One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Termites Emit More Greenhouse Gases than Coal Plants!
Page <prev 2 of 2
Dec 26, 2014 10:57:59   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Turd and puss Bob should just post pics back and forth that way both i***ts would be happy.
no propaganda please wrote:
The turd has been informed of that by at least a dozen people, but that would just get in the way of his moronic posts, so why should he let facts get in his way?

Reply
Dec 26, 2014 12:37:37   #
Pulfnick Loc: Knoxville, TN
 
Coos Bay Tom wrote:
The termite mounds in South America and Africa are green house gas producers. I knew that from High school science. Coal can be used very efficiently with modern technology. that is a fact also. Should the government subsidize the coal industry to keep it working? We did it with the railroads and the Oil industry. So should Coal companies and power plants get big money from the government to subsidize their operations? that is my question.


G***n e****y is highly dependent on subsidies by government supporting ridiculous, highly uneconomical, irrational schemes. Think ethanol in gasoline, solar energy companies, ugly windmills, etc. But oil??? You've got that bassakwards. Governments all over the world plunder oil companies, not subsidize them.

Reply
Dec 26, 2014 18:21:54   #
peter11937 Loc: NYS
 
Note the "true believers" never ever tell you that water vapor accounts for 95% of the so called "green house effect" and CO2 less than 4%. Never mention that as CO2 volume rises its' effect tapers off because it only intercepts near infra red wavelengths, that's low energy, and when it releases the energy half or more is radiated into space. That Earth has had CO2 levels in the geological past at 8,000 ppm , now it is 380-400 ppm, with no ill effect. The hysteria the pol's are trying to gin up is a thinly veiled attempt to centralize power.
BTW, the "wetlands" we call vital give off more CO2 than all human industry. Is industry any less vital than wetlands?

Reply
 
 
Dec 26, 2014 22:20:42   #
rolse
 
tdsrnest wrote:
Take your foolish article and put it where the sun don't shine. I can't understand the foolishness of the right Termites my that just the i***tic way the right thinks


Right wing hell! Anyone with half an ounce of sense knows that people like you are so damned stupid that it's a wonder you can still breathe. I love the picture of the cooling towers. The "pollutant" you imply is coming from the towers is pure water in a low temperature form of steam. There hasn't been a stack in the United States from any industry of any kind belching smoke like that one in your picture for well over thirty years. I am old enough to remember when a lot of them did, and even then, the bodies weren't lying in the streets, and the scientists were concerned that the smog would make the climate colder. Anyone remember that BS? The carbon dioxide thing is so preposterous that even a third grade 8 year old would laugh him or her self sick if they weren't dumbed down in our government jail/schools. CO2 is heavier than "air", less than one percent of the atmosphere, colorless at usual temperatures at the earth's surface, and odorless. Suggesting that it will "rise" through the atmospheric gasses that are less dense than it is and prevent the escape of heat, or form a blanket at the earth's surface to perform that same function, are both so absurd that such claims could only gain credibility among a population that has created the world's largest insane asylum. As for c*****e c****e, I suspect that it changed at times before there were people, has changed since there have been people and probably will keep right on changing, even if we get stupid enough to k**l ourselves off to please our would be masters and take them with us.

Reply
Dec 26, 2014 22:54:28   #
peter11937 Loc: NYS
 
The CO2 is a fraction lf one percent, and humanity adds a small fraction of that. Yet, withoutCO2 at over 180 ppm, we'd all die. We're at 380 to 400 ppm, and that is why tree growth is as strong as it s. Ideal would be about 1,200 ppm, but that's not likely, as green plants would take it up and make bigger crops and trees with it, lowering the levels after a few decades, It would not warm the Earth much, certainly not enough to melt ice at either pole. It would take an increase of about 100 deg, F to warm Antarctica enough to cause noticeable melt, and at worst, we might be looking a 2F or less more.

Reply
Dec 26, 2014 23:58:06   #
BigMike Loc: yerington nv
 
JMHO wrote:
Buried deep in the archives of The New York Times is an article about termites. We have a h**e-love relationship with the little creatures. We h**e them because they can turn a house constructed from wood into saw dust without a homeowner ever knowing it.

Watch a show like “Flip or Flop” on HGTV. It seems like Tarek and Christina El Moussa are always buying homes that have extensive termite damage. There's an entire industry dev**ed to k*****g termites and insuring that they don't return to wreck havoc on our homes.

We love them because they turn discarded wood products into compost, enriching the soil. If there were no termites we would be living in a forest of dead trees all around us.

A fundamental law is that nothing is ever destroyed. When termites consume wood and vegetable matter, they turn it into energy, heat, and gaseous byproducts like carbon dioxide and methane – dreaded greenhouse gases.

They are by definition some of the biggest polluters on the planet.

The following is from a 1982 New York Times article “Termite Gas Exceeds Smokestack Pollution”:

“For several years scientists have been warning that carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere by increased burning of fuel is likely to alter world climates, like a greenhouse, by inhibiting the escape of heat into outer space.

“Now researchers report that termites, digesting vegetable matter on a global basis, produce more than twice as much carbon dioxide as all the world's smokestacks.

“Termite gas production has become particularly high, the researchers say, because widespread clearing of land has offered them abundant food in the debris of felled forests. By digesting this debris, they are adding not only carbon dioxide but also methane to the atmosphere. Other researchers have found that methane in the atmosphere is increasing 2 percent a year.

“The high level of termite gas production is reported in the Nov. 5 issue of the journal Science. The authors measured termite gas production inside laboratory jars. In Guatemala forests, they enclosed a huge arboreal termite nest in a Teflon bag to confirm that the insects were prolific producers of methane.”

Termite “polluters” are only one source of such gases. Every living creature emits carbon dioxide and methane — even humans. Then there are the cows that are constantly belching and passing gas.

Some cows are now wearing back packs — "fartpacks" — to capture their emissions.

Let’s not forget volcanoes.

“Another author of the report, Patrick R. Zimmerman of the atmospheric center in Boulder, said that plant respiration and decay added 10 to 15 times as much carbon dioxide to the air as termites.”

Let’s not let the EPA find this 32-year article. It might get them thinking on how much more they can regulate our world into oblivion.

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/19337/termites-emit-greenhouse-gases-coal-plants/#GbeeKSTjEi9BeWGm.99
Buried deep in the archives of The New York Times ... (show quote)


We may be guilty of a couple percentage points of c*****e c****e, but it's hard to tell since the climate has always and will always change. It's sure not worth going into panic mode over. Seawalls, levees and desalination plants will help a lot more than all the hare-brained environmentalist whacko schemes put together.!

Reply
Dec 27, 2014 00:01:11   #
BigMike Loc: yerington nv
 
tdsrnest wrote:
Take your foolish article and put it where the sun don't shine. I can't understand the foolishness of the right Termites my that just the i***tic way the right thinks


How do you know termites aren't a big part of the equation? I remember reading that the world's cattle expel something like 600 billion cubic feet of methane a year. That's a lot of gas! :lol:

Reply
 
 
Dec 27, 2014 03:28:09   #
Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon
 
Pulfnick wrote:
G***n e****y is highly dependent on subsidies by government supporting ridiculous, highly uneconomical, irrational schemes. Think ethanol in gasoline, solar energy companies, ugly windmills, etc. But oil??? You've got that bassakwards. Governments all over the world plunder oil companies, not subsidize them.
Oil companys do not pay taxes in the USA though the products they make are taxed several ways and passed to the consumer. I really do think Coal plants and the industry should be subsidized. Coal can be burned super clean and people with familys need jobs.

Reply
Dec 27, 2014 19:11:46   #
Pulfnick Loc: Knoxville, TN
 
Coos Bay Tom wrote:
Oil companys do not pay taxes in the USA though the products they make are taxed several ways and passed to the consumer. I really do think Coal plants and the industry should be subsidized. Coal can be burned super clean and people with familys need jobs.


I suggest you tell that to the oil companies and negotiate a fee for applying your expertise to eliminate all the massive taxes oil companies do pay!! I'm certain you will be highly rewarded if - if you have even a vague clue and enlighten those nasty oil companies so they can save many billions of dollars.

Reply
Dec 27, 2014 19:30:23   #
JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida
 
Where do these knuckleheads like Tom get their info? Amazing what they will believe.
Pulfnick wrote:
I suggest you tell that to the oil companies and negotiate a fee for applying your expertise to eliminate all the massive taxes oil companies do pay!! I'm certain you will be highly rewarded if - if you have even a vague clue and enlighten those nasty oil companies so they can save many billions of dollars.

Reply
Dec 27, 2014 20:28:24   #
BigMike Loc: yerington nv
 
Coos Bay Tom wrote:
Oil companys do not pay taxes in the USA though the products they make are taxed several ways and passed to the consumer. I really do think Coal plants and the industry should be subsidized. Coal can be burned super clean and people with familys need jobs.


No industry, bank, corporation or foreign country should be subsidized. It's not the government's job to pick the winners and losers. Neither should any of those be taxed and regulated to death.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.