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?
6855 messages, Last post on Nov 29, 2009 at 5:52 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 25, 2008 11:32 am) Let me be clear: I concur that all living things including humans affect the environment continually and that this has always been true. I also agree humans' present effect on the environment is greater than probably at any time in the past. This tells us nothing about whether human actions are of consequence in the context of all factors. What I find hilarious is not the question of whether or not humans have any impact on global warming; we may. However I think the default position must be that we don't until such proof is offered that we do. What I find hilarious is the doomsday predictions of some blindly believed by many that drastic climate change is only a few decades away. The same sort of predictions were made in the 1970s. These were largely based on the consistent rise in temperature in any number of major cities around the world. No one bothered to consider that these increases were due to the population explosion in those cities and were merely local events, not global. Additionally, temperatures have been recorded for a tiny portion of time relative to the earth's history. My previous post was simplistic; the point was humankind's impact on global temperatures is as yet unknown. Future predictions of catastrophe due to humans is a bit premature. Okay? I have no problem with money being spent on anything - just not taxpayers' money. Many well meaning organizations never solve problems because that would mean an end to their funding stream...
|
|
|
Replying to: sidious6688 (Oct 27, 2008 6:26 pm) That may be the Most astute saying yet on GW/CC research. Once you have solved the riddle you are out of a job. |
|
|
Replying to: sidious6688 (Oct 27, 2008 6:26 pm)  along with all power to the people! (wonder how they granted folks like me the degree. ) Then, they got me back by shipping me to upstate New York (during the winter, GEEZ) Over population would bring the DEEP freeze, yada yada, etc.. Must be global warming now that we got rid of lead in leaded regular and now use RUG? 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: sidious6688 (Oct 27, 2008 6:26 pm) I would agree that predicting catastrophe is a bit premature, however, we have enough evidence to suggest there will be some changes in the future. It does make sense to keep funding research into climate. If we can make our climate predictions more accurate we can do a better job of planning. " I have no problem with money being spent on anything - just not taxpayers' money. " Gotta disagree with you on this one. Government is one of the few organizations that can adequately fund research. Exxon is not going to do it. Having said that I don't disagree with the idea of limiting the money spent. In other words, no blank checks. In fact I would guess we will be lucky to keep funding where it is now. The country faces some rather hefty bills in the future for infrastructure replacement (roads, bridges, water and wastewater systems.....). |
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 28, 2008 3:54 am) I could support that (continuing research). However what we have today is beyond unbiased research. We have a group who put in some study, collect some short-term data - over a stretch they like, and want the glory and power of proclaiming "we have found a major issue, and we all must act!". IMO - 1) they are crying wolf because a bush is rustling, and 2) they have a psychological need to be recognized as important; or 3) they see $ in it for them or their institution. So research is fine; but there are far too many examples throughout history where even the greatest of scientists proclaimed understanding; only to find the Earth wasn't flat. So no I am not about to get the whole village up everytime someone sees a bush rustle. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Oct 27, 2008 4:31 am) Minor correction, absolute zero is −459.67 degrees on the Fahrenheit scale. The earth generates heat internally that will keep it above absolute zero. And the universal background radiation has been measured at about 2.7 degrees K. " This BY FAR dwarfs any contribution mankind will make to climate change. That is why even small changes in solar activity matter greatly. " Yes minor changes in the suns output matter a great deal. That is why we have been lucky that changes have also been minor. We humans live in a rather narrow range of temperature and weather. It is possibly that human activities are having a bigger impact then you think. Is it 10, 50 or 90%. I do not know and I suspect we don't have enough information to make the call yet. If we are responsible for 10% of the GW we would not want to put money into reducing CO2 emissions. The change will happen at about the same time even if we cut emissions by 50%. The overall GW change would still proceed at 95%. We would be better off preparing for the inevitable change. At 50% man induced GW we still would likley not want to put that much money into reducing GW. Cutting our contribution by 50% would still see the change proceeding at 75% (50% natural & 25% man). Inexpensive or no cost options might be considered, but again, we would want to brace ourselves for the change. At 90% man induced GW we would want to see what cost effective solutions are out there. Still, this would need to be a world wide effort. If China, India and the Middle East countries keep expanding it won't matter all that much what the U.S. or Europe does.
|
|
|
|
|
Today here in upstate NY we are expecting a foot of snow. What's up with that? Where is all that wonderful GW I've been hearing about? Would all you SUV owners please drive up here and rev your engines until spring returns? Come quick, I'm getting chilly. 
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 28, 2008 3:54 am) I have to disagree there. The 25 years I spent in the Prudhoe Bay Oilfield there were 100s of scientists studying everything from tundra grass to ice crystals in the upper atmosphere. Many if not most of the studies were paid for by BP and the other oil companies. They came from Universities all over the World to further their knowledge of the Arctic and the impact of oil exploration and production.
|
|
|
Replying to: oldfarmer50 (Oct 28, 2008 5:27 am) I guess it got misdirected. We got it here in So CA. It was 93 yesterday and a record for this day in history. So I guess I don't get to drive my SUV.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Oct 28, 2008 5:53 am) It would be curious to see how many weather records have been broken this decade vs the previous one. I'm sure a computer model could compensate for the difference in the length of time. Then we could find another computer modeler to compare weather to climate. |
|
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
