Villages is negligible, since it's very expensive unless you rent, and renting means risky resale value to the home (if the new homeowners don't like it, the solar company has to remove the panels from the roof).

On the other hand, a home that is built WITH solar panels and sold as new construction that way will have a much greater value. Since the average life of solar panels is 20 years (new tech has actually increased it to 25 years), it's very likely that someone will buy a home and move in to the Villages, and remain in that home for the entire lifespan of the panels.

Compare to a roof - which has to be replaced every 10-15 years. Do you not put a roof on your house because it'll need to be replaced and whatever shall we do with all that wasted destroyed useless old roof? No of course not. We buy homes with roofs, and replace the roofs every 10-15 years. And the old roofing is discarded into landfills.

That's another downside to solar panels though - if they outlive the roof they're connected to, you have to deal with removal and replacement of the panels. Most roofing companies don't offer that service.

[Win1894]

Erm - you're wrong. There's really no other way to express that.

Not only can you store solar energy, but most houses in the north that have solar energy, also have the means to store it. They're called solar batteries. They're an actual thing and they exist expressly to store energy collected from solar panels.

Those who don't have batteries, have their solar system hooked up to the utility's company grid, which produces energy for all the customers on the grid. This results in the solar customer receiving a credit from the utility company for any UNused energy, and significantly reduced cost for any energy drawn from the pool.


As for the actual topic: there already is a "green" solar community near the Villages, right in Lady Lake. It's called Green Key Village. The homes aren't just solar-panels on the roofs, they're also amazingly energy-efficient, and advertise that most homes have a net-zero energy expense. In other words, their homes produce more energy to the grid than the average home uses in a year.

The benefit to adding solar to existing homes in the Villages is negligible, since it's very expensive unless you rent, and renting means risky resale value to the home (if the new homeowners don't like it, the solar company has to remove the panels from the roof).

On the other hand, a home that is built WITH solar panels and sold as new construction that way will have a much greater value. Since the average life of solar panels is 20 years (new tech has actually increased it to 25 years), it's very likely that someone will buy a home and move in to the Villages, and remain in that home for the entire lifespan of the panels.

Compare to a roof - which has to be replaced every 10-15 years. Do you not put a roof on your house because it'll need to be replaced and whatever shall we do with all that wasted destroyed useless old roof? No of course not. We buy homes with roofs, and replace the roofs every 10-15 years. And the old roofing is discarded into landfills.

That's another downside to solar panels though - if they outlive the roof they're connected to, you have to deal with removal and replacement of the panels. Most roofing companies don't offer that service.

My point was that solar energy is a very diffuse source of energy and only works for part of the day. At all other times you need a backup source of energy - either a utility or battery system. Unfortunately, batteries are not a solution because it would require a massive amount of batteries to provide backup energy. For example, you would need a battery the size of your car to run your AC at night and on a cloudy day. A Tesla battery weighs 1200 pounds and only provides a range of ~250 miles. The same weight of gasoline takes my Audi almost 7000 miles.

Whether you buy into the climate change/global warming arguments is irrelevant. My point was to obviate all this windmill and solar nonsense by building 3+ and 4th generation nuclear power plants. Zero carbon footprint, walk-away safe, cheap energy, uses existing infrastructure, tiny manageable waste stream, non-proliferative, and a virtually unlimited supply of fuel. These power plants can produce so much energy in addition to supporting the power grid they could produce ultra pure water from seawater and can chemically reduce carbon dioxide from the air. It would also relieves us on any dependence on foreign oil sources. Other countries are doing this now (India, Russia, China).

[Bay Kid]

If global warming was such a concern shouldn't the people complaining about it, pushing it down our throats, stop flying in their big jets, riding on their motor yachts and limos? Could it be about the money for them?

[Jeffreycgrey]

I recommend it to everyone. The one big take away I got from this is . . . Although the Global warming Alarmist tend to call those of us, who question or deny the theory, "Political". In reality it is just the opposite. And the sad thing is the alarmist group whole heartedly believe it. Listen to this lecture and decide for yourselves.

[Laker14]

I recommend it to everyone. The one big take away I got from this is . . . Although the Global warming Alarmist tend to call those of us, who question or deny the theory, "Political". In reality it is just the opposite. And the sad thing is the alarmist group whole heartedly believe it. Listen to this lecture and decide for yourselves.

I did listen to it, and did decide for myself that
A: I hope he's right, and
B: after doing a little bit of Google searching discovered that he accepts money from the fossil fuel industry, and the group he was talking to with the fancy name is a fossil fuel lobby group who refuse to disclose their contributors, and hence,
C: while knowledgable, he is not unbiased, and his conclusions should be swallowed with a grain of salt. Or two.

But he might be right. Being biased doesn't make someone wrong.

[Larchap49]

The Top of the World retirement community already stresses solar power and very high insulation levels in their houses. It surprised us to hear that and yet see almost no solar power in houses in The Villages. We see plenty of solar water heating for swimming pools but very few solar panels for electricity. Given that The Villages outsells Top of the World (and everybody else in the retirment community), I wonder if they made the calculation that too few people are willing to pay the initial bump in housing prices to incorporate solar power to warrant widescale inclusion.

In a world of ROI it would be far longer than our life expectancy to make it profitable. I know it might help the environment long term but I'll spend the 35k + on living a better retirement for the time I've got left. You get people should definitely look into it. Also the cost of storage batteries is not in the price so that's another 25k+

[Larchap49]

My point was that solar energy is a very diffuse source of energy and only works for part of the day. At all other times you need a backup source of energy - either a utility or battery system. Unfortunately, batteries are not a solution because it would require a massive amount of batteries to provide backup energy. For example, you would need a battery the size of your car to run your AC at night and on a cloudy day. A Tesla battery weighs 1200 pounds and only provides a range of ~250 miles. The same weight of gasoline takes my Audi almost 7000 miles.

Whether you buy into the climate change/global warming arguments is irrelevant. My point was to obviate all this windmill and solar nonsense by building 3+ and 4th generation nuclear power plants. Zero carbon footprint, walk-away safe, cheap energy, uses existing infrastructure, tiny manageable waste stream, non-proliferative, and a virtually unlimited supply of fuel. These power plants can produce so much energy in addition to supporting the power grid they could produce ultra pure water from seawater and can chemically reduce carbon dioxide from the air. It would also relieves us on any dependence on foreign oil sources. Other countries are doing this now (India, Russia, China).

BINGO been saying this for years with today's technology safe nuclear industry is a reality the fears of the past can be put to bed.

[jimjamuser]

I edited that post, BTW. I think they are holding that there is a 60% chance of global warming being significantly human caused.
Which I think goes to the point that the "science" is iffy either way.

My take on it is that the data may be well agreed upon, but the conclusions are up for argument, and that it's damn hard to find a conclusion that hasn't been, if not bought and paid for, at the very least, heavily influenced by $$, on either side.

I have no problem with anyone deciding for themselves who is right and who is wrong, but I take issue with people who claim to "know the science" better than anyone else, and deny that their take on the issue isn't pre-determined by who they have decided, before hearing the evidence and the thinking, is on the take, one way or the other.

Furthermore, as I stated previously, I don't think it matters who is right and who is wrong. There is too much money being made with the status quo, and too much resistance from those living comfortable fossil fuel supplied lives to change the status quo, for there ever to be meaningful change before a catastrophic outcome is realized.
I agree with most of that. I would add that at some point (maybe 1960) the Federal Government - to save money, gave up a lot of their basic science research and "FARMED" it out to Universities and "think tanks" (which were easy to corrupt with MONEY), LIKE YOU STATED. Also, some scientists seemed to want to make a name for themselves by making outrageous conclusions that would get themselves on TV for MONEY and also speaking tours for MONEY. So, yes we ALL NOW TODAY must shift through the sands of "facts" and separate the grains of truth from the grain of S**T !!!!!!!!!

[jimjamuser]

au revoir:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:
Chow! May you always have the perfect line to the cup!

[jimjamuser]

Erm - you're wrong. There's really no other way to express that.

Not only can you store solar energy, but most houses in the north that have solar energy, also have the means to store it. They're called solar batteries. They're an actual thing and they exist expressly to store energy collected from solar panels.

Those who don't have batteries, have their solar system hooked up to the utility's company grid, which produces energy for all the customers on the grid. This results in the solar customer receiving a credit from the utility company for any UNused energy, and significantly reduced cost for any energy drawn from the pool.


As for the actual topic: there already is a "green" solar community near the Villages, right in Lady Lake. It's called Green Key Village. The homes aren't just solar-panels on the roofs, they're also amazingly energy-efficient, and advertise that most homes have a net-zero energy expense. In other words, their homes produce more energy to the grid than the average home uses in a year.

The benefit to adding solar to existing homes in the Villages is negligible, since it's very expensive unless you rent, and renting means risky resale value to the home (if the new homeowners don't like it, the solar company has to remove the panels from the roof).

On the other hand, a home that is built WITH solar panels and sold as new construction that way will have a much greater value. Since the average life of solar panels is 20 years (new tech has actually increased it to 25 years), it's very likely that someone will buy a home and move in to the Villages, and remain in that home for the entire lifespan of the panels.

Compare to a roof - which has to be replaced every 10-15 years. Do you not put a roof on your house because it'll need to be replaced and whatever shall we do with all that wasted destroyed useless old roof? No of course not. We buy homes with roofs, and replace the roofs every 10-15 years. And the old roofing is discarded into landfills.

That's another downside to solar panels though - if they outlive the roof they're connected to, you have to deal with removal and replacement of the panels. Most roofing companies don't offer that service.
Very informative post. I wonder if states other than Florida, have better policies for their electric companies buying back electrical energy from the homeowner. I somehow got the impression that Florida discouraged solar energy buy-backs? I really don't know?

[jimjamuser]

My point was that solar energy is a very diffuse source of energy and only works for part of the day. At all other times you need a backup source of energy - either a utility or battery system. Unfortunately, batteries are not a solution because it would require a massive amount of batteries to provide backup energy. For example, you would need a battery the size of your car to run your AC at night and on a cloudy day. A Tesla battery weighs 1200 pounds and only provides a range of ~250 miles. The same weight of gasoline takes my Audi almost 7000 miles.

Whether you buy into the climate change/global warming arguments is irrelevant. My point was to obviate all this windmill and solar nonsense by building 3+ and 4th generation nuclear power plants. Zero carbon footprint, walk-away safe, cheap energy, uses existing infrastructure, tiny manageable waste stream, non-proliferative, and a virtually unlimited supply of fuel. These power plants can produce so much energy in addition to supporting the power grid they could produce ultra pure water from seawater and can chemically reduce carbon dioxide from the air. It would also relieves us on any dependence on foreign oil sources. Other countries are doing this now (India, Russia, China).
I agree with everything. But, the comparison about the WEIGHT and range of a Tesla battery to the WEIGHT of the gasoline for an INFERNAL combustion engine - that's BOTH irrelevant and apples and prunes (in that case)! And if one would compare the weight in an electric car by adding battery plus drive train and then comparing that weight to the gas or diesel engine plus the massive drive train - I think that the ELECTRIC vehicle would win., And be quieter, and accelerated faster. But the big advantage is the ZERO pollution at the vehicle and charging station. It is a question of whether a person LOVES their mother.......MAMA EARTH! I certainly do!

[golfing eagles]

Chow! May you always have the perfect line to the cup!

Well, I wasn't planning on eating, so CIAO would be more appropriate. But I'll take the perfect line to the cup and raise you an auf wiedersehen:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Win1894]

I agree with everything. But, the comparison about the WEIGHT and range of a Tesla battery to the WEIGHT of the gasoline for an INFERNAL combustion engine - that's BOTH irrelevant and apples and prunes (in that case)! And if one would compare the weight in an electric car by adding battery plus drive train and then comparing that weight to the gas or diesel engine plus the massive drive train - I think that the ELECTRIC vehicle would win., And be quieter, and accelerated faster. But the big advantage is the ZERO pollution at the vehicle and charging station. It is a question of whether a person LOVES their mother.......MAMA EARTH! I certainly do!

You are entitled to your opinion but I contend my point was anything but irrelevant. To restate, solar energy is a very diffuse energy source and OrangeBlossomBaby stated incorrectly that one could use batteries as one source of back-up power when the sun ain't shining. To prove it, I used a comparison using an energy balance between battery powered vehicle and a hydrocarbon fueled vehicle. Clearly, the hydrocarbon fueled vehicle has almost 30 times the energy density the best battery technology based on weight or volume, take your pick. Unless you have a garage-size battery you still need a power utility to power your home, or just do without electricity.

Additionally, your point about "zero pollution" at the electric vehicle or charging source is laughable. Yeah, the electric vehicle pollution is occurring at the coal or gas fuelled power station that's charging your EV. That's why electric cars are euphemistically referred to as 'coal burners' in the energy business.

If you "love Mother earth" you would be a proponent of 3rd or 4th gen nuclear power - zero carbon footprint. Talk about energy density, a single golfball size chunk of Thorium (one of two naturally occuring radioactive elements) contains enough energy to provide your lifetime use of energy.

[DARFAP]

This. About time someone said it.

[Stu from NYC]

This. About time someone said it.

This? Or do you mean that?

It would help if you quoted the post you are referring too.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Very informative post. I wonder if states other than Florida, have better policies for their electric companies buying back electrical energy from the homeowner. I somehow got the impression that Florida discouraged solar energy buy-backs? I really don't know?

Yes. Many northern communities have buy-back programs with their electric companies. The town I moved here from - North Haven, CT, has solar panels on top of their closed landfill. The panels produce enough energy to completely run the water-treatment plant.

They also replaced every single city-owned street light in the town with LED bulbs.

The town I lived in prior to North Haven - East Haven - is turning unuseable town land into a solar farm to power ITS municipal buildings including the High School and save a fortune in energy costs. The fun part - this will actually generate income for the town, which will rent the old farmland to the solar company. So in addition to saving hundreds of thousands in utility costs for the town, it's also generating around $700,000 in lease and Grand List tax revenue.

That's just the situation of two towns in New Haven County, Connecticut. Most northern states have solar initiatives of some sort or another.

[UpNorth]

Yes. Many northern communities have buy-back programs with their electric companies. The town I moved here from - North Haven, CT, has solar panels on top of their closed landfill. The panels produce enough energy to completely run the water-treatment plant.

They also replaced every single city-owned street light in the town with LED bulbs.

The town I lived in prior to North Haven - East Haven - is turning unuseable town land into a solar farm to power ITS municipal buildings including the High School and save a fortune in energy costs. The fun part - this will actually generate income for the town, which will rent the old farmland to the solar company. So in addition to saving hundreds of thousands in utility costs for the town, it's also generating around $700,000 in lease and Grand List tax revenue.

That's just the situation of two towns in New Haven County, Connecticut. Most northern states have solar initiatives of some sort or another.

Connecticut is great for home solar power installations. You make a watt, they give you a watt. Installed 28 panels back in 2011 and haven't paid for electricity since then. Connecticut electricity rates are crazy, so solar panels make sense. Not so much in Florida, where electricity is much cheaper and they don't deal with you on a watt-per-watt basis.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Connecticut is great for home solar power installations. You make a watt, they give you a watt. Installed 28 panels back in 2011 and haven't paid for electricity since then. Connecticut electricity rates are crazy, so solar panels make sense. Not so much in Florida, where electricity is much cheaper and they don't deal with you on a watt-per-watt basis.

We had oil heat, and no central air. So our electric bill wasn't TOO bad, unless we had to run the room air conditioners for longer than a few hours a day during heat waves. Several of our neighbors had full-house solar electricity (which DOES power the house all day all night, for whoever posted otherwise), but our house didn't have the right pitch roof facing the right direction, and the spot where it would've gotten the most sun exposure was under the branches of a 250-year-old sugar maple tree. So - we didn't get solar and just paid a small fortune every winter for oil delivery.

[Dennys37Packard]

The sky is falling and we must tell the king!!! It is a historical fact that all this crazy weather is cyclical. Over centuries, the weather and warming, then cooling , comes and goes. We learned that in Science class. Do they even teach that anymore or was it dropped like shop classes to make room for woke crap.

[Dennys37Packard]

Yeah, with more solar panels might come global cooling since less sun is being absorbed by the earth. 😜

[VApeople]

No one, perhaps with the exception of Al Gore, should believe any of this "global warming" garbage that is being shoved down our throats

On this day 70 years ago, I was playing in the surf at Fort Myers Beach.

When we visited there a few months ago, the beach looks the same as it did in 1951, and the seawater level is no higher than it was back then.

If the climate does change and there is global warming, it will make much of the land in Northern Canada and Northern Russia more productive for agriculture. I'm not worried.

[biker1]

Sealevels have been rising at a rate of 1.5 - 3 mm per year during that period. This is not a difference you would necessarily perceive with your eyes.

On this day 70 years ago, I was playing in the surf at Fort Myers Beach.

When we visited there a few months ago, the beach looks the same as it did in 1951, and the seawater level is no higher than it was back then.

If the climate does change and there is global warming, it will make much of the land in Northern Canada and Northern Russia more productive for agriculture. I'm not worried.

[golfing eagles]

Sealevels have been rising at a rate of 1.5 - 3 mm per year during that period. This is not a difference you would necessarily perceive with your eyes.

3mm/year x 70 years = 210mm= 8.26 inches. Would probably be noticeable.

I believe your math is correct, long term:

8.26 inches/70 years = 11.8 inches/century= 147.5 feet 15,000 years from now, which is what I've been posting, consistent with all the paleoclimatologic data over the last 4 million years, AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR SUV!!!!!!. Better pack your swim trunks to see a Broadway show:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[biker1]

No, not necessarily. Coastal regions change and you may not have a specific reference point to compare to nor remember from 70 years ago. While the sea levels have been rising for the last 10,000 years because we are in an interglacial period and warming, the increase in the rate of the rise (the second derivative) is a concern. Some of it is anthropogenic - how much is still an area of research.

3mm/year x 70 years = 210mm= 8.26 inches. Would probably be noticeable.

I believe your math is correct, long term:

8.26 inches/70 years = 11.8 inches/century= 147.5 feet 15,000 years from now, which is what I've been posting, consistent with all the paleoclimatologic data over the last 4 million years, AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR SUV!!!!!!. Better pack your swim trunks to see a Broadway show:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[golfing eagles]

No, not necessarily. Coastal regions change and you may not have a specific reference point to compare to nor remember from 70 years ago. While the sea levels have been rising for the last 10,000 years because we are in an interglacial period and warming, the increase in the rate of the rise (the second derivative) is a concern. Some of it is anthropogenic - how much is still an area of research.

All true. Unfortunately, the "research" is generally pro-anthropogenic due to the enormous amount of money the feds are throwing at grants, and the way in which the media is reporting it, all to justify the ridiculous amount of spending that has been proposed to "combat" it. The "best/most respected" non-biased paleoclimatologists feel that the anthropogenic factor is minimal, perhaps delaying the next period of glaciation by 3-5,000 years. As far as the WEATHER changes of the last 100 years goes, 1 good volcano will change all that.

[biker1]

Paleoclimatolgists look at what has occurred. Projections of anthropogenic warming are based on radiative transfer physics - big difference. Whether the earth warms or cools is a function of the difference between net incoming solar and net longwave loss to space. The physics are indisputable as increased in CO2 and other gasses changes the radiative balance - it impacts both solar and long wave, as do the Milankovitch Cycles. What is still an area of research is "how much?". There is still a considerable range in the estimates. Some of the estimates would be problematic if they verified. The "sky is falling" cry come from left leaning politicians and the press. The scientists working this area are simply reporting what the current state of the science is indicating. There are many international teams working on this. I fail to see the point in attempting to disparage scientists you don't know. Isn't this the same thing you accuse others of doing? Full disclosure - I am a retired atmospheric scientist and developed numerical atmospheric models.

All true. Unfortunately, the "research" is generally pro-anthropogenic due to the enormous amount of money the feds are throwing at grants, and the way in which the media is reporting it, all to justify the ridiculous amount of spending that has been proposed to "combat" it. The "best/most respected" non-biased paleoclimatologists feel that the anthropogenic factor is minimal, perhaps delaying the next period of glaciation by 3-5,000 years. As far as the WEATHER changes of the last 100 years goes, 1 good volcano will change all that.

[Laker14]

All true. Unfortunately, the "research" is generally pro-anthropogenic due to the enormous amount of money the feds are throwing at grants, and the way in which the media is reporting it, all to justify the ridiculous amount of spending that has been proposed to "combat" it. The "best/most respected" non-biased paleoclimatologists feel that the anthropogenic factor is minimal, perhaps delaying the next period of glaciation by 3-5,000 years. As far as the WEATHER changes of the last 100 years goes, 1 good volcano will change all that.

can you provide links to validate that claim about how the "best/most respected paleoclimatologists" feel? I'd like to know how you come to that conclusion?

[tophcfa]

Very informative post. I wonder if states other than Florida, have better policies for their electric companies buying back electrical energy from the homeowner. I somehow got the impression that Florida discouraged solar energy buy-backs? I really don't know?

Connecticut is great for home solar power installations. You make a watt, they give you a watt. Installed 28 panels back in 2011 and haven't paid for electricity since then. Connecticut electricity rates are crazy, so solar panels make sense. Not so much in Florida, where electricity is much cheaper and they don't deal with you on a watt-per-watt basis.

Florida encourages affordable energy for ratepayers. One of the primary reasons Connecticut and many other states energy rates are significantly higher is because regulators mandate utilities include solar and other cost inefficient sources be included in their portfolio of energy sources. Forcing utilities to by back unused energy (net metering) from small solar producers increases their costs, which are passed on to ratepayers.

[golfing eagles]

Paleoclimatolgists look at what has occurred. Projections of anthropogenic warming are based on radiative transfer physics - big difference. Whether the earth warms or cools is a function of the difference between net incoming solar and net longwave loss to space. The physics are indisputable as increased in CO2 and other gasses changes the radiative balance - it impacts both solar and long wave, as do the Milankovitch Cycles. What is still an area of research is "how much"? There is still a considerable range in the estimates. Some of the estimates would be problematic if they verified. The "sky is falling" cry come from left leaning politicians and the press. The scientists working this area are simply reporting what the current state of the science is indicating. There are many international teams working on this. I fail to see the point in attempting to disparage scientists you don't know. Isn't this the same thing you accuse others of doing? Full disclosure - I am a retired atmospheric scientist and developed numerical atmospheric models.

In which case I know you are aware that the most important "greenhouse" gas is not CO2, but water vapor. Hence, after the rise of the Himalayan and Rocky plateaus about 60 million years ago which act as heat sinks by catching atmospheric moisture and creating rain, the planet is about 10 degrees cooler'

And yes, while paleoclimatologists study the past, we don't have any psychic climate experts to predict the future, so to a certain extent we look at the past to create future "models". And yes, these models do vary. I am not "disparaging" those scientists as much as I am concerned that the grant and political climate (pardon the pun) may bias them. Let's face it, when you know that if you conclude and then publicize your model that shows anthropogenic climate change is a myth, you are done receiving any federal grant money, there might be some bias.

If I am way off base on this, let me know, since you clearly have more expertise on this subject than I----as you know, I don't care for amateurs meddling in my field of expertise either.

[golfing eagles]

can you provide links to validate that claim about how the "best/most respected paleoclimatologists" feel? I'd like to know how you come to that conclusion?

I already did earlier in this thread---from ABC news, not exactly Breitbart:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[bilcon]

This year we have experienced stronger storms, more frequent floods, droughts, forest fires, rising seas, melting glaciers, etc. Most people will agree that global warming, caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the air, is a primary driver of catastrophic weather events that will seriously impact the quality of life our children and grandchildren will inherit from us. The Villages is uniquely positioned to lead the nation in remediating the harmful effects of ongoing carbon dioxide pollution.

It would be a source of pride for all Villagers if the developer of The Villages, the preeminent builder in central Florida, and an enormously profitable business, would announce one of its forthcoming villages would be a “Solar Village.” Every house and public building in the solar village could be partially solar-powered.

As it has led in planned community development, The Villages can lead the nation in sustainable community development.

With all the recent Catastrophes in the world, "Do you really think it's a good time to take "God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance. Hummmm!

[biker1]

What has gone on it the distant past isn't really the issue. The issue is "do anthropogenic increases of CO2 create a problem?". As I wrote in a previous post, if anthrogogenic increases in CO2 are a problem then the mechanism is that it produces some degree of warming which then positively feedbacks to create additional warming. Yes, water vapor is a more important than CO2 (and clouds are even more important) but CO2 caused warming can increase the amount of water vapor in the air. That is how it is theorized to work. This is what numerical models are showing. The models are not what you think. They solve the Navier-Stokes fluid equations on a rotating sphere while incorporating the physics of radiative transfer, water phase change, and turbulence, also while interacting with an ocean circulation model. The models are dynamical. The scientists working in this area are pretty clear about their results and the uncertainties in the models. The accuracy of the models can certainly be questioned but suggesting that scientists are essentially fudging the results is not reasonable. The real problem, that doesn't appear to get much attention, is that the various models used in the IPCC reports are not independent of each other and therefore all show the same trends. The reason they are not independent of each other is that the various models solve essentially the same equations. The models do have some "knobs to turn" and the developers do "turn those knobs" to understand how sensitive the models are. Do we have a problem? I am not sure anybody really knows. Also, if there is a problem, there isn't much anyone can do about it with the possible exception of starting to build CO2 sequestering machines at a very rapid rate.

In which case I know you are aware that the most important "greenhouse" gas is not CO2, but water vapor. Hence, after the rise of the Himalayan and Rocky plateaus about 60 million years ago which act as heat sinks by catching atmospheric moisture and creating rain, the planet is about 10 degrees cooler'

And yes, while paleoclimatologists study the past, we don't have any psychic climate experts to predict the future, so to a certain extent we look at the past to create future "models". And yes, these models do vary. I am not "disparaging" those scientists as much as I am concerned that the grant and political climate (pardon the pun) may bias them. Let's face it, when you know that if you conclude and then publicize your model that shows anthropogenic climate change is a myth, you are done receiving any federal grant money, there might be some bias.

If I am way off base on this, let me know, since you clearly have more expertise on this subject than I----as you know, I don't care for amateurs meddling in my field of expertise either.

[golfing eagles]

What has gone on it the distant past isn't really the issue. The issue is "do anthropogenic increases of CO2 create a problem?". As I wrote in a previous post, if anthrogogenic increases in CO2 are a problem then the mechanism is that it produces some degree of warming which then positively feedbacks to create additional warming. Yes, water vapor is a more important than CO2 (and clouds are even more important) but CO2 caused warming can increase the amount of water vapor in the air. That is how it is theorized to work. This is what numerical models are showing. The models are not what you think. They solve the Navier-Stokes fluid equations on a rotating sphere while incorporating the physics of radiative transfer, water phase change, and turbulence, also while interacting with an ocean circulation model. The models are dynamical. The scientists working in this area are pretty clear about their results and the uncertainties in the models. The accuracy of the models can certainly be questioned but suggesting that scientists are essentially fudging the results is not reasonable. The real problem, that doesn't appear to get much attention, is that the various models used in the IPCC reports are not independent of each other and therefore all show the same trends. The reason they are not independent of each other is that the various models solve essentially the same equations. Do we have a problem? I am not sure anybody really knows. Also, there isn't much anyone can do about it with the possible exception of starting to build CO2 sequestering machines at a very rapid rate.

I think we pretty much agree on this issue. While I doubt any of these scientists are intentionally "fudging" their results, I still think it is possible for the economic and political bias to filter in to some extent. But even if there is no bias at all, which scientists get published and which ones appear on MSNBC may very well be cherry picked by the "powers that be"

[biker1]

The problem is that statements such as "anthropogenic warming is a scam" is no more valid then saying "COVID-19 is a scam". And there are plenty of people saying both of these and neither is true. I really doubt the worst case scenarios of anthropogenic warming will come to pass, and not because we try to reduce CO2 emissions (which we can't to any meaningful degree anytime soon). If they do, man can and will adapt. Despite what AOC says, the world will not end. Sometimes I feel the media portrayal of both is misguided. I enjoyed the discussion.

I think we pretty much agree on this issue. While I doubt any of these scientists are intentionally "fudging" their results, I still think it is possible for the economic and political bias to filter in to some extent. But even if there is no bias at all, which scientists get published and which ones appear on MSNBC may very well be cherry picked by the "powers that be"

[golfing eagles]

The problem is that statements such as "anthropogenic warming is a scam" is no more valid then saying "COVID-19 is a scam". And there are plenty of people saying both of these and neither is true. I really doubt the worst case scenarios of anthropogenic warming will come to pass, and not because we try to reduce CO2 emissions (which we can't to any meaningful degree anytime soon). If they do, man can and will adapt. Despite what AOC says, the world will not end. Sometimes I feel the media portrayal of both is misguided. I enjoyed the discussion.

Well, at least empirically, one would have to believe that dumping millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere would contribute to global warming. Probably does to some extent, but as you stated, we just don't know.

However, with COVID, it's not hard to see the body count, mourn for missing family and friends, and realize that it is not a "scam". I don't think anthropogenic warming is a "scam" either, it's just that the media and government are shoving it down our throats so aggressively that it begs the question of what their real agenda is

[Laker14]

I already did earlier in this thread---from ABC news, not exactly Breitbart:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Yes, I mentioned a few pages ago that I can't find your post with that link. I just read through the entire thread again, and still can't find the link. I remember seeing it once, but not opening it.
Would you mind posting the link again?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Florida encourages affordable energy for ratepayers. One of the primary reasons Connecticut and many other states energy rates are significantly higher is because regulators mandate utilities include solar and other cost inefficient sources be included in their portfolio of energy sources. Forcing utilities to by back unused energy (net metering) from small solar producers increases their costs, which are passed on to ratepayers.

Not necessarily true. You -can- go "off-grid" and not be hooked up to the utility company at all. There are people who've gone that route. They generate their own electricity, don't pay anything to anyone, don't get anything back from anyone. There are even a few self-sustaining communities that have gone this route scattered around the country.

[golfing eagles]

Yes, I mentioned a few pages ago that I can't find your post with that link. I just read through the entire thread again, and still can't find the link. I remember seeing it once, but not opening it.
Would you mind posting the link again?


I think I found it:

What causes an ice age and what would happen if the Earth endured another one? - ABC News (https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-06-15/what-is-an-ice-age-explainer/7185002)

[Win1894]

Not necessarily true. You -can- go "off-grid" and not be hooked up to the utility company at all. There are people who've gone that route. They generate their own electricity, don't pay anything to anyone, don't get anything back from anyone. There are even a few self-sustaining communities that have gone this route scattered around the country.

OrangeBlossomBaby - This comment of yours could be interpreted as somewhat misleading. Here’s why. Below is a summary of the ‘self-sustaining communities’ you allude to that are not connected to the grid. I couldn’t stop laughing while reading through the community summaries. Does The Villages allow outhouses or homes made out of straw bales and mud??

Drum roll please:
Three Rivers (Oregon) - Population - 80, powered by solar panels, wind turbines, and backup generators, water is periodically hauled in. It contains mostly vacation homes.

Greater World Earthship Community (New Mexico) - the world's largest off-grid, legal subdivision, 634 acres contains passive solar houses made of natural materials like adobe, recycled tires, and cans, each with1.8 kilowatts of solar power, solar-powered water collector and self-contained sewage treatment system. Propane powers the stoves. Note: NM is one of the sunniest locations in the US.

Breitenbbush (Oregon) - 85 residents - set on 154 acres doubles as a worker-owned cooperative that runs the Breitenbush Hot Springs Retreat. Geothermal waters help to heat the complex of 100 buildings. The community has a hydropower plant to supply electricity.

Earthaven (NC)- 75 people on 320 acres. 12 "neighborhoods," each containing two to eight homesites. Everything is powered by solar panels and hydropower. Residents catch water off roofs for use in irrigation.

The list goes on.

[Laker14]

can you provide links to validate that claim about how the "best/most respected paleoclimatologists" feel? I'd like to know how you come to that conclusion?

I already did earlier in this thread---from ABC news, not exactly Breitbart:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Yes, I mentioned a few pages ago that I can't find your post with that link. I just read through the entire thread again, and still can't find the link. I remember seeing it once, but not opening it.
Would you mind posting the link again?



I think I found it:

What causes an ice age and what would happen if the Earth endured another one? - ABC News (https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-06-15/what-is-an-ice-age-explainer/7185002)

Well, I just read that article. The "ABC" in that link, BTW, stands for Australian Broadcast Company, I think. The article seems to have been written by a 13 year old, or maybe FOR 13 year olds. Nowhere in the article does it make any claim whatsoever that climate change is not caused by humans. :1rotfl::1rotfl:

Nowhere in the article does it make any mention of "the best/most respected paleoclimatologists", in fact it quotes 1 (one) paleoclimatoligist from the University of Tasmania, who states "There's no chance of us going into an ice age now because the greenhouse gases we've put into the atmosphere during the industrial era have warmed the earth." (:1rotfl::1rotfl:)
I could be wrong but it seems to me the article you link to refutes, rather than supports your claims that climate change is not caused by, and has not been caused by human activity.
:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[markusmom]

When I was in the 3rd grade our "Weekly Reader" article said we were heading for an Ice Age again and said the earth was getting colder and the line of "the freeze" was moving down into Canada and at the rate it was moving it would reach the United States in about 200 years. Pure science.

Study the theory of the polar flip where the center of the North pole is moving off course which is causing severe weather for the entire world. When the center moves far enough the north pole and south pole will flip and cause ocean and land masses to change. This has happened before. Ever wonder why the land masses on earth look like a broken puzzle? Promoting climate change has been a pretty sweet money maker for a lot of scientists and committees.

[Laker14]

When I was in the 3rd grade our "Weekly Reader" article said we were heading for an Ice Age again and said the earth was getting colder and the line of "the freeze" was moving down into Canada and at the rate it was moving it would reach the United States in about 200 years. Pure science.

Study the theory of the polar flip where the center of the North pole is moving off course which is causing severe weather for the entire world. When the center moves far enough the north pole and south pole will flip and cause ocean and land masses to change. This has happened before. Ever wonder why the land masses on earth look like a broken puzzle? Promoting climate change has been a pretty sweet money maker for a lot of scientists and committees.
What exactly do you mean when you say it will "cause ocean and land masses to change"? In what way will they change?