One can only hope that these devastating rains will help to refill reservoirs and aquifers. Those who have been watching will be aware that California has been dealing with its worse drought in its measured history. In areas, land has sunk 6’ as the underground water on which the land above ‘floated’ was used for crops and drinking water. Just a few weeks ago, farmers were concerned about numerous crops that might fail this year. We should rejoice that California is getting some badly needed water and snow, but one wishes it had occurred more gently and over a period of time instead of all at once.@ Boots at the Boar http://abc7.com/weather/tornado-touches-down-in-south-la/434798/You forgot the tornado.Respectfully,C.
I remember back in the 70s a storm that lasted at least two weeks. I had a motorcycle at the time, and was holed up in LA, but I had to go north, and could not wait for the rain to let up. That was one miserable drive that day.
Over millons of years, climate has indeed changed, quite slowely, taking millennia, to change to the degree it has in the past 200 years since the industrial revolution, and the HUGE increase in human population using these fossil sources. Water is more often cyclic than temperature, with three droughts in 6,000 years that each lasted about 500 years, and more severe than any observed in the record, like pollen cores and other “science”, until today.. We’re messing with lots of stuff.
BTW; the city of Long Beach, California sank 21 FEET as a result of oil extraction in the early to mid 20th century. They pumped water back in to arrest the sinking.
I do not deny that our ecosystem is changing, and that the weather patterns are changing. Where I disagree is that mankind is the sole cause of it. Weather patterns shift as part of the natural order of things. It’s difficult to extract ourselves from the equation and to decipher which is which. I also loath the self-deprecation that “believers” have towards our country as it comes to our level of pollution and contribution to said climate change. We have made MASSIVE strides in this country on being more conscious of our emissions, and yet we continue to get slapped about the head and face by ecoterrorists that insist everything that runs on fossil fuels is akin to a mortal sin.Our way of life is built around fossil fuels, mostly because there is no good, cost-effective alternative. The concept of going green is fine and dandy, until you involve the end consumer in the process, especially the middle and lower classes. First, the easiest to fix would be electricity, mostly because it doesn’t require direct investment by the consumer. But what you don’t see is that if we convert all of our processes to green processes, we run the risk of brownouts or worse. On top of that, the investment made by utility companies will spike the costs passed on to the consumer. Do you want to see a family of 4 making $35k a year (poverty) see their utility bill double or triple? You honestly think they can absorb that cost? If you say, “government programs will pay for it,” where do you think that comes from? Why, it comes from schlubs like me that can afford to pay my utility bill, so our rates will go up nearly double to make up for it. It hurts the middle class the worst, because the upper class doesn’t care. They have enough money to pay it without even batting an eye. Then we get to heat… a lot of people use heating oil or forced-air natural gas or other natural-gas-using devices. If you have to convert all those units to Geotherm or electric (because we somehow magically converted everything to have an abundant electricity supply), that’s a massive expense to lay out for individual homeowners or business owners to convert everything in the buildings to electric or geotherm (not cheap). Who is going to pay for this?? How can the middle and lower classes afford this, on top of the increased electricity bill above? Again, the rich have enough money so they don’t care.I could continue, but I’m looking at this from a practical approach. Do we need to reign in emissions? Sure? Maybe? Does India and China? Absolutely. But can the rank-and-file consumer afford to do a major overhaul of our system to meet ecoterrorist demands? Not in even the best-case scenario can we do that. it’s simply too expensive for the average household to retool to meet your expectations. Or do you have a more pragmatic approach that is reasonable for every day people?
Boots at the Boar Premium Member over 9 years ago
Oh the weather outside is kind of cray, cray.But climate change isn’t real.Let it snow and rain and sleet and hail.All in the same day, day!
Carl Premium Member over 9 years ago
See Democrats do like big banks, big buisiness and big money.
chazandru over 9 years ago
One can only hope that these devastating rains will help to refill reservoirs and aquifers. Those who have been watching will be aware that California has been dealing with its worse drought in its measured history. In areas, land has sunk 6’ as the underground water on which the land above ‘floated’ was used for crops and drinking water. Just a few weeks ago, farmers were concerned about numerous crops that might fail this year. We should rejoice that California is getting some badly needed water and snow, but one wishes it had occurred more gently and over a period of time instead of all at once.@ Boots at the Boar http://abc7.com/weather/tornado-touches-down-in-south-la/434798/You forgot the tornado.Respectfully,C.
jergideon over 9 years ago
I remember back in the 70s a storm that lasted at least two weeks. I had a motorcycle at the time, and was holed up in LA, but I had to go north, and could not wait for the rain to let up. That was one miserable drive that day.
chazandru over 9 years ago
Good post, Crosspatch.Thank you.Sincerely, C.
Dtroutma over 9 years ago
Over millons of years, climate has indeed changed, quite slowely, taking millennia, to change to the degree it has in the past 200 years since the industrial revolution, and the HUGE increase in human population using these fossil sources. Water is more often cyclic than temperature, with three droughts in 6,000 years that each lasted about 500 years, and more severe than any observed in the record, like pollen cores and other “science”, until today.. We’re messing with lots of stuff.
BTW; the city of Long Beach, California sank 21 FEET as a result of oil extraction in the early to mid 20th century. They pumped water back in to arrest the sinking.
Wraithkin over 9 years ago
I do not deny that our ecosystem is changing, and that the weather patterns are changing. Where I disagree is that mankind is the sole cause of it. Weather patterns shift as part of the natural order of things. It’s difficult to extract ourselves from the equation and to decipher which is which. I also loath the self-deprecation that “believers” have towards our country as it comes to our level of pollution and contribution to said climate change. We have made MASSIVE strides in this country on being more conscious of our emissions, and yet we continue to get slapped about the head and face by ecoterrorists that insist everything that runs on fossil fuels is akin to a mortal sin.Our way of life is built around fossil fuels, mostly because there is no good, cost-effective alternative. The concept of going green is fine and dandy, until you involve the end consumer in the process, especially the middle and lower classes. First, the easiest to fix would be electricity, mostly because it doesn’t require direct investment by the consumer. But what you don’t see is that if we convert all of our processes to green processes, we run the risk of brownouts or worse. On top of that, the investment made by utility companies will spike the costs passed on to the consumer. Do you want to see a family of 4 making $35k a year (poverty) see their utility bill double or triple? You honestly think they can absorb that cost? If you say, “government programs will pay for it,” where do you think that comes from? Why, it comes from schlubs like me that can afford to pay my utility bill, so our rates will go up nearly double to make up for it. It hurts the middle class the worst, because the upper class doesn’t care. They have enough money to pay it without even batting an eye. Then we get to heat… a lot of people use heating oil or forced-air natural gas or other natural-gas-using devices. If you have to convert all those units to Geotherm or electric (because we somehow magically converted everything to have an abundant electricity supply), that’s a massive expense to lay out for individual homeowners or business owners to convert everything in the buildings to electric or geotherm (not cheap). Who is going to pay for this?? How can the middle and lower classes afford this, on top of the increased electricity bill above? Again, the rich have enough money so they don’t care.I could continue, but I’m looking at this from a practical approach. Do we need to reign in emissions? Sure? Maybe? Does India and China? Absolutely. But can the rank-and-file consumer afford to do a major overhaul of our system to meet ecoterrorist demands? Not in even the best-case scenario can we do that. it’s simply too expensive for the average household to retool to meet your expectations. Or do you have a more pragmatic approach that is reasonable for every day people?