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?
6849 messages, Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 1:15 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: steve_ (Nov 15, 2008 2:55 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Nov 15, 2008 2:55 pm) That is not what the consensus of the scientific UN report said. If memory serves me, it claimed transportation was 15% of all GHG. All the hand wringing over something they know mortal man has no control over is mind boggling. They want more taxes and try every scheme they can think of to stick it to the working man. We will get EVs and plug-in hybrids as soon as the technology is perfected. Raising gas taxes will not rush the technology. It will only hurt the little guy at the bottom of the food chain.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 15, 2008 3:46 pm) "In the USA, the rise in transport related emissions is officially projected to be as much as 46% within the next 20 years . In the emerging economies of China and India, the growth in transport related pollution has only just begun." Deutsche Welle Passenger cars account for 17% of U.S. emissions. WSJ
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Nov 15, 2008 4:09 pm) |
|
|
More poor scientific evidence, handled by inept scientist.. A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is run by Al Gore's chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record. This was startling. Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China's official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its "worst snowstorm ever". In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years. So what explained the anomaly? GISS's computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running. The error was so glaring that when it was reported on the two blogs - run by the US meteorologist Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, the Canadian computer analyst who won fame for his expert debunking of the notorious "hockey stick" graph - GISS began hastily revising its figures. This only made the confusion worse because, to compensate for the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a new "hotspot" in the Arctic - in a month when satellite images were showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same time last year. A GISS spokesman lamely explained that the reason for the error in the Russian figures was that they were obtained from another body, and that GISS did not have resources to exercise proper quality control over the data it was supplied with. This is an astonishing admission: the figures published by Dr Hansen's institute are not only one of the four data sets that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) relies on to promote its case for global warming, but they are the most widely quoted, since they consistently show higher temperatures than the others. If there is one scientist more responsible than any other for the alarm over global warming it is Dr Hansen, who set the whole scare in train back in 1988 with his testimony to a US Senate committee chaired by Al Gore. Again and again, Dr Hansen has been to the fore in making extreme claims over the dangers of climate change. (He was recently in the news here for supporting the Greenpeace activists acquitted of criminally damaging a coal-fired power station in Kent, on the grounds that the harm done to the planet by a new power station would far outweigh any damage they had done themselves.) Yet last week's latest episode is far from the first time Dr Hansen's methodology has been called in question. In 2007 he was forced by Mr Watts and Mr McIntyre to revise his published figures for US surface temperatures, to show that the hottest decade of the 20th century was not the 1990s, as he had claimed, but the 1930s. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml- When are we going to strip Al of his awards, tar and feather him along with his accomplice Hansen? Their misrepresentation of climate data will cost tax payers billions of dollars.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 15, 2008 8:05 pm) Resources are probably a problem for Hansen because he works for the current administration.  The incorrect figures came from NOAA, but the GISS should have cross-checked them. GISS has updated the graphs; maybe you can figure out what they say and let me know. 
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Nov 15, 2008 8:28 pm) 2008-11-12: It seems that one of the sources sent September data rather than October data. Corrected GHCN files were created by NOAA. Due to network maintenance, we were only able to download our basic file late today. We redid the analysis - thanks to the many people who noticed and informed us of that problem. Why do we pay these guys to give US accurate results, when they are continually being caught giving false information? I don't believe these are honest mistakes. I believe it is a case of shuffling data to create a favorable end result for the GW theorists. I just would like to see honest data and debate with NO politicians drawing conclusions. |
|
|
|
but I can't wait to read larsb's response(s) to your posts above.
|
|
|
Replying to: iluvmysephia1 (Nov 16, 2008 6:13 am) I am getting a bit excited about your i-MIEV coming to America. I think the Feds will screw it up like they did the Smart. I don't know about your situation wanting a vehicle for crossing the desert to shop in Tucson. That may be a real push for any EV. To me it is strictly a commuter for less than 60 miles round trip. You have to expect in any Urban location to be sitting with the AC keeping you cool. That is the big unknown with the EVs. Will Congress back down on the Tax Credit if they see them all going to foreign built cars? From the earmark thrown into the Bailout it was obvious they only thought of the Volt to help GM out of the mess they have gotten themselves into. A $40k Volt for running errands would not tempt me in the least. |
|
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
