ttystikk
Well-Known Member
That would be where it went lol
Scientists are Declaring a Climate Emergency
- Thread starter ttystikk
- Start date
-
- Tags
- climate global warming
esh dov ets
Well-Known Member
the first part is chemical fracturing, there is also explosives involved in that sometimes. as well as chemicals being used in explosive fracking which is an older method.Fracking is when they pump a slurry of various chemicals under extremely high pressure to fracture the rock structures deep underground to allow gas and oil to flow into pools where they can be pumped out. No explosives used
The explosives are used during the search for oil deposits by drilling shallow holes in a grid pattern over many square miles. Then shoving an explosive known as GeoGel down the holes as they are drilled. All the holes are wired together along with microphones pressed into the ground to record the seismic waves when all the charges are fired at once.
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
Oh the elusive Salt Dome.Fracking is when they pump a slurry of various chemicals under extremely high pressure to fracture the rock structures deep underground to allow gas and oil to flow into pools where they can be pumped out. No explosives used but the process can and does cause earthquakes. It's often used on old, dried up oil wells to get them flowing again. More greenhouse gases are released than all the activity at the oil sands projects in Ft. McMurray combined tho Ft. Mac looks like hell on the surface while fracking destruction is hidden deep underground. Many cases of surface water contamination are quietly swept under the rug of non-disclosure agreements with the aggrieved plaintiffs.
The explosives are used during the search for oil deposits by drilling shallow holes in a grid pattern over many square miles. Then shoving an explosive known as GeoGel down the holes as they are drilled. All the holes are wired together along with microphones pressed into the ground to record the seismic waves when all the charges are fired at once.
I first worked in a seismic exploration camp in '77 and have been involved in a few dozen oil crews since both seismic and drilling for what they found. Mostly hauling fluids but have worked as a drillers helper stuffing the explosives down the holes and numerous other jobs.
Shaped charges to burn precise holes in casing miles away within inches of the production zone is impressive.
Oh and don't forget the stories that go with it, Like the time we had to go back and find our radio active source that fell out of the back of the Cementers pick up. The source was used to track radioactive sand pumped with an acid slurry to find out in which direction the fracture followed.
It is kept and transported in a "Pig", a barrel shaped lead lined container weighs about 250 pounds because of it's danger to human life.
...and the time salt water was used to mix the slurry......
...and when the
Good times.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
but how can you trust those with massive money, power and an agenda? One part of that agenda being a global tax. Imagine the money that will bring in, and know none of it would actually be used to stop global warmning, aka, climate change
Go to NASAs website and look in the banner/header to see how little temps have heated up since 1880, and yet they push this lie, much like the cannabis is a schedule 1 drug lie due t big pharma pressure
Go to NASAs website and look in the banner/header to see how little temps have heated up since 1880, and yet they push this lie, much like the cannabis is a schedule 1 drug lie due t big pharma pressure
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
"4000+ American lives Iraq is a small price to pay to fuel China for 5 years."
Global Economy Chairman will not be questioned.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
hear ye, hear ye. Not every scientist is bought and paid for, but the msm won't let you hear their voices:
More than 300 scientists have urged President Trump to withdraw from the U.N.’s climate change agency, warning that its push to curtail carbon dioxide threatens to exacerbate poverty without improving the environment.
In a Thursday letter to the president, MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen called on the United States and other nations to “change course on an outdated international agreement that targets minor greenhouse gases,” starting with carbon dioxide.
“Since 2009, the US and other governments have undertaken actions with respect to global climate that are not scientifically justified and that already have, and will continue to cause serious social and economic harm — with no environmental benefits,” said Mr. Lindzen, a prominent atmospheric physicist.
Signers of the attached petition include the U.S. and international atmospheric scientists, meteorologists, physicists, professors and others taking issue with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC], which was formed in 1992 to combat “dangerous” climate change.
The 2016 Paris climate accord, which sets nonbinding emissions goals for nations, was drawn up under the auspices of the UNFCCC.
“Observations since the UNFCCC was written 25 years ago show that warming from increased atmospheric CO2 will be benign — much less than initial model predictions,” says the petition.
More than 300 scientists have urged President Trump to withdraw from the U.N.’s climate change agency, warning that its push to curtail carbon dioxide threatens to exacerbate poverty without improving the environment.
In a Thursday letter to the president, MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen called on the United States and other nations to “change course on an outdated international agreement that targets minor greenhouse gases,” starting with carbon dioxide.
“Since 2009, the US and other governments have undertaken actions with respect to global climate that are not scientifically justified and that already have, and will continue to cause serious social and economic harm — with no environmental benefits,” said Mr. Lindzen, a prominent atmospheric physicist.
Signers of the attached petition include the U.S. and international atmospheric scientists, meteorologists, physicists, professors and others taking issue with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC], which was formed in 1992 to combat “dangerous” climate change.
The 2016 Paris climate accord, which sets nonbinding emissions goals for nations, was drawn up under the auspices of the UNFCCC.
“Observations since the UNFCCC was written 25 years ago show that warming from increased atmospheric CO2 will be benign — much less than initial model predictions,” says the petition.
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
Meanwhile....
Search Results
Great Barrier Reef Hit by Worst Coral Die-Off on Record, Scientists Say
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/world/.../great-barrier-reef-coral-bleaching.html
Nov 29, 2016 - SYDNEY, Australia — Scientists surveying the Great Barrier Reef said Tuesday that it had suffered the worst coral die-off ever recorded after ...
Great Barrier Reef scientists confirm largest die-off of corals recorded ...
https://www.theguardian.com › Environment › Great Barrier Reef
Nov 28, 2016 - Terry Hughes: coral bleaching 'has changed the Great Barrier Reef ... the reef has undergone the worst bleaching event in recorded history.
scientists record biggest ever coral die-off on australia's great barrier reef
www.telegraph.co.uk › News
Nov 29, 2016 - Warm seas around Australia's Great Barrier Reef have killed two-thirds of a 700-km (435 miles) stretch of coral in the past nine months, the worst die-off ever recorded on the World Heritage site, scientists who surveyed the reef said on Tuesday. Scientists have confirmed on ...
Australia's Great Barrier Reef has worst coral die-off ever - USA Today
www.usatoday.com/story/tech/sciencefair/...barrier-reef...coral-die-off/94554934/
Nov 28, 2016 - Australia's Great Barrier Reef has worst coral die-off ever .... reef, “it would be among the largest mass extinction events in history,” said Torda.
Great Barrier Reef bleaching is the "worst coral die-off" in recorded ...
inhabitat.com/great-barrier-reef-bleaching-is-the-worst-coral-die-off-in-recorded-hist...
Nov 30, 2016 - Scientists say coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef is now the worst die-off in recorded history.
The Great Barrier Reef Just Suffered Its Worst Coral Die-Off on Record
https://psmag.com/the-great-barrier-reef-just-suffered-its-worst-coral-die-off-on-recor...
Dec 16, 2016 - The Great Barrier Reef Just Suffered Its Worst Coral Die-Off on ... Below the surface of the worst bleaching in the history of the Reef.psmag.com.
Great Barrier Reef DIES: Scientists record BIGGEST ever coral die-off ...
www.express.co.uk › News › Nature
Nov 29, 2016 - THE Great Barrier Reef has suffered the largest coral die-off ever recorded, ... Reef DIES: Scientists record BIGGEST ever coral die-off in history ...
2016 Deadliest Year on Record for Great Barrier Reef
www.commondreams.org/.../coral-was-cooked-2016-deadliest-year-record-great-barr...
Nov 28, 2016 - The Great Barrier Reef suffered through the worst coral die-off in recorded history this year, scientists found, with unusually warm ocean water ...
Great Barrier Reef: Scientists record biggest ever coral die-off in history
home.bt.com/.../great-barrier-reef-scientists-record-biggest-ever-coral-die-off-in-histo...
Nov 29, 2016 - Some two-thirds of shallow-water coral along a 435-mile stretch in the north of the reefhas perished in the past nine months, and scientists say ...
Dying Coral Reefs Impact Environment and Economy - Time
time.com/coral/
Coral die-offs—caused by a process known as bleaching—tend to look as bland ... It's also the longest bleaching event in recorded history, and scientists say it ...
People also ask
What percentage of the Great Barrier Reef is bleached?
What causes coral bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef?
Why the coral reefs are dying?
What is coral bleaching and how does it happen?
Feedback
Searches related to coral reef die off history
the great barrier reef pronounced dead
the great barrier reef before and after
about 80 percent of the population lives within ________ mile(s) of australia's coast.
great barrier reef 50 years ago
the great barrier reef dying
what is a barrier reef
biggest dice
why is the great barrier reef bleaching
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
The reason why we climate change zealots exist in the first place boils down to actual physical evidence gathered from the natural world. Oil company paid scientists do precious little of this, preferring to just use statistical games to deny trends.
What is conspicuously missing from this manufactured 'debate' is any discussion of the fact that Our planet is dying from a toxic soup of fossil fuel emissions in the air, on and under the ground, in the water and all the oceans. We need to find alternative energy sources before we destroy the entire planet and with it, ourselves.
Nice post, @Grandpapy , it illustrates the point I'm trying to make here very precisely.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
While I am all for a world free from industrial pollution, sadly, it is intentional, by those who have an agenda: see Agenda 21. No tax is going to change that. We had 'free energy tech as far back as Tesla (Nicolas, not Elon) . Many similar devices have been taken from the developers under the guise of National Security, when in truth it is to protect the oil industry and military industrial complex, none of whom gives a shit about us
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Shitty post; you want to give up without a fight because of some paranoid delusion about people wanting to render the earth uninhabitable by EVERYONE?
Do you even think about what you say?
esh dov ets
Well-Known Member
Are you requesting feedback? Many of they reefs die due to temperature changes and saline levels changing there environment. Some due to pollution. I am no expert but i will look into it again
esh dov ets
Well-Known Member
He's on to something. And on topic. I disagree with the why bother sentiment but so far there have been very few strong measures taken to fix the problem. A tax is a small step and they will pay and the consumer will pay and the poor will suffer increase price and barley changed pollution levels. The tax is good because it raises awareness but insufficient in it self. Further more it is an example of a half measure that will have bad consuquence as well as half what is supposed to achieve. I soport a pollution tax. But some will stop there and say that we have done our part. And the businesses now have a moral offset, to say see we pay our taxes.
@PetFlora
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Changing temperatures across a reef several thousand square miles in size is definitely a sign of accelerated climate change. Salinity hasn't changed much there, not like it has near the poles due to melting ice. Pollution is everywhere; the fish being brought up from the Challenger Deep, the deepest water on Earth, are so loaded with pollutants they aren't safe for human consumption.
We are killing our planet before we even know what we're losing. This makes us a very stupid and short sighted species to shit where we eat, very possibly not worthy of a chance to develop further.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
The tax is a good first step towards monetizing the value of the environment; up til now, corporations have not had to account for the environmental costs of their activities. Once these costs are factored in, corporations will work to reduce emissions as a cost of doing business.
Agreed that the environment we depend on for life itself is by definition priceless, but we have to start somewhere.
esh dov ets
Well-Known Member
yo ho. i like you. i hope we are worthy of the chance to live until the planet will die of natural causes and peacefully move it or us else where.
The problem i have with monetizing the environment is that it is already for the most part and that is half the problem. i don't want to say it's ok to destroy the planet as long as i get paid and i will never be paid anyway. i think the tax should go twards finding and implamenting alternatives. but it will proly go into gov. general funds that increase gov. profit from ecological destruction there by accelerating it forward. It will of course be sold and bought as an answer.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Monetizing pollution credits and thus being able to limit, control and tax them means those who are doing good things that reduce pollution are rewarded in a fungible currency they can earn profits and offset costs from. I believe it's a good idea, not a bad one.
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
Lol That depends on how long Ive been sitting here
I might be awhile responding.Coral began to gain a foothold around 46 million years ago before disappearing for the last time in the Mid-Eocene period around 40 million years ago. Finally around 20 million years ago, the Great Barrier Reef, located off the west coast of Australia came into existence.
http://www.globalreefproject.com/coral-reef-history.php
Another indicator,
-snip- three species showed marked changes. a shifting toward higher elevations that had cooler temperatures. Red fir, western white pine, and mountain hemlock all showed obvious signs of movement toward higher elevations that provide cooler temperatures.
http://snowbrains.com/sierra-nevada-trees-are-moving-to-higher-elevations-due-to-warmer-temperatures/
OldMedUser
Well-Known Member
Another great reason to switch to non-polluting energy sources like fossil fuels is because burning it up is so wasteful of an otherwise great substance. Think of all the great things that oil can be used for other than to burn it.
Plastics - mostly can be replaced with cannabis.
Fabrics - " " " " " "
Medicine - " " " " " "
Lots more- " " " " " "
One of the big reasons for reef die-off is the increased acidity of the oceans that is caused by the increased levels of CO2 that the oceans are huge sink for. I am of the firm belief that the higher CO2 is caused by humans but much of the climate change is the earth doing it's own thing no matter what we do. It was concerns with the hole in the ozone layer when I was back in school in the late 80s taking environmental chemistry that spurred a mostly world wide effort to eliminate the use of chlorofluorocarbons, (Freon). The hole has been getting smaller each year since.
We need to put that kind of effort into greenhouse gases reduction especially CO2.
Plastics - mostly can be replaced with cannabis.
Fabrics - " " " " " "
Medicine - " " " " " "
Lots more- " " " " " "
One of the big reasons for reef die-off is the increased acidity of the oceans that is caused by the increased levels of CO2 that the oceans are huge sink for. I am of the firm belief that the higher CO2 is caused by humans but much of the climate change is the earth doing it's own thing no matter what we do. It was concerns with the hole in the ozone layer when I was back in school in the late 80s taking environmental chemistry that spurred a mostly world wide effort to eliminate the use of chlorofluorocarbons, (Freon). The hole has been getting smaller each year since.
We need to put that kind of effort into greenhouse gases reduction especially CO2.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
Absolutely I do. what you missed was the tax is NOT to resolve any of this, it's just a way to suck more money from us. If world governments cared, they would force the polluters to stop using their crap technology instead of attempting to tax us, using lies
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
I told my govt. I didn't want US Corps to poison China either.....but for some reason "their" govt. welcomed them with open arms, like they didn't even care how many might die.
My voice was drowned out by the flutter of cash counting machines.