Maybe 'hijacked" is a little strong but a coal train was stopped and boarded by a group of climate change protesters. There is video of the protesters starting to unload the coal right on the tracks. I’m guessing they didn’t get to far. Its quite an undertaking when all you have is a few shovels.
Are the protesters misinformed or is this a sign of the future? Will coal fired power plants come under increasing political pressure from different action groups?
If not coal, then what do we get power from? Its cheap, they have scrubbers for the emissions. We have come a long way in emissions controll. I nor hardly anyone else in the northern hemisphere want to go back to living like in the days of “Little House on the Prarie”.
Well, I hope that they don’t think that they are the first ones to pull a stunt like this. This wasn’t an unusual thing to happen in the U.S. People would find a way to stop a coal train and once stopped climb on board and start shoveling coal to heat their homes with.
The same thing happened with the old open auto-racks. They would climb on board and strip parts off of the cars. That’s why you have covered auto -racks these days.
I would not say that hijack is too strong of a term. In fact the protesters are hijacking a lot more than just a coal train. Whether they are misinformed or not depends on your viewpoint. But it is shaping up to be perhaps one of the biggest tugs of war that the world has ever known. The green protesters won’t get far shoveling coal out of trains, but that is only symbolism for what they are really shoveling, which is the politics of climate change. And in that arena, I think they are winning the contest. They have won a big battle in the recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court declaring that CO2 is a pollutant.
To general perception, it may seem like there have been no consequences of the CO2 ruling, but the implications of the decision are so vast that it will take a few years for them to develop. I think we will look back on it as the point where we made a u-turn unless we can find a way to eliminate CO2 other than not producing it in the first place.
And in this country protestors have managed to close down most of the nations Nuclear Power Plants. Just across the short channel from where they protested is France where 90% of their power comes from Nuclear Power Plants. It has proven to be the cleanest of all power sources with the smallest footprint possible. The dams have proven to actually be the cheapest source of power but protestors are growing in complaits against them and some of these have even been removed.
I have energy efficient lights in every fixture in my apartment, energy saving appliances throughout and most of these I put in at my own expense. When I shopped for a big screen HD television I shopped for the most energy efficient on the market and after comparing dozens of models I purchased the most energy efficient. Inspite of all of my personal energy saving devises my PG&E bill has doubled in one year.
When Rancho Seco the nuclear power plant was still open my energy bills were one quarter what they are today and I had nothing in my same apartment that was energy efficient.
It would be a good start if the government reopened all of the mothballed nuclear plants and built an addditional thirty across the country. The railroads would scream bloody murder over the loss of coal hauling revenue, not to mention the coal producers. We can’t continue to build coal burning plants and not suffer the consequences. A good start would to be to reopen Alcatraz in San Francisco Bay to house all of the ACLU lawyers.
All these ECO Freaks don’t know what there talkin about, there is no such thing as global warming. The earth goes though cycles it just happens that we are going though a warming cycle right now. It funny to me that all these enviromentalist are saying the poler ice can is melting and the glaicers on greenland are melting, well here something for everyone to think about. When the Nords sailed across the pond they landed on Greenland and it was Green and lush, and then the earth went into a cool cycle and was cover with snow. I read something about a year ago about one of the glaciers in Greenland, had receeded and do you know what they found. a village and it had artifacts from the vikings that date back before Columbus. But we here anymore about this. NO because they don’t want us to. That would mean that they are wrong and there knowing they could do, and for some people that would be unbearable. another point I would like to make is why are we only hearing about the arctic, what the antarctic. Maybe because the antarctic is growing, and that doesn’t line up with there thinking. besides with what we have lost in the arctic, Florida and Louisanna should be underwater by now. As for burning coal we should keep using it until something better comes along, and nuclear is not the answer. We as a human race we don’t produce nearly as much CO2 or SO2 as nature does. Here another Question how many cubic tons of Sulfur Dioxide and Carbon Dioxide is the volcanos on the big island of Hawaii are producing a day or that matter the ever volcano in the world. another question is how many cubic ton of Carbon Dioxide is produced when then is a forest/grass fire? In truth natures scrubber system is the trees and plant and that why God put them here____. Our father in heaven would not put created coal if we were n
Wow, if you’re serious then I feel sorry for you. Global Warming is real, and today’s climate change was predicted 25 years ago by leading scientists throughout the developed world.
Why don’t you use the brain God gave you and do some real research on your own. You may want to consider alternate news sources such as, Scientific American, U.S. News and World Report, and the WSJ. Do yourself a favor and stay away from Rush Limbaugh and FOX News for a month and try something objective. You might be surprised what you will find when you open up your closed and biased mind.
And no, I’m not an ECO freak: I support the responsible use of coal and would welcome the development of nuclear power plants in my backyard. But to stick your head in the sand and pretend that today’s global warming is just a cyclic event unrelated to human activity is to behave as if stupidity were a virtue.
I won’t debate whether it’s real or not because it is fruitless. The battle is over and we will be moving forward as though manmade climate change is happening. However, I will submit this:
A very small percentage of those who believe it is happening are prepared or willing to make the sacrifices that will be necessary to forestall the very calamity they have defined. There is a huge disconnect between the sacrifice of nearly eliminating CO2 output, and the little knickknack remedies such as changing light bulbs and keeping your tires properly inflated. Saying over and over, “We just need to do a lot of little things” does not make it true. It has been sold as a big problem, and it requires a big solution.
But global warming HAS been a cyclic event ever since the start of recorded history. It tends to run in approximately 300 year cycles. The last cooling one ended about 1850 and its been slowly warming ever since. The warmest period recorded for earth was approximately 600-950 AD. No man-made polution problems back then. The one thing that has been consistent when global warming has occurred is increased sunspot activity. Also, we now know that the temperatures are slowly warming on the other planets in our solar system that we are exploring and there’s no evidence of carbon activity on them
The big unknown is what impact if any modern activity will have on this global warming cycle. No one knows that for sure and the evidence so far is mixed. I have a professor friend who is one of the US’s leading climate researchers. First, he says to not pay any attention to the people that spout off that all the scientist agree on global warming and its cause. Per him, there’s really only about 100 US scientists who really are global warming experts and their views vary all over the place. They do agree the earth is experiencing it but there’s widespread disagreement as to the extent its caused by natural causes and by man-made causes. Second, his biggest gripe is that so many politicans, individuals, and news media have embraced Al Gore and company to the extent that any unbiased research is getting harder and harder to do and results that contradict the environmentalists’ theories are ignored and the scientists attacked as quacks. (Good example: see the previous email attacking Fox news becaused they’ve reported some of the research findings that contradict the environmentalists’ “gospel”.) I would add that he is not a big fan of Gore’s and his bo
It is interesting that these climate campaigners got as far as they did without police showing up. You would think the police would be on the scene by the time the climate campaigners finished making arrangements with the signalmen working for the railroad as is mentioned in the article. I wonder how this protest concluded.
I am one of thoe pseudo-scientists you make reference to. I am now retired and no longer involved in any kind of scientific studies; however, the chemistry behind global warming is rock solid. Statistics can be used to support just about anything, but you should know that this period of climate change is not just some cyclic event that is repeating itself.
If you would like to do something interesting, research how many barrels of oil are burned on our planet every single day, 365 days a year. Hint: the answer will be in the millions and there are 42 gallons of crude oil per barrel. And then ask yourself, can we really do this for decades and decades without any consequence? Think about it and use some common sense and logic and ask yourself how long can we continue to use this planet as a garbage pit.
I know the protesters’ intentions were good, and their hearts are definately in the right place, but this was not exactly the brightest way of going about this. Whoever the coal was being delivered to, wouldn’t they be able to bring lawsuits for all of the lost coal and the delay in the arrival of it?
You’re kidding, right? (sorry for dping, just now saw this) Look at the weather across the Midwestern United States right now. We’ve basically had severe storms every day for the past few weeks. That’s because there’s a mass of warm air coming up from the Gulf of Mexico stalling the cold front right over us. Tell me that’s normal. NEWS FLASH!! It’s not. It’s been there for God knows how long. Something seriously wacko is going on, and you’re refusing to accept this why?
Tire inflation is perhaps a percent or two difference in your car gas consumption, and if you are using electricity for a main source of heat, such as domestic hot water or space heating, whether through resistance or heat pump, there is not much you can do in a cold climate unless you want to risk freezing to death (hypothermia, and this will be a real concern for those having trouble this coming winter paying for $4+/gallon home heating oil and may be dialing thermostats way down because they lack the money).
But there is enormous potential for cutting way back on home electricity consumption by the combined influence of “knickknack remedies such as changing light bulbs.”
Our local power company Madison Gas and Electric has a Web site where you can find the electric and gas usage of anyone in their service area if you know the street address. I compiled my own list of monthly electric usage of members of the faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, leaving off some newly hired assistant professors living in apartments or with unlisted home addresses – the entries on my list are all for stand-alone houses.
The low was 236 kWHr/month, the median 729 kWHr/month. The high of 3789 kWHr a month was for the outgoing UW Chancelor, who happens to be a faculty member of ECE. You can excuse the Chancelor living in the Chancelor’s residence because it is this massive old structure, and I suppose the Chancelor has to leave lights on a lot because numerous official receptions and other hostings of university visitors takes place in that residence. But it may say something about the UW, being at the forefr
whats funny…Carl Webster researcher at UofM did a study last year…im looking for the link…but in his study he examined 150 years worth of New York Times London Times and other front page stories of leading news papers …low and behold…every 25 to 30 years headlines read “WORLD ENDING YEAR LONG WINTERS SOON”…next 25 years “WORLD ENDING SUN GETTING HOTER”…point is for the last 150 years every 25 to 30 years someone comes up with a “therory” to explain hot summers and cold winters…guess what SUMMERS ARE HOT AND WINTERS ARE COLD,until the brainyacks come up with a time machine to go back and actully record things from 200 years ago to compare with today its all just a “therory”…some believe it…the ones that buy $40 light bulbs and pump $4 gas into their “Hybrid”…some dont…IMHO its just another scam to get mush minded sheeple to buy $40 light bulbs “for the good of the Earth”…for every “study” showing climate change is man made theres 5 that say it aint…funny thing is the ones that say it aint are “ridiculed” and pushed aside by todays liberal big dollar press…they cant sell $40 light bulbs if theres news stories about the farce of global warming…heck i remember the big scare in the mid 70’s…remember the “new ice age coming by 2000?”… i do …it was a joke then and its a joke now…of course i dont mean to detract from what anyone wants to believe after all this is the U.S.of A. and we are all intitled to our own beliefs and opinions [:D]
as far as the original post…is hyjacking a coal train to pollute the ground by dumping coal any different then the green goobers that burn new homes by the 100’s in California “to stop over population”?
just another quicky…things are bad in Iowa and other places…our thoughts and prayers go out to all those affected…but what about '93?..same weather pattern then…now 15 years later another …and during the inbetween years?..things were pretty “normal”…who here has lived in Iowa since say…1850…and can say “yup things were way different then i tell ya…we never had tornadas and the rainfall was perrrrfect fer mah crops”…so what is realy “normal” for the area?..
Weather has always behaved by moving from one extreme to another. From these extremes, you can calculate the average, which by definition has no extremes. So, although you can calculate an average, that does not mean that weather should be average. In reality, it seldom is behaving at its average.
To help advance the climate change agenda, however, the meaning of average weather has been hijacked to mean normal weather, as though any departure from the average is abnormal or even extreme. This concept of extreme weather is then used to advance the premise that it is evidence of man’s impact on the climate. And of course, since weather is seldom average, this new definition of terms makes for a lot of extreme weather. So, just because ABC, CBS, and NBC spend 15 minutes each night whipping up hysteria over extreme, wild, wicked, and whacky weather, it does not prove that anything is any different today than any other time in the history of weather.
I am not sure what a “pseudo-scientist” is – what journals do they publish in? And if such a person submits a manuscript, what does the review feedback look like? Maybe something like this.
