Mr. Asthma » Asthma Children » Scientists Say Toxic Cloud Impacting Economies World Health
Scientists Say Toxic Cloud Impacting Economies World Health
Question:
This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for us when we finally do get our act together. http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn
Response:
I belive this is a vast cloud of smog wafting over asia. It illustrates why it is folly to exempt China and developing countries from the Kyoto protocalls. Bushie, bless his little heart, opted the US out of the Kyoto agreement probably for selfish corporate reasons, but at some point we all will have to join. It’s very important that the developing world, China, India, Brazil and the third world countries adopt some controls as well. Obviously we are all in this together and certain countries should not be given a pass and allowed to polute just because they are poor and under developed. Dr. Bob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > us when we finally do get our act together. > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn
Response:
> This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > us when we finally do get our act together. > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn
That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; install more insulation in buildings to keep heat in and out. Design towns and cities, or extensions to existing cities for people rather than cars. All simple stuff that can be implemented quite quickly with great effect.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > us when we finally do get our act together. > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; install more > insulation in buildings to keep heat in and out. Design towns and cities, > or extensions to existing cities for people rather than cars. All simple > stuff that can be implemented quite quickly with great effect.
You’ve got my vote! Don W.
Response:
> I belive this is a vast cloud of smog wafting over asia. It illustrates > why it is folly to exempt China and developing countries from the Kyoto > protocalls.
Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. — Tumbleweed Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
> That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel;
Ever been to China? Most of that stuff is from burning locally mined COAL. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany — "it’s the network…" "The Journey is the reward" Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com 9-11 United we Stand
Response:
> That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; > Ever been to China? Most of that stuff > is from burning locally mined COAL.
Which is a filthy fossil fuel.
Response:
They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. Dr. Bob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. > — > Tumbleweed > Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
> > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; > Ever been to China? Most of that stuff is from burning locally mined COAL.
Thank you for pointing that out. What many younger readers fail to relize is the the gross levels of pollution existing in many parts of Asia, including the Indian Subcontinent, were terrible even before the industrial age. Primitive practices die hard. As early as the middle 1800s it was said that you could navigate to India using your nose alone from as far at sea as 100-Nautical Miles. I find it comforting to realize that the very least polluted parts of the world today are generally the most industrialized, simply because modern technology at least attempts to deal with the problem. Harry C.
Response:
> > > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution > at > > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in > vehicles > > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; > Ever been to China? Most of that stuff > is from burning locally mined COAL. > Which is a filthy fossil fuel.
Rumor has it that those parts of the world also use large quantities of both charcoal and coke, which while relatively clean burning on their own, and each incredibly filthy (with respect to air pollution) to produce (except when produced using high-tech systems, which are generally cost prohibitive to employ in 3rd World nations. Then too, consider what industries employ the largest quantities of coke, and the terrible air pollution they generally produce! Then too, China has worked long an hard to dominate world market for iron and steel, plus heavy industry. This has its price. Ever been to Pittsburgh? It’s a really nice place to visit, now that you can breathe there again. (If you do find yourself there, by all means visit the Allegheny Brewery. This is a great German restaurant with a micro-brewery that produces the best beer I have ever tasted — Something they call "Allegheny Dark Pilsner". This beer is so good that you’ll remember it long after you have forgotten anything else about Pittsburgh! ‘Nuff said, and they don’t bottle it, although they do bottle "Sam Adams.") Harry C.
Response:
Reduce the amount of methane burned in large scale power systems. Since these sets of products are not related except within a certain type of application, any change in the applications mix could have this effect. Consider reducing the coal burning power plants total fuel consumed. This results in brown outs. When folk really need the power they will run their diesel generators producing less total power and a little less CO2, but much higher emissions of smoke, SO2, etc. Forcing highly efficient and relatively clean plants in high tech locations to reduce CO2 can result in shifting demand to low tech plants that produce more pollution while reducing only marginally the CO2 totals. I thought that, apart from the steel industry, much of the smoke found in the Asian countries was from forest and crop land burning? True, or not?
> They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 > but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. > Dr. Bob > Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. > — > Tumbleweed > Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to
newsgroups)
Response:
> They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 > but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. > Dr. Bob
Yes, there are many. Besides which, you are confusing two things, what the process for producing energy outputs in the way of CO2 and smog, and how much energy we produce in total. I could switch to a different process (or fuel) that resulted in less CO2 and smog, but increase the use of it, so that CO2 was higher overall, and smog still lower overall, compared to previously. This has happened in the West over the past 50 years for example. Which is why we produce more CO2 and less smog. But its perfectly possibly to produce the same amount (or maybe more) CO2, and less smog. You may even consume more energy (thus producing more CO2) to extract the particulates. Depends how you do it. — Tumbleweed Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > > us when we finally do get our act together. > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution > at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; install > more > insulation in buildings to keep heat in and out. Design towns and cities, > or extensions to existing cities for people rather than cars. All simple > stuff that can be implemented quite quickly with great effect. > You’ve got my vote!
As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. 50,000 people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst its banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, global warming is not just playing golf in January.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > > > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > > > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > > > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > > > us when we finally do get our act together. > > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn > > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution > at > > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in >vehicles > > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; install > more > > insulation in buildings to keep heat in and out. Design towns and >cities, > > or extensions to existing cities for people rather than cars. All >simple > > stuff that can be implemented quite quickly with great effect. > You’ve got my vote! >As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. 50,000 >people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst its >banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, >global warming is not just playing golf in January.
Of course every weather anomaly from now on is certainly the work of global warming. Riiiiggghhhtttt… Dave Head
Response:
> You’ve got my vote! > As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. 50,000 > people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst its > banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, > global warming is not just playing golf in January.
Indeed, these are the worst floods for 100 years. So according to your logic, global warming was worse 100 years ago since the floods were worse then? — Tumbleweed Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > You’ve got my vote! > As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. > 50,000 > people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst > its > banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, > global warming is not just playing golf in January. > Indeed, these are the worst floods for > 100 years. So according to your > logic, global warming was worse 100 > years ago since the floods were worse > then?
I’m, not sure if Prague has ever been flooded. Many places had floods 100s of years ago for sure. Since those floods, flood plains and other measures have been built that stopped the flooding. The rain is so torrential is saturates these measures. In short, the rain is worse than 100s of years ago.
Response:
> They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 > but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. > Dr. Bob > Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. > — > Tumbleweed > Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
IIRC, in London they had tremendous smog problems which would kill thousands when the weather was wrong. They switched to coke, which greatly reduced the problem. This reduces smog without reducing CO2, which would be much more expensive. Even if the only pollution control on the coke plant was a tall smokestack downwind from the city, it would be much better than burning coal in people’s kitchen ovens, like they do in China. — When you work, you create. When you win, you just take from the loser. For an explanation, see http://paulstudier.com/win
Response:
I think the flooding in the Czech Republic is more related to development and construction, than global warming. Each building, each parking lot, and every road, prevent ground absorption. When the 100 year rain comes, and you no longer have the 100 year watershed. The water has to go somewhere. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > You’ve got my vote! > > As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. > 50,000 > > people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst > its > > banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, > > global warming is not just playing golf in January. > Indeed, these are the worst floods for > 100 years. So according to your > logic, global warming was worse 100 > years ago since the floods were worse > then? > I’m, not sure if Prague has ever been flooded. Many places had floods 100s > of years ago for sure. Since those floods, flood plains and other measures > have been built that stopped the flooding. The rain is so torrential is > saturates these measures. In short, the rain is worse than 100s of years > ago.
– —- John B. Bahm, Network Specialist IBM Houston My views in no way reflect the views of my Company
Response:
Uh Huh, and how do they make coke? A tall smoke stack just puts the polution higher into the air so it will waft to Europe. The real thing that cleaned up London and surrounds was North Sea natural gas not coke. Also, steel making has largely left Europe and the US for that matter and now resides, guess where?, in China. Dr. Bob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 > but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. > Dr. Bob > > Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. > > — > > Tumbleweed > > Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to > newsgroups) > IIRC, in London they had tremendous smog problems > which would kill thousands when the weather was wrong. > They switched to coke, which greatly reduced the > problem. This reduces smog without reducing CO2, > which would be much more expensive. Even if the > only pollution control on the coke plant was a tall > smokestack downwind from the city, it would be > much better than burning coal in people’s kitchen > ovens, like they do in China. > — > When you work, you create. > When you win, you just take from the loser. > For an explanation, see http://paulstudier.com/win
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > As I write parts of Austria and the Czech > > > Republic are under water. 50,000 > > > people in Prague are being evacuated > > > as the Danube is expected to burst > > > its banks and destroy some of the > > > finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, > > > global warming is not just playing > > > golf in January. > > Indeed, these are the worst floods for > > 100 years. So according to your > > logic, global warming was worse 100 > > years ago since the floods were worse > > then? > I’m, not sure if Prague has ever been flooded. > Many places had floods 100s of years ago > for sure. Since those floods, flood plains > and other measures have been built that > stopped the flooding. The rain is so torrential is > saturates these measures. In short, the > rain is worse than 100s of years ago. > I think the flooding in the Czech Republic > is more related to development and > construction, than global warming. Each > building, each parking lot, and every road, prevent > ground absorption. When the 100 year rain > comes, and you no longer have the > 100 year watershed. The water has to > go somewhere.
< moved text down here where it should be > Watersheds have been built-in over the years. Houses and roads take little area in total – fly over a supposedly densely populated region and look down. Fly over London and the green below is phenomenal. In the UK with a population of over 60 million and an area of 60 million acres, only 7.5% of the land is actually built on including gardens. Claims of "concreting over the countryside" and "urban sprawl" are baseless when environmental aspects are viewed.
Response:
> Uh Huh, and how do they make coke? > A tall smoke stack just puts the > polution higher into the air so it will > waft to Europe. The real thing > that cleaned up London and surrounds > was North Sea natural gas
That make a big impact. > not coke.
The clean air acts came in, in the late 1940s early 1950s. A 1950 London smog killed 1000s. Smog is a mixture of SMoke and fOG, not car fumes. I experienced one SMOG as a kid. Not a nice experience as breathing was difficult, and you could not see your hand at the end of your arm. People would walk around with WW2 gas masks on, or make shift linen masks over their faces. Attempting to walk at night in a SMOG was suicidal. The UK led the world in air clean ups and cleaner fuels had to be used, including gas. Many of the houses built to replace Victorian slums and WW2 bombings had gas warm air heating; the first mass take up system in central heating in the UK. Locally burning coke, or types of coals that emitted less smoke, assisted in cleaning up the cities, yet the overall pollution was the same. The coke was an interim measure as town gas was already being taken up en-mass, with the by-product of town gas being coke for those still burning solid fuels. North Sea gas just made it that much cleaner all around and new emission standards are cleaning up the emissions on that too. More efficient boiler as condensing boilers are also contributing as less gas is used, so less emissions.
Response:
>> You’ve got my vote! >As I write parts of Austria and the Czech >Republic are under water. 50,000 >people in Prague are being evacuated >as the Danube is expected to burst its >banks and destroy some of the finest >Medieval buildings in Europe. So, >global warming is not just playing >golf in January. > Of course every weather anomaly from now on is certainly the work of > global warming. > Riiiiggghhhtttt…
No. It is the persistent sharp swings in weather patterns (lots of rain, too cold, too hot, too windy, etc) which is the result of global warming. The result in the UK is not getting very hot summers. It is wonderful today, however the UK summer has been abysmal overall; temperatures are increasing that is for sure. In the UK wind speeds are increasing at an alarming rate. The government is taking no notice and not uprating the building regs to ensure new homes and extensions are hurricane proof. We had a hurricane in the south east of England in 1987. Millions of tress were downed. The town of Seven Oaks in Kent is now only "Three Oaks", 4 of them were blown down after 1000 years. BTW, Dresden in Germany is flooded.
Response:
> Watersheds have been built-in over the years. Houses and roads take little > area in total – fly over a supposedly densely populated region and look > down. Fly over London and the green below is phenomenal. In the UK with a > population of over 60 million and an area of 60 million acres, only 7.5% of > the land is actually built on including gardens.
Just green isn’t good enough. The runoff increases 5-10x soon after a climax forest is cut down, even when new trees are allowed to grow. Apparently due to loss of equilibrium of dead tree roots and animal burrows. > Claims of "concreting over the countryside" and "urban sprawl" are baseless > when environmental aspects are viewed.
Studies I’ve seen suggest around half a climax hectare is lost per house, even where no concrete is involved.
Response:
> I think the flooding in the Czech Republic is more related to development and > construction, > than global warming. Each building, each parking lot, and every road, prevent > ground absorption. > When the 100 year rain comes, and you no longer have the 100 year watershed. > The water has to go somewhere.
Not to mention rivers turned into canals which channels water faster, numerous buildings whose rain water outfall rushes directly into waterways instead of via trees and the soil, etc. This may well be the worst floods ever in that part of the world, but to my info its not the worst rain ever. — Tumbleweed Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
> Watersheds have been built-in over the years. Houses and roads take little > area in total – fly over a supposedly densely populated region and look > down. Fly over London and the green below is phenomenal. In the UK with a > population of over 60 million and an area of 60 million acres, only 7.5% of > the land is actually built on including gardens. > Just green isn’t good enough. The runoff increases > 5-10x soon after a climax forest is cut down,
In areas where is little forest anyway, the impact must be minimal.
Response:
>> You’ve got my vote! >As I write parts of Austria and the Czech >Republic are under water. 50,000 >people in Prague are being evacuated >as the Danube is expected to burst its >banks and destroy some of the finest >Medieval buildings in Europe. So, >global warming is not just playing >golf in January. > Of course every weather anomaly from now on is certainly the work of > global warming. > Riiiiggghhhtttt…
No. It is the persistent sharp swings in weather patterns (lots of rain, too cold, too hot, too windy, etc) which is the result of global warming. The result in the UK is not getting very hot summers. It is wonderful today, however the UK summer has been abysmal overall; temperatures are increasing that is for sure. In the UK wind speeds are increasing at an alarming rate. The government is taking no notice and not uprating the building regs to ensure new homes and extensions are hurricane proof. We had a hurricane in the south east of England in 1987. Millions of tress were downed. The town of Seven Oaks in Kent is now only "Three Oaks", 4 of them were blown down after 1000 years. BTW, Dresden in Germany is flooded.
Response:
> Watersheds have been built-in over the years. Houses and roads take little > area in total – fly over a supposedly densely populated region and look > down. Fly over London and the green below is phenomenal. In the UK with a > population of over 60 million and an area of 60 million acres, only 7.5% of > the land is actually built on including gardens.
Just green isn’t good enough. The runoff increases 5-10x soon after a climax forest is cut down, even when new trees are allowed to grow. Apparently due to loss of equilibrium of dead tree roots and animal burrows. > Claims of "concreting over the countryside" and "urban sprawl" are baseless > when environmental aspects are viewed.
Studies I’ve seen suggest around half a climax hectare is lost per house, even where no concrete is involved.
Response:
> I think the flooding in the Czech Republic is more related to development and > construction, > than global warming. Each building, each parking lot, and every road, prevent > ground absorption. > When the 100 year rain comes, and you no longer have the 100 year watershed. > The water has to go somewhere.
Not to mention rivers turned into canals which channels water faster, numerous buildings whose rain water outfall rushes directly into waterways instead of via trees and the soil, etc. This may well be the worst floods ever in that part of the world, but to my info its not the worst rain ever. — Tumbleweed Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
> Watersheds have been built-in over the years. Houses and roads take little > area in total – fly over a supposedly densely populated region and look > down. Fly over London and the green below is phenomenal. In the UK with a > population of over 60 million and an area of 60 million acres, only 7.5% of > the land is actually built on including gardens. > Just green isn’t good enough. The runoff increases > 5-10x soon after a climax forest is cut down,
In areas where is little forest anyway, the impact must be minimal.
Response:
> Uh Huh, and how do they make coke? > A tall smoke stack just puts the > polution higher into the air so it will > waft to Europe. The real thing > that cleaned up London and surrounds > was North Sea natural gas
That make a big impact. > not coke.
The clean air acts came in, in the late 1940s early 1950s. A 1950 London smog killed 1000s. Smog is a mixture of SMoke and fOG, not car fumes. I experienced one SMOG as a kid. Not a nice experience as breathing was difficult, and you could not see your hand at the end of your arm. People would walk around with WW2 gas masks on, or make shift linen masks over their faces. Attempting to walk at night in a SMOG was suicidal. The UK led the world in air clean ups and cleaner fuels had to be used, including gas. Many of the houses built to replace Victorian slums and WW2 bombings had gas warm air heating; the first mass take up system in central heating in the UK. Locally burning coke, or types of coals that emitted less smoke, assisted in cleaning up the cities, yet the overall pollution was the same. The coke was an interim measure as town gas was already being taken up en-mass, with the by-product of town gas being coke for those still burning solid fuels. North Sea gas just made it that much cleaner all around and new emission standards are cleaning up the emissions on that too. More efficient boiler as condensing boilers are also contributing as less gas is used, so less emissions.
Response:
I think the flooding in the Czech Republic is more related to development and construction, than global warming. Each building, each parking lot, and every road, prevent ground absorption. When the 100 year rain comes, and you no longer have the 100 year watershed. The water has to go somewhere. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > You’ve got my vote! > > As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. > 50,000 > > people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst > its > > banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, > > global warming is not just playing golf in January. > Indeed, these are the worst floods for > 100 years. So according to your > logic, global warming was worse 100 > years ago since the floods were worse > then? > I’m, not sure if Prague has ever been flooded. Many places had floods 100s > of years ago for sure. Since those floods, flood plains and other measures > have been built that stopped the flooding. The rain is so torrential is > saturates these measures. In short, the rain is worse than 100s of years > ago.
– —- John B. Bahm, Network Specialist IBM Houston My views in no way reflect the views of my Company
Response:
Uh Huh, and how do they make coke? A tall smoke stack just puts the polution higher into the air so it will waft to Europe. The real thing that cleaned up London and surrounds was North Sea natural gas not coke. Also, steel making has largely left Europe and the US for that matter and now resides, guess where?, in China. Dr. Bob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 > but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. > Dr. Bob > > Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. > > — > > Tumbleweed > > Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to > newsgroups) > IIRC, in London they had tremendous smog problems > which would kill thousands when the weather was wrong. > They switched to coke, which greatly reduced the > problem. This reduces smog without reducing CO2, > which would be much more expensive. Even if the > only pollution control on the coke plant was a tall > smokestack downwind from the city, it would be > much better than burning coal in people’s kitchen > ovens, like they do in China. > — > When you work, you create. > When you win, you just take from the loser. > For an explanation, see http://paulstudier.com/win
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > As I write parts of Austria and the Czech > > > Republic are under water. 50,000 > > > people in Prague are being evacuated > > > as the Danube is expected to burst > > > its banks and destroy some of the > > > finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, > > > global warming is not just playing > > > golf in January. > > Indeed, these are the worst floods for > > 100 years. So according to your > > logic, global warming was worse 100 > > years ago since the floods were worse > > then? > I’m, not sure if Prague has ever been flooded. > Many places had floods 100s of years ago > for sure. Since those floods, flood plains > and other measures have been built that > stopped the flooding. The rain is so torrential is > saturates these measures. In short, the > rain is worse than 100s of years ago. > I think the flooding in the Czech Republic > is more related to development and > construction, than global warming. Each > building, each parking lot, and every road, prevent > ground absorption. When the 100 year rain > comes, and you no longer have the > 100 year watershed. The water has to > go somewhere.
< moved text down here where it should be > Watersheds have been built-in over the years. Houses and roads take little area in total – fly over a supposedly densely populated region and look down. Fly over London and the green below is phenomenal. In the UK with a population of over 60 million and an area of 60 million acres, only 7.5% of the land is actually built on including gardens. Claims of "concreting over the countryside" and "urban sprawl" are baseless when environmental aspects are viewed.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > > us when we finally do get our act together. > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution > at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; install > more > insulation in buildings to keep heat in and out. Design towns and cities, > or extensions to existing cities for people rather than cars. All simple > stuff that can be implemented quite quickly with great effect. > You’ve got my vote!
As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. 50,000 people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst its banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, global warming is not just playing golf in January.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > > > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > > > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > > > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > > > us when we finally do get our act together. > > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn > > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution > at > > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in >vehicles > > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; install > more > > insulation in buildings to keep heat in and out. Design towns and >cities, > > or extensions to existing cities for people rather than cars. All >simple > > stuff that can be implemented quite quickly with great effect. > You’ve got my vote! >As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. 50,000 >people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst its >banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, >global warming is not just playing golf in January.
Of course every weather anomaly from now on is certainly the work of global warming. Riiiiggghhhtttt… Dave Head
Response:
> You’ve got my vote! > As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. 50,000 > people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst its > banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, > global warming is not just playing golf in January.
Indeed, these are the worst floods for 100 years. So according to your logic, global warming was worse 100 years ago since the floods were worse then? — Tumbleweed Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > You’ve got my vote! > As I write parts of Austria and the Czech Republic are under water. > 50,000 > people in Prague are being evacuated as the Danube is expected to burst > its > banks and destroy some of the finest Medieval buildings in Europe. So, > global warming is not just playing golf in January. > Indeed, these are the worst floods for > 100 years. So according to your > logic, global warming was worse 100 > years ago since the floods were worse > then?
I’m, not sure if Prague has ever been flooded. Many places had floods 100s of years ago for sure. Since those floods, flood plains and other measures have been built that stopped the flooding. The rain is so torrential is saturates these measures. In short, the rain is worse than 100s of years ago.
Response:
> They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 > but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. > Dr. Bob > Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. > — > Tumbleweed > Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
IIRC, in London they had tremendous smog problems which would kill thousands when the weather was wrong. They switched to coke, which greatly reduced the problem. This reduces smog without reducing CO2, which would be much more expensive. Even if the only pollution control on the coke plant was a tall smokestack downwind from the city, it would be much better than burning coal in people’s kitchen ovens, like they do in China. — When you work, you create. When you win, you just take from the loser. For an explanation, see http://paulstudier.com/win
Response:
Reduce the amount of methane burned in large scale power systems. Since these sets of products are not related except within a certain type of application, any change in the applications mix could have this effect. Consider reducing the coal burning power plants total fuel consumed. This results in brown outs. When folk really need the power they will run their diesel generators producing less total power and a little less CO2, but much higher emissions of smoke, SO2, etc. Forcing highly efficient and relatively clean plants in high tech locations to reduce CO2 can result in shifting demand to low tech plants that produce more pollution while reducing only marginally the CO2 totals. I thought that, apart from the steel industry, much of the smoke found in the Asian countries was from forest and crop land burning? True, or not?
> They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 > but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. > Dr. Bob > Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. > — > Tumbleweed > Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to
newsgroups)
Response:
> They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 > but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. > Dr. Bob
Yes, there are many. Besides which, you are confusing two things, what the process for producing energy outputs in the way of CO2 and smog, and how much energy we produce in total. I could switch to a different process (or fuel) that resulted in less CO2 and smog, but increase the use of it, so that CO2 was higher overall, and smog still lower overall, compared to previously. This has happened in the West over the past 50 years for example. Which is why we produce more CO2 and less smog. But its perfectly possibly to produce the same amount (or maybe more) CO2, and less smog. You may even consume more energy (thus producing more CO2) to extract the particulates. Depends how you do it. — Tumbleweed Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
> > > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution > at > > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in > vehicles > > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; > Ever been to China? Most of that stuff > is from burning locally mined COAL. > Which is a filthy fossil fuel.
Rumor has it that those parts of the world also use large quantities of both charcoal and coke, which while relatively clean burning on their own, and each incredibly filthy (with respect to air pollution) to produce (except when produced using high-tech systems, which are generally cost prohibitive to employ in 3rd World nations. Then too, consider what industries employ the largest quantities of coke, and the terrible air pollution they generally produce! Then too, China has worked long an hard to dominate world market for iron and steel, plus heavy industry. This has its price. Ever been to Pittsburgh? It’s a really nice place to visit, now that you can breathe there again. (If you do find yourself there, by all means visit the Allegheny Brewery. This is a great German restaurant with a micro-brewery that produces the best beer I have ever tasted — Something they call "Allegheny Dark Pilsner". This beer is so good that you’ll remember it long after you have forgotten anything else about Pittsburgh! ‘Nuff said, and they don’t bottle it, although they do bottle "Sam Adams.") Harry C.
Response:
They go hand in hand. Can you suggest a process that would reduce CO2 but not particulates, NOx, Ozone, CO, S02, etc. Dr. Bob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. > — > Tumbleweed > Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
> > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; > Ever been to China? Most of that stuff is from burning locally mined COAL.
Thank you for pointing that out. What many younger readers fail to relize is the the gross levels of pollution existing in many parts of Asia, including the Indian Subcontinent, were terrible even before the industrial age. Primitive practices die hard. As early as the middle 1800s it was said that you could navigate to India using your nose alone from as far at sea as 100-Nautical Miles. I find it comforting to realize that the very least polluted parts of the world today are generally the most industrialized, simply because modern technology at least attempts to deal with the problem. Harry C.
Response:
> That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; > Ever been to China? Most of that stuff > is from burning locally mined COAL.
Which is a filthy fossil fuel.
Response:
> I belive this is a vast cloud of smog wafting over asia. It illustrates > why it is folly to exempt China and developing countries from the Kyoto > protocalls.
Kyoto is about potentially marginally reducing CO2 emissions, not smog. — Tumbleweed Remove my socks before replying (but no email reply necessary to newsgroups)
Response:
> That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel;
Ever been to China? Most of that stuff is from burning locally mined COAL. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany — "it’s the network…" "The Journey is the reward" Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com 9-11 United we Stand
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > us when we finally do get our act together. > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn > That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at > local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles > by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; install more > insulation in buildings to keep heat in and out. Design towns and cities, > or extensions to existing cities for people rather than cars. All simple > stuff that can be implemented quite quickly with great effect.
You’ve got my vote! Don W.
Response:
This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for us when we finally do get our act together. http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn
Response:
I belive this is a vast cloud of smog wafting over asia. It illustrates why it is folly to exempt China and developing countries from the Kyoto protocalls. Bushie, bless his little heart, opted the US out of the Kyoto agreement probably for selfish corporate reasons, but at some point we all will have to join. It’s very important that the developing world, China, India, Brazil and the third world countries adopt some controls as well. Obviously we are all in this together and certain countries should not be given a pass and allowed to polute just because they are poor and under developed. Dr. Bob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > us when we finally do get our act together. > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn
Response:
> This is an interesting article. It’s no wonder after reading > something like this that so many of our children nowadays are on > inhalers for asthma. This is scary stuff and even though I know many > people are working on these issues, I hope it will not be too late for > us when we finally do get our act together. > http://www.msnbc.com/news/792811.asp?pne=msn
That pollution is on a continental level. To prevent it, stop pollution at local levels. Like stop burning dirty fossils fuels so heavily in vehicles by using cleaner compressed natural gas or LPG and bio-diesel; install more insulation in buildings to keep heat in and out. Design towns and cities, or extensions to existing cities for people rather than cars. All simple stuff that can be implemented quite quickly with great effect.