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?
6769 messages, Last post on Nov 21, 2009 at 7:56 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
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. |
|
|
|
a viable alternative to the Chevy Volt. This car is called the Pininfarina-Bollore B0. Have you heard of it yet? I am truly interested in this car, as well as Mitsubishi's i-MIEV for my next rig.  Pininfarina B0 is a 4-person 4-door compact electric car, with a maximum speed (electronically limited) of 130 km / h. Batteries last for up to 250 km and located at the bottom of the platform between the two axles, lowering the center of gravity machine. Roof and hood have solar cells that will supply energy to electrical equipment. Next week, car will be presented to the French president Nicolas Sarkozy, who is a personal friend of Bolore. Sales of new models will begin in mid-2009. Planned output is 10 thousand units per year. This is an Italian bird. Exporting to the U.S. does not seem to be firmly in their radar yet, though they have mentioned it. If Pininfarina-Bollore would export this car to the U.S. and price it for around $19,995, and we could use our $7,500 Obama rebates on it I'd cling to it like a warm, raspberry donut and a tall mug of Taster's Choice with Hazelnut creamer and 4 scoops of sugar. What'd'ya think, San Diego dude? Hey, I just found some more juicy news on this little pup. Pininfarina and Bollore have partnered up to build an electric car that will go into production and be available in the U.S. in late 2010. The vehicle is called the B0 and it made its debut at the Paris Motor Show this week. The car is an automatic hatchback four-seater with four doors. Its powered by an electric motor and a lithium polymer battery that’s made by Bollore. This car can travel 153 miles on a full charge and it has a top speed of 80-mph. The car can go from 0-37-mph in 6.3 seconds. But a really cool feature the vehicle has are the solar panels on its roof and hood that help recharge and keep the car’s power. Pininfarina states that the battery has a lifespan of 125,000 miles and doesn't need any maintenance. Pricing info hasn’t been released yet but as soon as we know we’ll pass the info on to you. http://www.dubdaily.com/?p=4914 Very, very cool news. So, there you have it. This little pup is being built to compete with Mitsubishi's i-MIEV directly. Right down to the same availability time in the U.S., late 2010. Actually, I am not certain that Mitsubishi is saying "late" 2010, just that they are saying "2010" for the i-MIEV. These are the two finalists vying for my potential purchase in 2010. I would probably get a decent trade-in value on my '08 Lancer GTS, or, just keep the '08 Lancer GTS for trips to Tucson, Phoenix, and on. If these cars are the right price I will lobby to my wife as one proposal to keep the '08 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS and buy an i-MIEV or B0. But if they get over $20,000 it will need to be a direct trade-in for an i-MIEV or B0. Exciting news-Pininfarina is going to export the little B0 to the U.S.! Whoo-hoo! 
|
|
|
|
|
I could probably make the trip from Willcox to Tucson(80 miles one way)and still make it back, even though it exceeds this car's total range capacity. Know why? You guessed it! It's so sunny around here, even in the winter, that my Pininfarina-Bollore B0's motor system would re-charge as I drive, or, even as my B0 sits outside a Tucson movie theater, concert hall or shopping center. I will attempt to learn more as time goes on, but I'll bet you dollars to glazed Winchell's donuts that that will be the case. I'll find out more about the solar panels and how strongly they will re-charge the system. It's nice to find out so early what my next car will probably no doubt be. I mean, two years till it gets here, one can never be too certain what new car he should buy next, now can he?
|
|
|
Replying to: iluvmysephia1 (Nov 16, 2008 6:47 am) That to me is much more exciting than the Volt for twice the price. My take is GM has lost site of the future and wants US to support their failed venture. With a $20k price for a little 4 passenger runabout and a $7500 tax credit the Feds should be all over these EVs like stink on doo doo. Offer some of that bailout money to establish the automakers of the 21st century, instead of throwing money at the losers from the last century. This of course is predicated on the assumption that Congress and the Federal agencies are truly interested in weaning US off of fossil fuel. I am very skeptical. Even CA with all its rhetoric has done NOTHING to encourage a practical EVs. All pie in the sky Tesla crap. The people do not need a $100k EV sports car with 6000 AA time bombs on board. The BO and the i-MIEV will be what we need.
|
|
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
