Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
6727 messages, Last post on Nov 05, 2009 at 2:29 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 16, 2008 7:44 am) |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 16, 2008 7:44 am) Find some big time financiers in LV and get started on that project Gary. It can be your last hobby. 
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 16, 2008 7:44 am) That is correct; and not the taxpayers of LV or the state. If the reason for the HST is to take tourists to spend money in the LV economy, then the LV casinos and other businesses should fund this. They throw several billion a year into new construction of casinos; let them build their railline if they wish. Why haven't they done it yet though? Maybe because it doesn't make economic sense to do so. It costs too much to acquire the land right-of-way, build the tracks, buy the train, and operate the train then it is worth to bring a thousand tourists into the city. A few planeloads from LA works instead. 90% of the tourists come from other areas than LA. If it made financial sense I'm sure it would get built.
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Jul 16, 2008 8:38 am) NYC-Atlantic City casino train startup delayed A SoCal casino train (light rail) proposal back in '02 was voted down. Aqua Caliente Tribe defends support of failed Proposition 51 I suspect a HST from NYC to Miami would be popular. Amtrak runs three trains a day back and forth as it is. The DC - Orlando Auto Train would probably be a lot more popular if it didn't take a 16 hours or so.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Jul 16, 2008 8:38 am) If cities are responsible for build nice new stadiums at taxpayer expense for bigmoney owners of sports teams to use..., why shouldn't taxpayers in LA/LV built their HST?
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jul 16, 2008 9:01 am) If you and others not willing to put up your own money on a business-venture, it mustn't be too good an idea. It's more palatable to take others' money and spend it on a questionable venture right? And why would our politicians do that? Oh I guess it creates more jobs for their friends, and makes the wealthy business owners wealthier (who then support the politicians' campaigns).
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Jul 16, 2008 11:03 am)  Yes, if it's a workable venture private money would build it! BTW I don't think stadiums should be built by all the taxpayers for individual owners to overpay athletes for couch potatoes to worship, when the athletes are not in jail (can you say Bengals?). In Ohio there's a sales tax for the county, State of Ohio money, and I forget what other that went to build the Reds and the Bengals' stadiums.  AND the same goes for trying to get the economy in a mess over carbon credit frauds and climate change and global warming without a bit of scientific proof it's anything other than the standard variations in the earth's massive systems. I was watching a program on History Channel about the magma from deep within the earth coming nearer the surface around Iceland. Do you think that could warm the areas where the Artic ice is? Or cause glaciers to warm and melt/move faster! Cute terms like "greenhouse gases" and all make it sound even more like a massive distraction from the real business at hand.
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jul 16, 2008 11:37 am) I posted a report about scientists seeing for the first time volcanic eruptions under the Arctic Ice. I also posted the scientific study on the ocean temperatures that ARE NOT rising as all those scientists had claimed. Almost every day more scientific data comes to the surface challenging the so called consensus pushed by the media, the UN and those lined up to sell Carbon Credits. I can accept that the earth may be getting warmer. I cannot accept the politicized man is the culprit view of Climate Change. Volcanoes Erupt Beneath Arctic Ice By Jeanna Bryner, Senior Writer posted: 27 June 2008 05:10 pm ET New evidence deep beneath the Arctic ice suggests a series of underwater volcanoes have erupted in violent explosions in the past decade. Hidden 2.5 miles (4,000 meters) beneath the Arctic surface, the volcanoes are up to a mile (2,000 meters) in diameter and a few hundred yards tall. They formed along the Gakkel Ridge, a lengthy crack in the ocean crust where two rocky plates are spreading apart, pulling new melted rock to the surface. Until now, scientists thought undersea volcanoes only dribbled lava from cracks in the seafloor. The extreme pressure from the overlying water makes it difficult for gas and magma to blast outward. But the Gakkel Ridge, which is relatively unexplored and considered unique for its slow spreading rate, is just the place for surprises. Robert Reeves-Sohn of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) in Massachusetts and his colleagues discovered jagged, glassy fragments of rock scattered around the volcanoes, suggesting explosive eruptions occurred between 1999 and 2001. They hypothesize that the slow spreading could allow excess gas to build up in pockets of magma beneath the oceanic crust. When the gas pressure gets high enough, it pops like a champagne bottle being uncorked. With news this week that polar ice is melting dramatically, underwater Arctic pyrotechnics might seem like a logical smoking gun. Scientists don't see any significant connection, however. "We don't believe the volcanoes had much effect on the overlying ice," Reeves-Sohn told LiveScience, "but they seem to have had a major impact on the overlying water column." The eruptions discharge large amounts of carbon dioxide, helium, trace metals and heat into the water over long distances, he said. http://www.livescience.com/environment/080627-sea-volcanoes.html Is it possible this has something to do with the ice melting?
|
|
|
|
|
What if Climate Change is real but a totally natural process which we can not effect no matter what we do. Also consider that we bankrupt ourselves trying to change a natural process over which we have no control. Now consider what shape we will be in dealing with this natural climate change without any resources because we wasted them all trying to change something that was unchangeable. I fear that humankind is in for a shock. 
|
|
|
Replying to: oldfarmer50 (Jul 16, 2008 12:14 pm) Carbon credits would be the equivalent/ are the proposed "secular" version of practices long past, but effectively have had the same effect: ZERO......................... Global warming? NO CARS during this period? There are psychological archetypal deep seated needs these fulfull, however......So if ya make moo lah from the concept.....................
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
