Australian Politics Forum - Global warming science is fraudulant.....???

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #15 - Sep 30^th, 2013 at 11:54am

muso wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 11:44am:

Chimp,

Have you looked at the NPI Web site?
http://www.npi.gov.au/npidata/action/load/emission-by-substance-result/criteria/...

That's for NSW. Substitute your own state if you like.

If SO2 scrubbing is compulsory by law, why were 230,000 tonnes emitted by Electricity generation in 2011-12?

Its not possible to remove 100% of the SO2 in the flue gas and scrubbers don't run all year round and are not set up with back up scrubbers to come online. They have long periods of being off line for maintenance etc, and often don't run at optimal efficiency

Can you name a major coal fired power station in Australia that does not have precipitators and SO2 scrubbers?

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #16 - Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:01pm

Many. Here are some just for starters:

Stanwell, Gladstone, Millmerran.

Stanwell: 25,000,000 kg of SO2 per year

http://www.npi.gov.au/npidata/action/load/emission-by-individual-facility-result...

Gladstone:

31,000,000 kg

[url]http://www.npi.gov.au/npidata/action/load/emission-by-individual-facility-result/criteria/state/QLD/year/2011/jurisdiction-facility/Q019NRG001 [/url]

Millmerran

25,000,000 kg

http://www.npi.gov.au/npidata/action/load/emission-by-individual-facility-result...

See anything strange yet?

If you want some examples from other states, just go for the oldest power stations, especially outside major metropolitan areas. Victoria and SA burn a lot of brown coal. You can imagine what that does to the SO2 emissions.

Quote:

Its not possible to remove 100% of the SO2 in the flue gas

Not if you don't use SO2 scrubbers. (They may be fitted, but they are not working being used. )

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 30^th, 2013 at 3:50pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #17 - Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:13pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 11:23am:

That may well be the case, but what does that have to do with the science of climate change and AGW?

The IPCC is run by united nations, the united nations is run the world bank and International World trade organisation.

Do you happen to know who runs these......??????

Quote:

Are you suggesting these very same war mongers are directing and corrupting the outcomes and publications of EVERY scientists working on AGW and climate change?

They certainly fund them to prove to the world that AGW is real......!!!!!

Quote:

(on your CO2 scrubber solution, its clear you haven't done enough work on the feasibility, and scale of the scrubbers that would be needed to remove the CO2 from the stacks.

Its quite feasible and not too expensive, this technology is taking off, because most know even if we do get taxed on the air we breath, fossil fuels will be around for a very long time to come.

http://www.rwe.com/web/cms/en/2734/rwe/innovation/projects-technologies/power-ge...

Quote:

SO2 scrubbers are used because of the low concentration of SO2 in the flue gases. The reason for this is to mitigate Acid Rain problems in the environment.

I am sure that your know that precipitators and SO2 scrubbers are compulsory by law (in the West and most other nations).

What do you suggest we do with the Carbonic acid produced in the scrubber liquor streams?)

Without doing the research i'm sure there are ways to re-use carbonic acid fro SO2.

The question is what about captured liquid CO2, well there are many uses for that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide

Quote:

There were alternatives to CFCs when the ban was introduced in the 1990s. There are non fossil fuel alternatives as well that can provide electricity. Why can you only see Natural gas as an alternative fuel? THis is not a long term solution.

Natural gas is a start, green energy is a goal that needs development.

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #18 - Sep 30^th, 2013 at 3:45pm

Ajax wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Its quite feasible and not too expensive, this technology is taking off, because most know even if we do get taxed on the air we breath, fossil fuels will be around for a very long time to come.

The last dying hope for CCS was Norway. Now even Norway has abandoned the Mongstad project due to cost.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24183443

Natural gas has potential, but it's not very effective for automotive applications because the vented methane in coupling and decoupling etc gives it about the same carbon footprint as as diesel.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 30^th, 2013 at 3:51pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #19 - Sep 30^th, 2013 at 6:40pm

Ajax wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 11:23am:

That may well be the case, but what does that have to do with the science of climate change and AGW?

The IPCC is run by united nations, the united nations is run the world bank and International World trade organisation.

Do you happen to know who runs these......??????

ummm, I dunno, the Zionist banking cartel? The Rothschilds?

enlighten everyone please Ajax

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #20 - Sep 30^th, 2013 at 7:11pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 6:40pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 11:23am:

That may well be the case, but what does that have to do with the science of climate change and AGW?

The IPCC is run by united nations, the united nations is run the world bank and International World trade organisation.

Do you happen to know who runs these......??????

ummm, I dunno, the Zionist banking cartel? The Rothschilds?

enlighten everyone please Ajax

Elvis? er Neil Armstrong? Al Gore?

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #21 - Sep 30^th, 2013 at 7:37pm

muso wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 7:11pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 6:40pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 11:23am:

That may well be the case, but what does that have to do with the science of climate change and AGW?

The IPCC is run by united nations, the united nations is run the world bank and International World trade organisation.

Do you happen to know who runs these......??????

ummm, I dunno, the Zionist banking cartel? The Rothschilds?

enlighten everyone please Ajax

Elvis? er Neil Armstrong? Al Gore?

Gore controls the cash flow??

Back to top

al-gore-450x315.jpg (35 KB | 36 )

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #22 - Oct 1^st, 2013 at 1:26pm

muso wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 3:45pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Its quite feasible and not too expensive, this technology is taking off, because most know even if we do get taxed on the air we breath, fossil fuels will be around for a very long time to come.

The last dying hope for CCS was Norway. Now even Norway has abandoned the Mongstad project due to cost.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24183443

Natural gas has potential, but it's not very effective for automotive applications because the vented methane in coupling and decoupling etc gives it about the same carbon footprint as as diesel.

Why would you send your OWN nation broke based on a opinion with a certainty of 95%.

A logical government would say, give me the scientific evidence......................!!!!!!

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

Ajax Gold Member Offline CO2 has never controlled temperature on Earth Posts: 11070 Australia Gender:	Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....??? Reply #23 - Oct 1^st, 2013 at 1:28pm Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 7:37pm: enlighten everyone please Ajax Every man should know the world he lives in....????? If you want to be a boy for the rest of your life there is nothing wrong with that either............!!! Sometimes ignorance is bliss......!!!!!!!
Back to top	1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax 2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #24 - Oct 1^st, 2013 at 5:14pm

Ajax wrote on Oct 1^st, 2013 at 1:26pm:

muso wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 3:45pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Its quite feasible and not too expensive, this technology is taking off, because most know even if we do get taxed on the air we breath, fossil fuels will be around for a very long time to come.

The last dying hope for CCS was Norway. Now even Norway has abandoned the Mongstad project due to cost.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24183443

Natural gas has potential, but it's not very effective for automotive applications because the vented methane in coupling and decoupling etc gives it about the same carbon footprint as as diesel.

Why would you send your OWN nation broke based on a opinion with a certainty of 95%.

A logical government would say, give me the scientific evidence......................!!!!!!

95% is the gold standard compared to most business decisions.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #25 - Oct 2^nd, 2013 at 8:30pm

Ajax wrote on Oct 1^st, 2013 at 1:26pm:

muso wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 3:45pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Its quite feasible and not too expensive, this technology is taking off, because most know even if we do get taxed on the air we breath, fossil fuels will be around for a very long time to come.

The last dying hope for CCS was Norway. Now even Norway has abandoned the Mongstad project due to cost.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24183443

Natural gas has potential, but it's not very effective for automotive applications because the vented methane in coupling and decoupling etc gives it about the same carbon footprint as as diesel.

Why would you send your OWN nation broke based on a opinion with a certainty of 95%.

A logical government would say, give me the scientific evidence......................!!!!!!

All good science has error value!

How long is a piece of string Grin

.....it's called the uncertainty principle Shocked

** If only you had measuring devices covering the earth then you might get a better idea on the science ay! Roll Eyes

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #26 - Oct 2^nd, 2013 at 8:32pm

muso wrote on Oct 1^st, 2013 at 5:14pm:

Ajax wrote on Oct 1^st, 2013 at 1:26pm:

muso wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 3:45pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 12:13pm:

Its quite feasible and not too expensive, this technology is taking off, because most know even if we do get taxed on the air we breath, fossil fuels will be around for a very long time to come.

The last dying hope for CCS was Norway. Now even Norway has abandoned the Mongstad project due to cost.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24183443

Natural gas has potential, but it's not very effective for automotive applications because the vented methane in coupling and decoupling etc gives it about the same carbon footprint as as diesel.

Why would you send your OWN nation broke based on a opinion with a certainty of 95%.

A logical government would say, give me the scientific evidence......................!!!!!!

95% is the gold standard compared to most business decisions.

+/- 2 standard deviations or some such !??! She'll be right cob! Huh

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Global warming science is fraudulant.....???
Reply #27 - Oct 2^nd, 2013 at 9:11pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2013 at 8:32pm:

Quote:

95% is the gold standard compared to most business decisions.

+/- 2 standard deviations or some such !??! She'll be right cob! Huh