Pages: 1

 

2007-06-03 09:29:46
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6852|North Carolina
Yahoo has an interesting article on the carbon footprints of various states....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070602/ap_ … g_states_1

Apparently, cheap electricity from high-carbon coal plants is mostly to blame.

Some interesting tidbits from the article.  "Wyoming's coal-fired power plants produce more carbon dioxide in just eight hours than the power generators of more populous Vermont do in a year."

"Texas, the leader in emitting this greenhouse gas, cranks out more than the next two biggest producers combined, California and Pennsylvania, which together have twice Texas' population....  Texas, where coal barely edges out cleaner natural gas as the top power source, belches almost 1 1/2 trillion pounds of carbon dioxide yearly. That's more than every nation in the world except six: the United States, China, Russia, Japan, India and Germany."

"In sparsely populated Alaska, the carbon dioxide produced per person by all the flying and driving is six times the per capita amount generated by travelers in New York state."

"The disparity in carbon dioxide emissions is one of the reasons there is no strong national effort to reduce global warming gases, some experts say. National emissions dipped ever so slightly last year, but that was mostly because of mild weather, according to the Energy Department."

What do you guys think?...
2007-06-03 09:39:02
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7208

Until everyone stops using electricity and oil.........meh.
2007-06-03 09:40:08
d4rkst4r
biggie smalls
+72|6900|Ontario, Canada
i think your secretly al gore
"you know life is what we make it, and a chance is like a picture, it'd be nice if you just take it"
2007-06-03 09:48:47
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6852|North Carolina
So... there's nothing to be said about how some states pollute more per capita than others?...  Like, there's no reason to suggest that all states move toward cleaner technologies like nuclear plants?....

By the way, I'll take the Al Gore thing as a compliment... 
2007-06-03 09:51:33
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7208

Turquoise wrote:

So... there's nothing to be said about how some states pollute more per capita than others?...  Like, there's no reason to suggest that all states move toward cleaner technologies like nuclear plants?....
No, because we count on various states for various things....some more pollutant than others.
2007-06-03 09:55:40
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6852|North Carolina
There's no excuse for any state to pollute more than others per capita when it comes to providing electricity for their own citizens.  Even the states that share power with others should make the move toward cleaner technologies than high-carbon coal.

I'll agree with you that the states with the most refineries will pollute a lot more than states without them, but when it comes to basic power provisions, there is no excuse.
2007-06-03 10:03:06
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6989|Texas - Bigger than France

Turquoise wrote:

There's no excuse for any state to pollute more than others per capita when it comes to providing electricity for their own citizens.  Even the states that share power with others should make the move toward cleaner technologies than high-carbon coal.

I'll agree with you that the states with the most refineries will pollute a lot more than states without them, but when it comes to basic power provisions, there is no excuse.
Yes on moving towards cleaner technologies, no on the no excuse on per capita part.

Here's what I mean:

Hypothetical:
If Texas provides 50% of the oil to the states and the refining process is more polluting than other industries, shouldn't we consider adding the portion of pollution to the state which receives the oil?  Aka carbon credits?

But it does prove that if we can focus on improving the refining process, the benefit is greater...
2007-06-03 10:17:33
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6852|North Carolina

Pug wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

There's no excuse for any state to pollute more than others per capita when it comes to providing electricity for their own citizens.  Even the states that share power with others should make the move toward cleaner technologies than high-carbon coal.

I'll agree with you that the states with the most refineries will pollute a lot more than states without them, but when it comes to basic power provisions, there is no excuse.
Yes on moving towards cleaner technologies, no on the no excuse on per capita part.

Here's what I mean:

Hypothetical:
If Texas provides 50% of the oil to the states and the refining process is more polluting than other industries, shouldn't we consider adding the portion of pollution to the state which receives the oil?  Aka carbon credits?

But it does prove that if we can focus on improving the refining process, the benefit is greater...
I totally agree.  That's why I mentioned the coal-burning power plants as my main point of concern.  As for the refining thing, we need to make it cleaner as well, but that's going to take some time.
2007-06-03 10:20:10
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6989|Texas - Bigger than France
Now, apply the thinking globally - if another country gets benefit from a carbon crazy country...

But if we start thinking about this in the states, perhaps it will be easier for us to think about other countries in the same way...
2007-06-03 10:21:38
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6852|North Carolina

Pug wrote:

Now, apply the thinking globally - if another country gets benefit from a carbon crazy country...

But if we start thinking about this in the states, perhaps it will be easier for us to think about other countries in the same way...
True dat.

Every country has a part to play in this, but some countries are pulling more weight than others.  Two countries we've been letting off of the hook are China and India.  We should definitely focus more on cleaning them up as well.
2007-06-03 12:05:57
blisteringsilence
I'd rather hunt with Cheney than ride with Kennedy
+83|7148|Little Rock, Arkansas

Turquoise wrote:

There's no excuse for any state to pollute more than others per capita when it comes to providing electricity for their own citizens.  Even the states that share power with others should make the move toward cleaner technologies than high-carbon coal.

I'll agree with you that the states with the most refineries will pollute a lot more than states without them, but when it comes to basic power provisions, there is no excuse.
OK.

First and foremost, that's not how the power grid in the country works. It's not like the lines stop at the state border. Power generated in Wyoming is used across the country. And Wyoming sits on like 50% of the nation's coal reserves. They're in the process of tapping their natural gas reserves, but environmental groups are complaining because of the water that is produced in the drilling and pumping of natural gas. There is no perfect compromise where everyone is happy.

Second, we need to convince people that they have to quit bitching about birds and spoiling the view. Wind power is awesome, and it's better than anything else we have. Yes, there are lots of birds that are going to get chopped up in the blades. That's a tradeoff that we have to accept. The same with offshore wind farms. Yes, the beach view from your $5 million dollar house will now see beach, ocean, and a wind farm. You can't NIBMY things that don't pollute. Yes, the deserts outside of Las Vegas will be a great place for solar farms, when the panels get to the point that their cost doesn't outweigh their efficiency. But the nation's electricity can't all be generated outside of Sin City.

You want the real solution? Transition the US from 120 volt power to 220. It cuts consumption by about half, up front.

 

Pages: 1

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard