Here we go folks - E-15 fuel

[Bill Van Steenwyk]

Independent thinking and the ability to make informed judgement's, without believing the sky is falling all the time and perpetrating a fraud on the American public to gain an end, based on incomplete information and in some cases outright fraud and lies.

The older I get the less use I have for those that know it all and try to tell others how to live and what to do, based on "junk science", massive self interest (money and grants) and a false belief that government and do-gooders can solve all the world problems. Profit motive has solved more world problems and fed more people than the other side with all the publicity they get, EVER will.

All you have to do is look at the folks on both sides of this issue, and as Looper One says, "Follow the Money".

Anyone who tells me that they can forecast on a short term basis from records only kept for the last couple hundred years, what is going to happen to the earths weather long term, and whose fault it is, needs to read some more books, primarily on independent thinking and deductive reasoning. In addition, it is a matter of record that some of the information used to reach these decisions, is false, and was known to be at the time it was put out to justify current and future appropriations for their use. In that type situation, I have no use either for them or their conclusions.

As to Rush Limbaugh, he is an entertainer, nothing more or less, and has no more or less a grasp of good ideas than those on the other side. They both lie and falsify information to suit their own purposes and agendas.

End of story.

[bandit]

people wake up and figure out regulating CO2 emissions means no soda and no beer.
That's the best explanation i've heard to date.
As Bill said the planet is warming at the rate so small my grand kids will have thier extra taxes paid before thet have to worry.
The taxes i meant were health care and cap&trade.

[ricochet112]

llllllllllllllllllllllllll

[Master Oil Racing Team]

Sorry, but your info is not correct. There is no CO2 in gasoline, and gasoline weighs around 6.25 pounds per gallon around 65 degrees F. You are referring of course to calculations of how much CO2 is produced in the burning of one gallon of gasoline. I am not sure I buy that though. According to that chart the average car produces 7700 kg per year in CO2. I drive more than average and get less fuel milage than average so the calculator says I put out 32 tons of CO2 per year. When we were busy, my average would be around 40 tons or more according to the calculator. To me that does just not compute. My average number of pounds of just the liquid gasoline I use per year is only a little over ten thousand pounds, 3333 gallons, or one third of a transport load of fuel. I do not see any way that translates to 64,000 pounds of CO2.

Consider that there are around 143 million vehicles operating in the United States.....only the U.S.. Just using the averages alone that amounts to over 24 billion pounds of CO2 PER YEAR, AND JUST THE U.S.! I have found that working with federal and state agencies, and in particular a 5 year term on the Nueces River Authority, I have heard countless statistics put out in confidence and when it gets to the nitty gritty and you ask why the results don't come out according to the predictions you will find every single time that the models don't work and they don't know why. I can tell you why. There are just way too many variables that come into play and the variables themselves are not static. They are constantly changing as well. That's why when you see a hurricane coming, there are over a half dozen projected paths. There are a lot more models, all with different paths, but they just show the most used.

You can burn and measure components of gasoline and atmosphere all day every day in a lab, but in the real world it is different. And data can be interpreted in many different ways according to how one wants the results to come out.

[Mark75H]

Clouds are not water vapor ... they are very fine droplets of liquid water ... not part of the "greenhouse" effect of water vapor


As far as following the money ... locally the owner of 2 reactors said this week that they would not build a third because they need the profits from trading cap and trade garbage in order to make enough money for their share holders ... they have nothing to do with oil production or use, but they WANT IT (cap and trade) BAD. Now they want out of the reactor so bad they are selling the project to their French partner for $1

It makes no sense for nuclear power producers to want cap and trade ... the system is that corrupt, that they do, because they will make money off of it.

[Bill Van Steenwyk]

If I were going to try to convince someone of something that there is so much doubt, confusion, misinformation, etc., about, I would try to do better than the sources you have most recently quoted and referred us to.

Wikipedia is widely known as a source that anyone can put about anything up they want, whether true or not. For that reason I have a hard time giving that source much credibility.
That is the source of two of your references.

The third source identifies themselves as "green". I have a hard time with credibility from that type source also.

The last source is NASA, who are in a hard way now and in the recent past insofar as funding for the various projects they want to go into the future with. Since their funds come directly from the same folks that are controlling the funding for various other studies that all come to the conclusion that we are doomed if we don't change our ways, please forgive me if I look upon all these sources/study's with a somewhat suspicious eye.

When you are able to source UNBIASED studies, by organizations who have taken no money from either side, and have no axe to grind in either direction, then perhaps those studies will have some credibility with me and others who feel the same way as I. By the way, don't waste any more time on my account.

Before you blame others for not being as concerned as you think we should be, or overlooking what seems to you to be obvious, look first at the ways in which this information has been put before the public. If there is plenty of confusion, and in some cases outright disbelief about all the stuff the "doomsayers" have been preaching the last couple of years, you and they have no one to blame by yourselves by the sleezy methods used to try to convince the citizens of this country of something that, at best, is highly unlikely to be caused in any great degree by HUMAN actions.

If this really is a crisis of the magnitude you and others are trying to warn us about (which I doubt) then a great portion of the fault that we did not believe you will be yours and your kind, by the way you have gone about it. Since most of you always think you are right all the time, no matter the facts and opinions in opposition, (look up the WIKI definition of arrogance) that probably will just go right by you as you blame everyone else for whatever does happen. If everyone but the folks that think the way you do are the "bad guys" anyway, and stupid besides, why should we care?

[bandit]

As Bill said to much misinformation!!

republican talking points nothing more...if you follow the money on the deniers side...it points to big oil...hmmm

one 1 liter of pop has about 5 grams of co2, about 18.5 grams per gallon

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_C...bottle_of_Coke

one gallon of gas has about 18 lbs of co2

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_CO2_do_cars_release

the amount of gallons of gas used in a day vs the gallons of pop drank in day is the only stat i couldn't find, i would bet gasoline use is about a 40 to 1 ratio vs pop and beer combined

an interesting calculator

http://www.afteroilev.com/emissions.php


A new paper released.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_05/

It has been understood since the 19th century that some gases absorb infrared radiation (IR) that is emitted by the planet, slowing the rate at which the planet can cool and warming the surface. These so-called greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide and water vapor, as well as ozone and methane among others. Note, however, that the bulk of the atmosphere is made up of nitrogen and oxygen molecules which don't absorb IR at all. Less well appreciated is that clouds (made of ice particles and/or liquid water droplets) also absorb infrared radiation and contribute to the greenhouse effect, too. Clouds, of course, also interfere with incoming sunlight, reflecting it back out to space, making their net effect one of cooling, but their contribution to the greenhouse effect is important.

[Master Oil Racing Team]

Woah Bill Van. You ran on him pretty hard. I have found that most people that watch network TV don't get all the facts right. I went to the links to see what he referred to, and I do have a problem with the sources. And you are right Bill Van, with the fact that anyone can post misinformation on a website that purportes to be the truth. If you cannot get your facts straight when you try to make a point....how can anyone follow where you are headed?

[Bill Van Steenwyk]

Wayne:

Three reasons for my direct and "hard" criticism of his posts regards this subject:

1. I have seen numerous posts by this same person regards the "sky is falling" about this and other subjects dear to the liberal heart on this site and another. Tell the lie often enough, and it becomes truth. You, I am sure, based on your background, are aware of that, and all the politics that can be involved in environmental issues. YOU more than most. I just have had a bellyfull of this subject by folks quoting sources that are very suspect, based on suspect motive, wanting to be in the forefront of the latest "green" issue, and other reasons, and I think it is time that all intelligent folks take a deep breath and really think this scam through.

2. He has no trouble in the past calling others out who disagree with him about this or other subjects and environmental issues.. Its past time to be on the other end. We are not a bunch of sheep out here.

3. What he and others are selling in a very "hard" and direct way is going to cost us all dearly, and the "sale" is based on a lot of very suspicious and possibly purposeful/fraudulent information presented as "fact". If you are part of the group that for whatever reason, ignorance, having been mislead, need the latest "green" issue to feel important, or just like to yell fire in a crowded theater, or even if you are genuinely concerned about this issue, at least try not to insult others intelligence with your arguments based on the type information and references you give to try to prove your point.

If you or others think I am over reacting, perhaps it is time more do. If something is not done this is going to cost us all a lot of money and freedom of activity. I wish we had an "NRA" for this issue. I think it is that important. Maybe if more criticism was directed to those who promote this issue as "truth" with no chance of error or mistake, we would all be more knowledgeable about the subject. The way it has been presented to to this point, with untruths and deception by those supposedly "expert" on the matter, is a disgrace.

[Master Oil Racing Team]

I rarely go to other sites Bill Van so I was not aware of other posts, but I can see where you are coming from. I was an "environmentalist" in college back in 1969. I subscribed to one of the very first magazines dealing with the subject called "Environmental". It dealt with issues of pollution. Water, air, land, etc. But it was a straightforward magazine and even had an article about how one company, following directives issued by the government, got screwed big time by a separate agency for doing what another arm of the government told them to do. The environmental movement got highjacked by the communists because it is a easy way to force rules upon us. The vast majority of the public has no clue to the science involved and so it is easy to fool them and scare them into heading down a path that will cost dearly not only in money, but freedom.

Take for instance the CAFE reforms congress forced on auto manufacturers. That was one of the primary reasons for the problems in the industry. That and the unions. Now they are going to try to force tin can toy electric cars on us. When it goes too far, those of us in the oilfield will not be able to go to the field to work. We have to have vehicles with guts and stamina to get to and from location. A toy pickup won't do it.

I have seen a lot of abuses in and from the environmental movement, and it is chock full of lies. The Cap and Trade is a farce that could be the final blow to the sovereignty of America. Finally, some of the lies are being exposed. I just hope it's not too late. If more scientists had the guts to stand up it would help, but too many live off of government grants. I would hope more would have enough integrity to expose the liars, but you know how that goes. As Paul says..."Follow the money".