Rachel Maddow is the best person

[Phatscotty]

Turns out, the best way to save to planet is to not reproduce and kill yourself early.

That will take care of the "human problem"

Only true for the people who don't spend their lives trying to actually solve our environmental problems.

Oh, I try every single day!!!! EVERYDAY!!!!

[Nobunaga]

Turns out, the best way to save to planet is to not reproduce and kill yourself early.

That will take care of the "human problem"

Only true for the people who don't spend their lives trying to actually solve our environmental problems.

Play me a violin.

If you have problems with abuse of the environment, go to China and raise some hell. You'll most likely never come back... but hopefully you will have done some good before you get tossed in a hole.

[Metsfanmax]

Turns out, the best way to save to planet is to not reproduce and kill yourself early.

That will take care of the "human problem"

Only true for the people who don't spend their lives trying to actually solve our environmental problems.

Play me a violin.

If you have problems with abuse of the environment, go to China and raise some hell. You'll most likely never come back... but hopefully you will have done some good before you get tossed in a hole.

China is not the problem here. We are.

[Nobunaga]

Turns out, the best way to save to planet is to not reproduce and kill yourself early.

That will take care of the "human problem"

Only true for the people who don't spend their lives trying to actually solve our environmental problems.

Play me a violin.

If you have problems with abuse of the environment, go to China and raise some hell. You'll most likely never come back... but hopefully you will have done some good before you get tossed in a hole.

China is not the problem here. We are.

Show me. Honestly. I don't see it. Just slap up some non partisan links and I will read.

Thanks.

[Metsfanmax]

Turns out, the best way to save to planet is to not reproduce and kill yourself early.

That will take care of the "human problem"

Only true for the people who don't spend their lives trying to actually solve our environmental problems.

Play me a violin.

If you have problems with abuse of the environment, go to China and raise some hell. You'll most likely never come back... but hopefully you will have done some good before you get tossed in a hole.

China is not the problem here. We are.

Show me. Honestly. I don't see it. Just slap up some non partisan links and I will read.

Thanks.

It has nothing to do with articles or opinions. It's just facts. Per capita, the US and other developed nations use around 4-5 times as much energy per person than China does. Our problem with the environment is not pollution, it is energy consumption. Pollution from carbon-fuel burning is a natural symptom of our reliance on fossil fuels, shales, etc. Once we transition to renewable energy, many of our other environmental problems will be solved.

[Phatscotty]

answer = less people

Give yourself some credit. Think about all the earth saved by all the abortions

[Metsfanmax]

answer = less people

Give yourself some credit. Think about all the earth saved by all the abortions

I am giving myself some credit.

If I were in charge, I'd institute a two child maximum policy for the US.

[Juan_Bottom]

Play me a violin.

If you have problems with abuse of the environment, go to China and raise some hell. You'll most likely never come back... but hopefully you will have done some good.

How responsible and informed of you to say so.


You know, Sweden only sends 4% of their garbage to landfills. The rest is turned into energy. Other country's actually pay them to get rid of their garbage, then Sweden converts it to cheap energy for the people. And Germany gets like, over 9000% energy from the sun, and other countrys are following suit. Morracco will be getting 40% of their energy from the sun.
Meanwhile in the US we're debating the best way to build a new coal plant to replace a nuclear one.
Humanity isn't exactly the problem with the environment as a whole, it's ignorance. American style.
(I'M USING WIND ENERGY TO POWER MY PC HAHA)

[Nobunaga]

Play me a violin.

If you have problems with abuse of the environment, go to China and raise some hell. You'll most likely never come back... but hopefully you will have done some good.

(Photos deleted)

How responsible and informed of you to say so.


You know, Sweden only sends 4% of their garbage to landfills. The rest is turned into energy. Other country's actually pay them to get rid of their garbage, then Sweden converts it to cheap energy for the people. And Germany gets like, over 9000% energy from the sun, and other countrys are following suit. Morracco will be getting 40% of their energy from the sun.
Meanwhile in the US we're debating the best way to build a new coal plant to replace a nuclear one.
Humanity isn't exactly the problem with the environment as a whole, it's ignorance. American style.
(I'M USING WIND ENERGY TO POWER MY PC HAHA)

That's awesome. I'd love to see that done here.

China uses less energy, and energy consumption is the problem?

That isn't algae.


Just out for a nice ride through town. Maybe stop by a Starbucks later...


A beauty skyline.


At least these girls don't seem to mind. (And I guarantee you they have no idea there was a massacre once where they now frolic... but that's beside the point).


Ahhhh, what a cutey. I personally think the lead poisoning scars add the right touch.

... Not the problem my ass. Americans not burning garbage to power household utensils has you pissed when an entire nation is brutalized by a poisoned environment?

But seriously, I'd love to burn some garbage or spin a windmill to power my toothbrush.

[Metsfanmax]

... Not the problem my ass. Americans not burning garbage to power household utensils has you pissed when an entire nation is brutalized by a poisoned environment?

If you don't understand the world energy problem, then kindly refrain from posting about it.

[Phatscotty]

... Not the problem my ass. Americans not burning garbage to power household utensils has you pissed when an entire nation is brutalized by a poisoned environment?

If you don't understand the world energy problem, then kindly refrain from posting about it.

He was pointing out that you don't understand America cannot even carry China's waterbucket when it comes to pollution.

[Metsfanmax]

... Not the problem my ass. Americans not burning garbage to power household utensils has you pissed when an entire nation is brutalized by a poisoned environment?

If you don't understand the world energy problem, then kindly refrain from posting about it.

He was pointing out that you don't understand America cannot carry China's waterbucket when it comes to pollution.

I was pointing out that China's pollution means pretty much zero when it comes to the world's energy problem.

[Funkyterrance]

This is a good conversation guys, lets not get too nasty plz. Pretty please?
Solar and wind energy are nice and all but they can't be used indefinitely on a larger scale, at least with the current technology. You can power your comp and your lights with solar cells but try and do that with the millions of cars out there and you have some serious problems. I do think that Americans in general are overly optimistic about alternative energy considering our disgustingly high average level of consumption.

[Nobunaga]

This is a good conversation guys, lets not get too nasty plz. Pretty please?
Solar and wind energy are nice and all but they can't be used indefinitely on a larger scale, at least with the current technology. You can power your comp and your lights with solar cells but try and do that with the millions of cars out there and you have some serious problems. I do think that Americans in general are overly optimistic about alternative energy considering our disgustingly high average level of consumption.

I was being nice, if a little sarcastic.

[Phatscotty]

answer = less people

Give yourself some credit. Think about all the earth saved by all the abortions

I am giving myself some credit.

If I were in charge, I'd institute a two child maximum policy for the US.

We know you would. For the record, you are a Progressive, right?

[Metsfanmax]

This is a good conversation guys, lets not get too nasty plz. Pretty please?
Solar and wind energy are nice and all but they can't be used indefinitely on a larger scale, at least with the current technology. You can power your comp and your lights with solar cells but try and do that with the millions of cars out there and you have some serious problems. I do think that Americans in general are overly optimistic about alternative energy considering our disgustingly high average level of consumption.

Nuclear energy is perfectly capable of powering our energy needs.

[Metsfanmax]

answer = less people

Give yourself some credit. Think about all the earth saved by all the abortions

I am giving myself some credit.

If I were in charge, I'd institute a two child maximum policy for the US.

We know you would. For the record, you are a Progressive, right?

Correct. To clarify, I am a progressive that believes in progress towards a better humanity. Achieving a better humanity will require some significant individual sacrifices on all of our parts.

[Nobunaga]

This is a good conversation guys, lets not get too nasty plz. Pretty please?
Solar and wind energy are nice and all but they can't be used indefinitely on a larger scale, at least with the current technology. You can power your comp and your lights with solar cells but try and do that with the millions of cars out there and you have some serious problems. I do think that Americans in general are overly optimistic about alternative energy considering our disgustingly high average level of consumption.

Nuclear energy is perfectly capable of powering our energy needs.

That I totally agree with. Now just get other liberals to stop suing anyone who tries to build one, and we'd solve a lot of this problem.

[Metsfanmax]

This is a good conversation guys, lets not get too nasty plz. Pretty please?
Solar and wind energy are nice and all but they can't be used indefinitely on a larger scale, at least with the current technology. You can power your comp and your lights with solar cells but try and do that with the millions of cars out there and you have some serious problems. I do think that Americans in general are overly optimistic about alternative energy considering our disgustingly high average level of consumption.

Nuclear energy is perfectly capable of powering our energy needs.

That I totally agree with. Now just get other liberals to stop suing anyone who tries to build one, and we'd solve a lot of this problem.

Unfortunately, this is one of the areas where I strongly department from my progressive friends. For some reason, a lot of them are incredibly anti-science when it comes to nuclear energy and I don't understand why. It's not at all consistent or intelligent.

[Nobunaga]

This is a good conversation guys, lets not get too nasty plz. Pretty please?
Solar and wind energy are nice and all but they can't be used indefinitely on a larger scale, at least with the current technology. You can power your comp and your lights with solar cells but try and do that with the millions of cars out there and you have some serious problems. I do think that Americans in general are overly optimistic about alternative energy considering our disgustingly high average level of consumption.

Nuclear energy is perfectly capable of powering our energy needs.

That I totally agree with. Now just get other liberals to stop suing anyone who tries to build one, and we'd solve a lot of this problem.

Unfortunately, this is one of the areas where I strongly department from my progressive friends. For some reason, a lot of them are incredibly anti-science when it comes to nuclear energy and I don't understand why. It's not at all consistent or intelligent.

Metsfan, I am happy to be surprised by your attitude. Apologies for the earlier sarcastic remarks.

[Funkyterrance]

I was being nice, if a little sarcastic.

I'm just afraid of the conversation spinning out of control since I love the subject.

I looked into buying a house that was "off-grid" recently and it was a real eye opener. I consider myself relatively low impact but this place would have been hard for me to adjust to. It had two good sized solar panels and a decent sized battery bank to match. The only things this setup could power on a daily basis were:

-Well pump
-Small, very dim bulbs for lighting (one 20 watt bulb in each room)
-A very small television (12 inch, for I think the guy said an hour a day)
-Limited use of a small appliance a couple of times a day
-Some other very minor stuff that I can't remember now

Most Americans would go batshit if they tried to live like this but this is how it would have to be in order to sustain ourselves on alternative energy. The alternative is further contaminating our resources but most Americans choose the latter without batting an eyelash.

[patches70]

If I were in charge, I'd institute a two child maximum policy for the US.

Of course, you'd think that was a wise policy, though have you thought of the unintended consequences?

For instance, 10,000 baby boomers a day are entering the Medicare and Social Security rolls. That population has to be replaced and put into the work force to pay all the taxes needed to pay for those entitlements. We've got a big problem already as it is, though the US's birth rates aren't quite low enough to be too bad, but at the moment we've got the lowest ratio of people working to people retiring than ever before. I mean, someone has to support the old people, right? If you cut out the new births, especially while making medical advances to extend life, you start getting into serious demographic issues, some of which we are already facing from decades of abortion on demand.

Another problem is being seen in China, where the number of men outnumber women by a huge margin. This makes it hard for everyone to find a mate. Does great for hand lotion stock I suppose, but sexually frustrated men, millions of them, tends to have some problems as well.

Then of course there is that whole Freedom thing. The progressives, liberals and supposedly enlightened class seem to think it's all good telling everyone else what they can and can't do. I don't think these people understand what freedom is.
And a whole host of other consequences too numerous to list.

I mean, if you decide for yourself you'll only have two children and that's it, that's all cool, fine and dandy. But what gives you the right to tell anyone else what to do?

Oh, you'll make the arguments that it's "for the greater good". In reality you just don't understand or believe in personal choice and personal responsibility. You think such things must be left up to the collective, so you don't eve have to think about personal choice and personal responsibility makes no difference because you'd shift such responsibility to the collective.

That's all fine and dandy if you so happen to agree with the collective, but come a day when the collective decides something that you may not agree, you'll find yourself being forced to sacrifice "for the greater good". That's the thing about collectivists, in the end they don't really have a leg to stand on.

So I ask, would you institute such a policy, even with the negative consequences, because it would be for the greater good for the greater number of people?

[Metsfanmax]

I was being nice, if a little sarcastic.

I'm just afraid of the conversation spinning out of control since I love the subject.

I looked into buying a house that was "off-grid" recently and it was a real eye opener. I consider myself relatively low impact but this place would have been hard for me to adjust to. It had two good sized solar panels and a decent sized battery bank to match. The only things this setup could power on a daily basis were:

-Well pump
-Small, very dim bulbs for lighting (one 20 watt bulb in each room)
-A very small television (12 inch, for I think the guy said an hour a day)
-Limited use of a small appliance a couple of times a day
-Some other very minor stuff that I can't remember now

Most Americans would go batshit if they tried to live like this but this is how it would have to be in order to sustain ourselves on alternative energy. The alternative is further contaminating our resources but most Americans choose the latter without batting an eyelash.

Solar energy is still far from its peak. It will become a lot more efficient in the coming decades. But yes, for now a house with solar panels is hard to keep completely off the grid. It's really better to stay on the grid, and feed back into the general supply when you're not at home, to help amortize the cost.

[Metsfanmax]

So I ask, would you institute such a policy, even with the negative consequences, because it would be for the greater good for the greater number of people?

Yes, because being alive is better than being dead. I don't think that most people (including you, apparently) realize the enormity of the energy problem we will be facing in the coming decades. If we don't stop worrying about short term economic problems and start focusing on long term solutions to our energy shortfall, we won't have a nation left to bicker over.

There may very well be a line before which collectivism is unjustified. But the long-term survival of our species is an open question right now. Individual rights pale in comparison to this problem.

No one has the "right" to endanger all of our humanity. That is why such a policy would be justified. Limit some freedoms now so that we're still alive later to enjoy the rest of them.

[Dukasaur]

... Not the problem my ass. Americans not burning garbage to power household utensils has you pissed when an entire nation is brutalized by a poisoned environment?

If you don't understand the world energy problem, then kindly refrain from posting about it.

He was pointing out that you don't understand America cannot carry China's waterbucket when it comes to pollution.

I was pointing out that China's pollution means pretty much zero when it comes to the world's energy problem.

And that's precisely where you're wrong. China may in toto use less energy than the U.S. (although catching up fast) but it produces it in the cheapest ways imaginable, mostly in coal-fired plants with no emission controls whatsoever. Altogether Asia fires up 85% of the coal burned in the world, mostly in plants with little or no filtration or scrubbing, while North America burns less than 10%, all of it subject to strict sulfur standards that include mandatory scrubbing unless the targets can be met without it (which does sometimes happen) and a variety of other restrictions.

You shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the pictures Nobunaga posted.

.

That really is China today. In fairness, it's also what Montreal, London, or Philadelphia would have looked like 80 years ago, but the point is they don't look like that any more. North America and Europe have cleaned up their act.

There's incredible engineering that goes into making our cars exhausts cleaner, our power plants cleaner, our steel mills cleaner. (And by our I'm talking all of the G7, not just the U.S.) The average new car today put out only about 1/20th of the toxic fumes that a new car in 1960 did. EGRs, catalytic converters, DPFs in trucks, even the humble little PCV valve in your engine (that you should change with every second oil change and probably don't) all add up to a mammoth joint effort by everyone involved to burn cleaner. There isn't a single industrial process that hasn't been squeezed by the engineers for a lower environmental damage profile.