REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

human actions, global climate change, global human solutions

POSTED BY: 1KIKI
UPDATED: Thursday, October 31, 2024 14:25
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 24626
PAGE 4 of 19

Thursday, June 23, 2022 9:26 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Wall Street Journal asked the question: What is the Cost to Reduce Global Warming?
$131 Trillion spent between 2021 until 2050 Is One Answer.

If you look over the costs for next 30 years, and divide $131 trillion by 30 then round that number up to $5 trillion per year. Funny thing about that number because governments around the world spent $5.9 trillion subsidizing fossil fuels in 2020. Maybe governments should NOT subsidize fossil fuels, but rather subsidize reducing global warming? It would be cheaper, but then gasoline would get more expensive. More expensive is the only way, other than making gasoline engines illegal, to reduce the burning of gasoline.
https://e360.yale.edu/digest/fossil-fuels-received-5-9-trillion-in-sub
sidies-in-2020-report-finds



The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 8, 2022 1:59 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Start-up NET Power has developed technology that differs from traditional power stations. It burns natural gas with oxygen instead of air and drives a turbine with high pressure carbon dioxide instead of steam. The additional CO2 is captured for storage.

NET Power recently connected a 50MW demonstration plant to the Texas electricity grid. If its emissions were to be permanently sequestered, the plant might have a carbon footprint no bigger than a solar farm.

https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2022/06/zero-emissions-natural-ga
s-may-be-possible/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 8, 2022 2:53 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Start-up NET Power has developed technology that differs from traditional power stations. It burns natural gas with oxygen instead of air and drives a turbine with high pressure carbon dioxide instead of steam. The additional CO2 is captured for storage.

NET Power recently connected a 50MW demonstration plant to the Texas electricity grid. If its emissions were to be permanently sequestered, the plant might have a carbon footprint no bigger than a solar farm.

https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2022/06/zero-emissions-natural-ga
s-may-be-possible/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
Sounds interesting. I'll have to look up the technical details bc I have quite a few questions!

Driving a turbine with high-pressure CO2 has got to be step 5 of a series of power-extraction steps. Clearly, burning natgas with O2 generates a huge amount of heat, especially since there's no N2 to dilute the heat, so there has got to be a traditional turbine as part of electrical generation. That can be made more efficient by using "waste heat"" to run either a traditional boiler-type steam turbine, or a Stirling engine.

Also, concentrating CO2 and O2 are energy-intensive steps.

CO2 can be chemically captured using one of the ethanolamines and released for re-use with heat, BUT water has to be dropped out first, bc burning natgas produces a prodigious amt of water, and running steamy exhaust thru ethanolamine will dilute it. I imagine some sort of heat-exchanger system where they use waste heart to regenerate the ethanolamine and at the same time cool the exhaust to drop water out

O2 OTOH is most efficiently captured, as far as I know,with pressure-swing absorption, which, of course, requires energy

And finally- complete capture of exhaust gases would reduce the carbon footprint of ANY generating station.

So the energetics would really have to be tuned for maximal efficiency.

I once calculated the energy savings of electric vehicles v gasoline - powered vehicles, attempting to find which has better CO2-per-mile performance.

It was actually pretty equivocal, and if coal is used to generate the electricity people driving electric cars are, in essence, driving coal-powered vehicles. But assuming electricity is generated with oil or natgas, electric vehicles are only a marginal improvement, if any (depending on turbine, grid and charging efficiency.)

Same issue with solar cells. While actual generation of electricity is clean and silent, only in the last 10 years or so have solar panels passed the "breakeven" point where they generate more energy, over their lifetime, than it took to produce them.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 8, 2022 3:42 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I think the greatest potential savings have to do with

farming and forestry practices which sequester carbon

reducing war (not just the fuel required to move weaponry around but the energy required for production)

improving women's standard of living and education ("demographic transition")

land use planning (reduce the requirement for autos)

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 18, 2022 8:43 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Why the US is so horribly incapable of meaningful climate action?

Updated 5:26 PM ET, Mon July 18, 2022

While the world's climate is hot and getting hotter, the US government is frozen in time.

Runways are melting in the UK. Lakes are drying up in the US. Fires are raging all over.

But the federal government is stuck in amber, blocked by a Supreme Court that pines for a pre-industrial age, insisting on new laws for the Environmental Protection Agency to fight climate change, and beholden to a custom in the Senate that makes any new climate law all but impossible.

One Democratic senator -- Joe Manchin, from the coal-producing state of West Virginia and the 50th Democratic Senator -- held the power to bless or destroy some climate action this year. He chose destruction. All 50 Republican Senators joined with Manchin.

What's playing out in Europe right now is remarkably similar to what we saw last year in the Pacific Northwest -- a region that is used to cooler weather besieged by record-breaking heat. Hundreds of people died in the Northwest last summer, and we've already seen reports that more than 1,000 people died of heat-related illness in Spain and Portugal in the past several days.

Humans caused this. Scientists later found that the Northwest heat wave would have been "virtually impossible" without human-caused climate change. The same will be said for Europe's heat this week -- and specifically the all-time records in the UK. We just wouldn't be able to get these kinds of temperatures without global warming.

Don't expect anything large and meaningful from the US government.

The second part of this story has to do with the US government, which is witnessing a conservative Supreme Court wield more power to weaken the federal government.
Less power for the EPA. In June the conservatives who will control the court for decades denuded the EPA of its ability to, as CNN wrote, broadly regulate carbon emissions from existing power plants.

It also upended years of doctrine by which the federal government assumed authority to regulate everything from climate policy to worker safety.

Congress is dysfunctional. Busting the federal bureaucracy back to the Gilded Age might sound good in a legal seminar, as in demanding more guidance from Congress.
But the problem is that the growing tribalism of US politics means Congress cannot agree to do big things. Climate change, which scientists have long argued is ultimately an existential threat, is the biggest.

More at https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/18/politics/us-climate-change-inaction-wha
t-matters/index.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, July 18, 2022 8:47 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


blah, blah, blah

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 21, 2022 6:02 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Every American should have a heat pump

The Post story doesn't really explain why heat pumps aren't more popular in the United States:

Estimates show that 90 percent of Japanese households use heat pumps to heat and cool homes, contributing to a 40 percent drop in the country’s electricity consumption over the past decade. In Italy, the government effectively pays citizens to use the technology; homeowners can get 110 percent of their heat pump cost reimbursed.

Scientists tout the devices as inexpensive, energy-efficient systems that significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions over traditional heating and cooling devices.

More at https://web.archive.org/web/20220721213930/https://www.washingtonpost.
com/technology/2022/07/21/europe-heat-wave-heat-pump/

The second type of heat pump is geothermal, and it's a practical option only when you're building a new house. It looks like this:



A geothermal heat pump takes advantage of the fact that once you dig down about six or seven feet, the temperature of the soil stays the same all year round, usually around 55° or so. In winter that's hot water that can be used to heat a house. In summer it's cold water that can be used to cool a house. That's super-efficient.

However, it also requires a whole bunch of piping to be installed underground, and that's a lot easier to do when a house is being built. Once the house is finished it's a lot harder to find the space to install the ground loops, though it's usually not impossible.

So this is a no-brainer. If you're building a house, it should include the piping for a geothermal heat pump. If you're replacing a central AC unit, it should be replaced with a heat pump.

More at https://jabberwocking.com/every-american-should-have-a-heat-pump/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 21, 2022 7:27 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Every American should have a heat pump


Nope.







But you go right on ahead and get yourself a heat pump.

Get a swamp cooler for the summer while you're at it.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 21, 2022 7:55 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


A couple I know had an "environmentally friendly" house built with ground_sourced heating/cooling and it cost a fortune bc they had to sink a heat exchanger into the ground (all of that environmentally unfriendly copper tubing!) filled with (environmentally unfriendly) glycol ethers and more (environmentally unfriendly) tubing for underfloor heating.


AFA electric-powered heat pumps: if your locality generates it's electricity from coal, what you have is a coal-fired heat pump. IF your locality generates electricity from natgas, you have to look at the efficiency of generating electricity and transmitting it to the user v the efficiency of generating heat by burning gas directly at the user's house. IIRC the efficiency of generating and xmitting electricity from nat gas to the user is about 50%. Even if you get twice as much heat out of a heat pump as you put in, you've basically doubled an efficiency that was previously cut in half. In other words, it's a wash.

Relative costs tell me that more material and expense goes into generating heat with a heat pump than generating heat directly from burning natgas. Someone should do a calculation taking into account all of the inefficicies of heat pumps plus all of the environmental costs of building and maintaining a power grid versus the inefficicies and resource costs of maintaining a natgas distribution system.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 21, 2022 9:12 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK








This guy is great. He's also a HUGE supporter of heat pumps. (We don't have to agree on everything).

I trust this guy's judgement, and he goes into detail about the efficiency of heat pumps. According to him, it is far more efficient using these than our traditional gas heaters.

But they are prone to a LOT of problems that will literally leave you out in the cold when they occur at the worst possible time. That might be just fine in Texas where they almost never have to even use a furnace, but up in Indiana it could mean life or death for a lot of people.


Look into the weird programs that the UK is implementing with these things too... They'll give you huge credits for dismantling your natural gas setup and having a heat pump installed, but part of the fine print is that you CAN NOT go back to natural gas if you take advantage of this program.

Why should they have to write that legalese in there if these things are so good, and why would anyone knowingly agree to those terms?

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 21, 2022 11:03 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Waaaay back when, when I was taking physics in high school and we were talking about the efficiency of refrigerators and thermodynamics, I asked whether you could heat
a house using a refrigerator in reverse. My teacher looked startled for a moment and then told me that they were called "heat pumps" and added that they generally only worked in climates that didn't get very cold in winter.
, Like the Mid-Atlantic seaboard.

I have nothing against the idea. But if you're trying to be "environmentally friendly", my point was that generating electricity is only 60% efficient at best, and out of all of the BTUs that you burned up to generate the electricity, you may be able to deliver to the customer only about 50% of that energy. So even if you get twice as much heat out of the heat pump as you put in, in terms of electricity, at best you're at the same efficiency as if you burned the gas directly in your furnace.

Thinking further... furnaces themselves aren't 100% efficient either. Some to most of the heat they generate goes up the chimney, depending on how efficient their heat exchanger is. Modern furnaces are SO efficient at extracting heat from combustion gas that they can't even be vented at the roof but out the side of the house bc the exhaust isn't hot/ bouyant enough to make it all the way up a normal chimney!

But even so, I think the best modern furnaces are only 75% efficient. So heat pumps may have an edge on energy saving.

What would be really cool tho (so to speak) would be a heat pump that is powered by nat gas. They have ACs that are powered by a small natgas flame, why not heat pumps?

Hmmm.... needs more thought!

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 22, 2022 12:21 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two



https://www.google.com/search?q=this+old+house+heat+pump

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 22, 2022 8:41 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Waaaay back when, when I was taking physics in high school and we were talking about the efficiency of refrigerators and thermodynamics, I asked whether you could heat
a house using a refrigerator in reverse. My teacher looked startled for a moment and then told me that they were called "heat pumps" and added that they generally only worked in climates that didn't get very cold in winter.
, Like the Mid-Atlantic seaboard.


Yeah... That's why I made the joke about the swamp cooler above. If you didn't know, swamp coolers have been an online scam now for about 5 years... I think the most recognizable brand name would be Arctic Cool, if memory serves. Online videos have been all over social media sites for years claiming that this $50 or $100 unit will cool off your room in minutes and out perform traditional A/C units. All it is is a fan with a membrane that wicks up water from a resevior that you need to manually fill. Unless you live in Arizona, adding humidity to the air to cool yourself is not going to work.



Quote:
I have nothing against the idea. But if you're trying to be "environmentally friendly", my point was that generating electricity is only 60% efficient at best, and out of all of the BTUs that you burned up to generate the electricity, you may be able to deliver to the customer only about 50% of that energy. So even if you get twice as much heat out of the heat pump as you put in, in terms of electricity, at best you're at the same efficiency as if you burned the gas directly in your furnace.

Thinking further... furnaces themselves aren't 100% efficient either. Some to most of the heat they generate goes up the chimney, depending on how efficient their heat exchanger is. Modern furnaces are SO efficient at extracting heat from combustion gas that they can't even be vented at the roof but out the side of the house bc the exhaust isn't hot/ bouyant enough to make it all the way up a normal chimney!

But even so, I think the best modern furnaces are only 75% efficient. So heat pumps may have an edge on energy saving.

What would be really cool tho (so to speak) would be a heat pump that is powered by nat gas. They have ACs that are powered by a small natgas flame, why not heat pumps?

Hmmm.... needs more thought!


No reason that companies shouldn't be investigating the possibilities.

They're going to have to do something about making sure that these things will actually work in cold temperatures first though if they're even going to be safe enough to rely on exclusively.

These things actually are on my list of stuff to install in my house... But only to lessen the burden on the gas furnace. I can't imagine not having a gas furnace in my house where I'm located.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 10:08 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Scientists say it’s ‘fatally foolish’ to not study catastrophic climate outcomes

Inside Climate News reports | August 1, 2022

As global greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise, some climate scientists say it’s time to start paying more attention to the most extreme, worst-case outcomes, including the potential for widespread extinctions, mass climate migration and the disintegration of social and political systems.

“Facing a future of accelerating climate change while blind to worst-case scenarios is naive risk management at best and fatally foolish at worst,” an international team of researchers wrote this week in a Perspective piece in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

More than half of all cumulative carbon dioxide emissions have occurred since international climate negotiations started in 1990.

More at https://insideclimatenews.org/news/01082022/scientists-study-catastrop
hic-climate-outcomes/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 12:11 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


If only someone had tipped us off to climate change sooner, we could've done something.

AUGUST 14, 1912.
Science Notes and News.
------•------
COAL CONSUMPTION AFFECTING CLIMATE.
The furnaces of the world are now burning about 2,000,000,000 tons of coal a year. When this is burned, uniting with oxygen, it adds about 7,000,000,000 tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere yearly. This tends to make the air a more effective blanket for the earth and to raise its temperature. The effect may be considerable in a few centuries. (Only took one century.)

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/08/13/fact-check-ye
s-1912-article-linked-burning-coal-climate-change/8124455002/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 12:13 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Posts falsely claim 95% of energy for charging electric cars comes from coal

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/07/30/fact-check-po
sts-makes-false-claim-gm-electric-cars/5428075001/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:32 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Your coal burning car is worse for the environment than my 25 year old gas burning car.



We can't even keep up with the energy needs of the people right now. What do you think is going to happen when a bunch more of you idiots buy them?

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:35 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Your coal burning car is worse for the environment than my 25 year old gas burning car.



We can't even keep up with the energy needs of the people right now. What do you think is going to happen when a bunch more of you idiots buy them?


And it ain't just California...

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/texas-power-use-breaks-record-heat-wa
ve-again-with-no-blackouts-2022-07-13/

That's right in your back yard.

I can't wait to hear the stories about how your coal burning car caused the blackouts that killed little Timmy's grandma next summer.

Sorry Grandma. The Democrats ruined everything in the 2020s.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:47 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I can't wait to hear the stories about how your coal burning car caused the blackouts that killed little Timmy's grandma next summer.

Sorry Grandma. The Democrats ruined everything in the 2020s.
Did you read this part? "The emergency notice came after ERCOT began paying suppliers an average of $5,000 per megawatt hour to keep generators running. That price is the highest the grid operator pays." -- https://www.reuters.com/world/us/texas-power-use-breaks-record-heat-wa
ve-again-with-no-blackouts-2022-07-13/

The price of electricity is 10 cents per kilowatt-hour. That is $100 per megawatt hour, but the generating companies are being paid $5,000 per megawatt hour and they are cheating, gouging, and raping customers, which is perfectly legal. It was, once upon a time, illegal when Democrats controlled Texas.

I forgot that 700 people died the last time the Texas power grid failed. It failed because (and this is where Republicans obfuscate the cause) Republican officials allowed Texas utilities to be run for the highest profits [remember that $5,000 per megawatt hour?] not for reliability.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 6:10 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I already heard you whining about it with that little cunt you call a mouth.



--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 6:48 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I already heard you whining about it with that little cunt you call a mouth.



--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
Texas electric generating companies made the biggest profits in history at the same time they were killing the most Texans in history. It is accurately and amusingly called "making a killing". Biggest profits would have been impossible without killing those Texans. Since 6ix doesn't think it is a problem, he must know best: "I already heard you whining about it with that little cunt you call a mouth." - 6ix. Would it be unfair to note that it was Republicans making the killing, 6ix?

There are 98 million stories about "making a killing" at Texas electric generating companies made the biggest profits in history
https://www.google.com/search?q=Texas+electric+generating+companies+ma
de+the+biggest+profits+in+history

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 7:05 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I already heard you whining about it with that little cunt you call a mouth.



--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
Texas electric generating companies made the biggest profits in history at the same time they were killing the most Texans in history. It is accurately and amusingly called "making a killing". Biggest profits would have been impossible without killing those Texans. Since 6ix doesn't think it is a problem, he must know best: "I already heard you whining about it with that little cunt you call a mouth." - 6ix. Would it be unfair to note that it was Republicans making the killing, 6ix?

There are 98 million stories about "making a killing" at Texas electric generating companies made the biggest profits in history
https://www.google.com/search?q=Texas+electric+generating+companies+ma
de+the+biggest+profits+in+history

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two



You keep saying it was Republicans making a killing.

Okay. I want an actual financial breakdown of every single person who made a dime off of the event you haven't stopped talking about for years now, and exactly how much money they made.

Let's get to the bottom of this.

My guess, which is rarely wrong, is that there was plenty of money made on this by both rich Republicans and rich Democrats. The split is almost certainly no wider than 60/40 either way.



In any event, don't try to make this about me not calling out Republicans. I have an extremely long post history here where I've constantly called out Republicans for their bullshit. Hell... I've even called out Trump (who is not a Republican) from time to time.

I'VE NEVER ONCE SEEN YOU CALL OUT BIDEN FOR ANYTHING. I'VE NEVER ONCE SEEN YOU CALL OUT THE BAD BEHAVIOR OF ANYBODY IN YOUR PARTY.

You're the one that goes around here with a big ole' tattoo of a Donkey on your forehead. I don't even have a hidden tattoo of an Elephant on my body.

Get fucked, retard.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 7:29 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You keep saying it was Republicans making a killing.

Okay. I want an actual financial breakdown of every single person who made a dime off of the event you haven't stopped talking about for years now, and exactly how much money they made.

Let's get to the bottom of this.

My guess, which is rarely wrong, is that there was plenty of money made on this by both rich Republicans and rich Democrats. The split is almost certainly no wider than 60/40 either way.



In any event, don't try to make this about me not calling out Republicans. I have an extremely long post history here where I've constantly called out Republicans for their bullshit. Hell... I've even called out Trump (who is not a Republican) from time to time.

I'VE NEVER ONCE SEEN YOU CALL OUT BIDEN FOR ANYTHING. I'VE NEVER ONCE SEEN YOU CALL OUT THE BAD BEHAVIOR OF ANYBODY IN YOUR PARTY.

You're the one that goes around here with a big ole' tattoo of a Donkey on your forehead. I don't even have a hidden tattoo of an Elephant on my body.

Get fucked, retard.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
6ix, you are crazy. This is why Republicans do not support taking action against climate change. They want proof that their actions will make a noteworthy change in climate. And they also want their "action" (which they don't wish to take any) to cost nothing. This is completely crazy, but that is what Republicans are. Oh, I forgot you are not a Republican, you say.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 8:34 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You keep saying it was Republicans making a killing.

Okay. I want an actual financial breakdown of every single person who made a dime off of the event you haven't stopped talking about for years now, and exactly how much money they made.

Let's get to the bottom of this.

My guess, which is rarely wrong, is that there was plenty of money made on this by both rich Republicans and rich Democrats. The split is almost certainly no wider than 60/40 either way.



In any event, don't try to make this about me not calling out Republicans. I have an extremely long post history here where I've constantly called out Republicans for their bullshit. Hell... I've even called out Trump (who is not a Republican) from time to time.

I'VE NEVER ONCE SEEN YOU CALL OUT BIDEN FOR ANYTHING. I'VE NEVER ONCE SEEN YOU CALL OUT THE BAD BEHAVIOR OF ANYBODY IN YOUR PARTY.

You're the one that goes around here with a big ole' tattoo of a Donkey on your forehead. I don't even have a hidden tattoo of an Elephant on my body.

Get fucked, retard.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
6ix, you are crazy. This is why Republicans do not support taking action against climate change. They want proof that their actions will make a noteworthy change in climate. And they also want their "action" (which they don't wish to take any) to cost nothing. This is completely crazy, but that is what Republicans are. Oh, I forgot you are not a Republican, you say.


That's not a valid reply.

Show me the actual financial data. An article from a Lefty "news" site is fine, as long as it provides actual, factual, verifiable citations.

Otherwise, I don't want to hear you ever talk about this incident in Texas again.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 9:15 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

That's not a valid reply.

Show me the actual financial data. An article from a Lefty "news" site is fine, as long as it provides actual, factual, verifiable citations.

Otherwise, I don't want to hear you ever talk about this incident in Texas again.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
I've had thousands of hours talking to Trumptards and they have very strange ideas about truth and validity and facts. Their ideas on those get them into endless trouble. For example, there is not yet enough facts/proofs/truths to justify that they stop smoking and there never will be.

6ix, every Trumptard I know has numerous "difficulties" and "problems" much like smoking, things they want to do and won't stop until there is sufficient "proof" they must change. But those are not their fault because they are certain that all blame is properly placed on Democrats. If I point out something that went wrong that they have complete control over, they demand proof it's their fault, not the Democrats' fault. Got divorced or girlfriend walked out? It's the Democrats' fault for women's lib. Weather too hot? Democrats' fault for blaming a natural phenomenon on mankind. Don't Democrats know it still snows in winter? Phooey on global warming. It is a Democrat myth. Texas electric grid failed during a winter freeze? It is the Democrats' fault for wind power. Ice cap melting in the Arctic? Glaciers melting in Antarctic? Fake news from Democrats and the scientists who are Democrats. Warning labels on cigarettes? That's Democrats being overly alarmist about an almost harmless habit.

Every Trumptard's "difficulties" and "problems" cannot be solved because those are completely controlled by Democrats and Bankers who are Democrats and wealthy Democrats such as Jeff Bezos and Jewish Democrats such as George Soros. Trumptards can do nothing about anything until the Democratic Party is dead. Once it is dead, only then can Republicans begin to think about climate change, but the solution must not mean burning less gasoline or buying more electric cars or expanding the electric grid or etc. etc. because all are Democrats' ideas.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 9:33 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

That's not a valid reply.

Show me the actual financial data. An article from a Lefty "news" site is fine, as long as it provides actual, factual, verifiable citations.

Otherwise, I don't want to hear you ever talk about this incident in Texas again.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
I've had thousands of hours talking to Trumptards and they have very strange ideas about truth and validity and facts. Their ideas on those get them into endless trouble. For example, there is not yet enough facts/proofs/truths to justify that they stop smoking and there never will be.

6ix, every Trumptard I know has numerous "difficulties" and "problems" much like smoking, things they want to do and won't stop until there is sufficient "proof" they must change. But those are not their fault because they are certain that all blame is properly placed on Democrats. If I point out something that went wrong that they have complete control over, they demand proof it's their fault, not the Democrats' fault. Got divorced or girlfriend walked out? It's the Democrats' fault for women's lib. Weather too hot? Democrats' fault for blaming a natural phenomenon on mankind. Don't Democrats know it still snows in winter? Phooey on global warming. It is a Democrat myth. Texas electric grid failed during a winter freeze? It is the Democrats' fault for wind power. Ice cap melting in the Arctic? Glaciers melting in Antarctic? Fake news from Democrats and the scientists who are Democrats. Warning labels on cigarettes? That's Democrats being overly alarmist about an almost harmless habit.

Every Trumptard's "difficulties" and "problems" cannot be solved because those are completely controlled by Democrats and Bankers who are Democrats and wealthy Democrats such as Jeff Bezos and Jewish Democrats such as George Soros. Trumptards can do nothing about anything until the Democratic Party is dead. Once it is dead, only then can Republicans begin to think about climate change, but the solution must not mean burning less gasoline or buying more electric cars or expanding the electric grid or etc. etc. because all are Democrats' ideas.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Nope. Don't see any numbers or links there.

Just a bunch of dumb bullshit and failing to justify why your coal burning car will be the future.

SPOILER ALERT: Coal burning cars will not be the future.



--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 2, 2022 11:49 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
SECOND: I've had thousands of hours talking to Trumptards and they have very strange ideas about truth and validity and facts.


Pffffwaaah!!!

You owe me a new keyboard!!!!

Quote:
...Every [liar] I know has numerous "difficulties" and "problems" much like [lying], things they want to do and won't stop


You get the "unintentionally funny" award!







-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 3, 2022 12:02 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


To the trained eye, it would certainly seem that Second has devolved into little more than a parody of himself at this point.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 3, 2022 8:17 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:

You get the "unintentionally funny" award!
Signym, misunderstanding makes it difficult for you to rise higher in the middle class but very easy to fall. Meanwhile:

As oil and gas industry's profits soar, corporations can afford to fight climate change

The oil and gas industry is making record profits thanks to high energy prices, but they also are pumping out more greenhouse gases than ever before.

If Exxon Mobil, Chevron and other oil companies have tens of billions to buy back stock and reward investors, they have a billion to spend on controlling emissions. No longer can they claim that tighter regulations will bankrupt them.

Houston-based Exxon reported a record $17.9 billion profit for the quarter ended June 30th, more than triple the $4.7 billion Exxon made last year in the same period. Chevron reported a record $11.6 billion in profit in the second quarter and a nearly 83 percent rise in revenues.

San Antonio-based Valero Energy said margins on refining surged to an unprecedented $30 per barrel, roughly four times year-ago levels. Houston-based refining giant Phillips 66 reported net income of $3.2 billion and a 77 percent increase in revenues.

The top 28 publicly traded independent oil producers generated $25.5 billion in free cash flow in the second quarter, Bloomberg news reported.

The energy crisis induced by Russian President Vladimir Putins war on Ukraine has been very, very good for oil and gas.

Profits are high because fossil fuel corporations do not pay for the damage their products cause the planet. They don’t pay carbon dioxide or methane taxes, and the U.S. is not effectively limiting emissions. Our grandchildren will pay for the warmer climate instead.

Natural gas producers could reduce emissions by 82 percent, if they chose, the consulting firm Accenture determined in a new report. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-net-zero-industry-tracker/digest But despite their promises, the oil and gas industry is increasing them, especially in Texas.

More at https://web.archive.org/web/20220803120637/https://www.houstonchronicl
e.com/home/article/Tomlinson-As-oil-and-gas-industry-s-profits-17346193.php

I shared this article by email with some Trumptards in the industry this morning. Their reactions summarized in the fewest possible words: "Nope." "Not gonna." "Impossible." "Those Democrats." "Why bother?"

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 3, 2022 10:31 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Dumb. You are so dumb.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 3, 2022 1:10 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
SignyM:
You get the "unintentionally funny" award!

SECOND: Signym, misunderstanding makes it difficult for you ...
Oh, I understand you quite well. I also know that our economic system.... which is not capitalism, BTW.

Meanwhile...

Quote:
SECOND: As oil and gas industry's profits soar, corporations can afford to fight climate change


Do you think you're talking to a climate change denier? If you do, then YOU misunderstand. It's just that I think the "fixes" for the problem, just like the "fixes" for Covid, are being driven by a different agenda.

For example, the whole drive to ban nitrogen-baded fertilizer.


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 3, 2022 1:13 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Dumb. You are so dumb.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
People have told me they are much smarter than I am. They make fatal decisions and go bankrupt or die from a preventable illness/accident or any of a thousand different missteps that could have been avoided if they actually were smart. These self-described smart people will keep burning fossil fuel because of habit (since fire is Man's oldest and most familiar technology) which will be the ultimate fatal decision.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 3, 2022 1:57 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
People have told me they are much smarter than I am.


A lot of people. Lots and lots of people.

Pretty much everybody but Ted.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 3, 2022 4:33 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
SECOND: People have told me they are much smarter than I am.
They are.

You're not smart, SECOND. What you are is sociopathically selfish. Your virtue is limited to SIGNALLING bc you're a nasty man who not only never does anything good, you take pleasure in harassing and hurting people IRL.

No wonder you have to lie to yourself 24/7/365.

BTW lying to yourself is stupid.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 3, 2022 5:44 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


So, now for the virtue-signalling ban on nitrogen -based fertilizer.

At issue is nitrous oxide (N2O) gas, which is emitted by bacteria in the soil and water.

60% comes from NATURAL sources. Of that, 60 pct comes from soils under natural vegetation and most of the remainder from the ocean. No
https://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse-gases/nitrous-oxide-emissions

A significant amount comes from either deliberately set* or accidental forest fires. (* burning forests to clear the land for farming or ranching as happens in Brazil, or for palm oil plantations in Indonesia, Malaysia, and SE Asia.

Quote:
Over the last decade, it seems that the regional distribution of biomass burning has increased worldwide, as well as the length of burning time. The result is a continuing increase in the release of emission products, and an increase in the severity of their impact on climate and on the environment. Scientists estimate that in just a few months the burning that took place in 1997 in Indonesia released as many greenhouse gases as all the cars and power plants in Europe emit in an entire year...
Nitrous oxide (N2O) concentrations have been increasing at about 0.3 percent per year for the last several decades. Yet, nitrous oxide has a lifetime of 150 years in the atmosphere, which contrasts sharply with the 10-year lifetime of methane. A single nitrous oxide molecule is the equivalent of 206 carbon dioxide molecules in terms of its greenhouse gas effect. Biomass burning accounts for about 2-3 percent of the total amount of tropospheric nitrous oxide.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/GlobalFire/fire_3.php

Fertilizing with too much ammonia doesn't do anyone any good. It creates both an air and water quality problem. But nitrate fertilizers are ok AFA global climate change is concerned.

Now, about some solutions:

Better forest management. Not "burn it down". Not "snuff out all fires" and not "let it burn". 'Nuff said.

Reforestation.
Quote:
Further, we show that applications of biochar during reforestation can partially compensate for project emissions.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-99395-6

Regenerative farming.
https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2022-2-summer/feature/dirt-first-car
bon-farming-regenerative-agriculture

Capping big methane leaks
https://news.stanford.edu/2022/03/24/methane-leaks-much-worse-estimate
s-fix-available/

Dialing our warmongering waaaay back
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/10/pentagon-us-military-e
missions-climate-crisis


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 6, 2022 7:13 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Nearly two dozen Republican state treasurers around the country are working to thwart climate action on state and federal levels, using the tax dollars they control to punish companies that want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Over the past year, treasurers in nearly half the United States have been coordinating tactics and talking points, meeting in private and cheering each other in public as part of a well-funded campaign to protect the fossil fuel companies.

The treasurers of Louisiana and Arkansas have pulled more than $700 million out of BlackRock, the world’s largest investment manager, over objections that the firm is too focused on environmental issues. At the same time, the treasurers of Utah and Idaho are pressuring the private sector to drop climate action and other causes they label as “woke.”

And treasurers from Pennsylvania, Arizona and Oklahoma joined a larger campaign to thwart the nominations of federal regulators who wanted to require that banks, funds and companies disclose the financial risks posed by a warming planet.

At the nexus of these efforts is the State Financial Officers Foundation, a little-known nonprofit organization based in Shawnee, Kansas.

The Republican treasurers skirt the fact that global warming is an economic menace that is damaging industries like agriculture and causing extreme weather that devastates communities and costs taxpayers billions in recovery and rebuilding. Instead, they frame efforts to reduce emissions as a threat to employment and revenue, and have turned climate science into another front in the culture wars.

In November, as major banks and corporations at a global summit in Glasgow were promising to take climate action, the Republican state treasurers were huddling at a State Financial Officers Foundation conference in Orlando, Fla., talking about ways to stop them.

At the meeting, the group’s chief executive, Derek Kreifels, made a presentation about a new law that had been signed by Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, a Republican. It prohibited state agencies from investing in businesses that have cut ties with fossil fuel companies.

Riley Moore, the West Virginia treasurer, went on to offer a classic denial of the overwhelming scientific consensus that the continued burning of oil, gas and coal will lead to planetary catastrophe.

“The climate has been changing in the world since Earth was created,” Mr. Moore said. “Whether these greenhouse gas emissions are contributing to the warming of the globe, I’m not sure I necessarily agree with that.”

More at https://web.archive.org/web/20220806005401/https://www.nytimes.com/202
2/08/05/climate/republican-treasurers-climate-change.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 6, 2022 10:04 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Nobody cares.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 6, 2022 11:01 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Nobody cares.
It’s hot outside. It’s been hot outside pretty much everywhere this summer. On five continents. In China, which is less than halfway through a predicted 40 days of extreme heat. In the United Kingdom, which recently set its new all-time heat record. In Seville, which for the first time named a heat wave. (Hi, Zoe.) And in the United States.

Daily temperature records are being broken year-round. It’s another heat wave, another extreme heat wave, but it’s kind of boring. If these things become so common, they’re just not that interesting.

The heat has become so regular that it no longer interests us and yet the fact of its regularity is exactly why it should.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 6, 2022 11:08 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I'm 42 years old. I'm not some dumb shit late Millennial or GenZ'er.

We've had hotter summers. All the way back in the 80's too.

Get fucked.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 6, 2022 12:00 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I'm 42 years old. I'm not some dumb shit . . .
https://eand.co/the-age-of-stupid-or-why-it-feels-like-the-world-is-en
ding-a-little-more-every-day-b3809ba521fd
https://miro.medium.com/max/840/1*DWfW-NrN2Tp2RWMObuYdtA.jpeg

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 6, 2022 1:01 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I'm 42 years old. I'm not some dumb shit . . .
https://eand.co/the-age-of-stupid-or-why-it-feels-like-the-world-is-en
ding-a-little-more-every-day-b3809ba521fd
https://miro.medium.com/max/840/1*DWfW-NrN2Tp2RWMObuYdtA.jpeg

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two



The poorly programmed SecondBot will deny crime all around us brought on by Democrat politicians and Democrat policy, but will complain that his summer is too hot.

Must be really nice living inside the basement of your parents house in that white gated community that only lets minorities in when they need the underpaid Mexican crews to do their yard work, or the underpaid black maids to raise their unwanted children and unwanted elderly parents. Do you make sure to berate your parents about using so much A/C to cool that 4,000 sq ft. home, or do you just pretend that it bothers you while enjoying the cool and dry basement?

Get fucked.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 11, 2022 3:21 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Carbon-reduction plans rely on technology that doesn’t exist

Instead of scaling up renewable energy, researchers promote unproved ideas on carbon capture and sequestration

Naomi Oreskes on August 1, 2022 writes at
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/carbon-reduction-plans-rely
-on-tech-that-doesnt-exist/

At last year’s Glasgow COP26 meetings on the climate crisis, U.S. envoy and former U.S. secretary of state John Kerry stated that solutions to the climate crisis will involve “technologies that we don’t yet have” but are supposedly on the way. Kerry’s optimism comes directly from scientists. You can read about these beliefs in the influential Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Integrated Assessment Models, created by researchers. These models present pathways to carbon reductions that may permit us to keep climate change below two degrees Celsius. They rely heavily on technologies that don’t yet exist, such as ways to store carbon in the ground safely, permanently and affordably.

Stop and think about this for a moment. Science—that is to say, Euro-American science—has long been held as our model for rationality. Scientists frequently accuse those who reject their findings of being irrational. Yet depending on technologies that do not yet exist is irrational, a kind of magical thinking. That is a developmental stage kids are expected to outgrow. Imagine if I said I planned to build a home with materials that had not yet been invented or build a civilization on Mars without first figuring out how to get even one human being there. You’d likely consider me irrational, perhaps delusional. Yet this kind of thinking pervades plans for future decarbonization.

The IPCC models, for instance, depend heavily on carbon capture and storage, also called carbon capture and sequestration (either way, CCS). Some advocates, including companies such as ExxonMobil, say CCS is a proven, mature technology because for years industry has pumped carbon dioxide or other substances into oil fields to flush more fossil fuel out of the ground. But carbon dioxide doesn’t necessarily stay in the rocks and soil. It may migrate along cracks, faults and fissures before finding its way back to the atmosphere. Keeping pumped carbon in the ground—in other words, achieving net negative emissions—is much harder. Globally there are only handful of places where this is done. None of them is commercially viable.

One site is the Orca plant in Iceland, touted as the world's biggest carbon-removal plant. Air-captured carbon dioxide is mixed with water and pumped into the ground, where it reacts with the basaltic rock to form stable carbonate minerals. That's great. But the cost is astronomical—$600 to $1,000 per ton—and the scale is tiny: about 4,000 tons a year. By comparison, just one company, tech giant Microsoft (which has pledged to offset all its emissions), produced nearly 14 million tons of carbon in 2021. Or look at carbon capture at the Archer Daniels Midland ethanol plant in Illinois, which, since 2017, has been containing carbon at a cost to the American taxpayer of $281 million (more than half the total project cost); at the same time, overall emissions from the plant have increased. And the total number of people employed in the project? Eleven. Meanwhile numerous CCS plants have failed. In 2016 the Massachusetts Institute of Technology closed its Carbon Capture and Sequestration Technologies program because the 43 projects it was involved with had all been canceled, put on hold or converted to other things.

It's obvious why ExxonMobil and Archer Daniels Midland are pushing CCS. It makes them look good, and they can get the taxpayer to foot the bill. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, passed last year, contained more than $10 billion for efforts to develop carbon-capture technologies. In contrast, the act contained merely $420 million for renewable energy—water, wind, geothermal and solar.

Scaling up solar and wind is going to cost money and will need to be supported by effective public policies. The big question is, Why can't we get those programs? One reason is the continued obstructive activities of the fossil-fuel industry. But why do scientists accept this hand-waving? My guess is that, frustrated by the inability of elected officials to overcome the political obstacles, researchers think that getting around the technological obstacles will be less difficult. They may be right. But by the time we know if they are, it may be too late.

This article was originally published with the title "Wishful Thinking in Climate Science" in Scientific American 327, 2, 90 (August 2022)
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0822-90
More at https://web.archive.org/web/20220810235727/https://www.scientificameri
can.com/article/carbon-reduction-plans-rely-on-tech-that-doesnt-exist/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 12, 2022 3:02 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Which is why carbon sequestration in the soil in the form of cover crops or biochar is a better option. If we could combine biochar with better forest management to reduce catastrophic wildfires (pyrolyzing smaller trees and shrubs along the way and laying down mile-wide firebreaks through dense forests) that would be even better. Reforestation with biochar also works. Paying farmers to increase the carbon content of their soils (carbon can be easily measured in dirt, there are some nifty ways to do it). Planting trees in cities to reduce temperatures and, oh btw, reduce AC costs. Better land-use planning to reduce miles driven. I think we could still try "land-ferries" - reduce the number of miles driven by loading cars on trains for lober-distance travel, which eliminates the problem of the "last mile".

Improving electricty transmission efficiencies.

I recall reading a paper of some researcher trying to understand how photosynthesis worked so he could reproduce it, and all I culd think of is ... "why?"

We don't need new technology, just the will to apply old, proven technology.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 12, 2022 6:05 AM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Nobody cares.
It’s hot outside. It’s been hot outside pretty much everywhere this summer. On five continents. In China, which is less than halfway through a predicted 40 days of extreme heat. In the United Kingdom, which recently set its new all-time heat record. In Seville, which for the first time named a heat wave. (Hi, Zoe.) And in the United States.

Daily temperature records are being broken year-round. It’s another heat wave, another extreme heat wave, but it’s kind of boring. If these things become so common, they’re just not that interesting.

The heat has become so regular that it no longer interests us and yet the fact of its regularity is exactly why it should.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


UK temperatures have been crazy - highest ever recorded and there are bushfires in Europe.

UK has just declared itself in drought

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/12/drought-declared-e
ngland-hosepipe-ban-water-restrictions

Waiting for people to complain about taking away their freedoms - seems to be a thing now.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 13, 2022 6:57 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


After 25 Years of Futility, Democrats Finally Jettison Carbon Pricing in Favor of Incentives to Counter Climate Change

The $370 billion Inflation Reduction Act is the nation’s first comprehensive climate plan to curtail greenhouse gas emissions and boost renewable energy and green technology. It relies on tax credits and other “carrots,” not sticks.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/12082022/after-25-years-of-futility
-democrats-finally-jettison-carbon-pricing-in-favor-of-incentives-to-counter-climate-change/

The nation’s first comprehensive climate law, expected to be sealed with a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday, will not look anything like the program imagined by either climate economists or those in Washington and the environmental movement who had faith in bipartisan action.

From the time that the world first agreed to act on climate change 30 years ago at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, environmentalists talked about putting a “price” on carbon as a core element of any strategy for reducing the fossil fuel pollution that was heating the planet.

Whether imposed by tax, fee or cap-and-trade system—such a price would discourage carbon-based fuel pollution and encourage investment in and deployment of clean alternatives, said advocates of the idea. And because such a scheme would rely on the market, rather than government mandates, to decide the best approach to decarbonize, proponents argued it was an idea both Democrats and Republicans could get behind.

Instead, Democrats are advancing their climate bill with no Republican support, and their program is one of carrots, not sticks. The idea is that an unprecedented $370 billion federal investment in clean energy — largely in the form of tax credits to encourage its development, as opposed to taxes on carbon to discourage use of fossil fuels — will be the push that transforms not only the economy but the politics of climate change.

“I’ve always thought that this gives us a chance to get the greatest possible emission reductions and the largest savings possible and still get the votes,” said Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee who shepherded through the tax credits at the heart of the Democrats’ climate plan.

The decision that the United States would spend rather than tax its way to a more sustainable future was in large part driven by political reality — Democrats had to win over the vote of a staunch fossil fuel industry supporter in their own party, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who opposed carbon taxes. But the plan also was influenced by a new generation of climate policy thinkers who argued that lawmakers had spent too much time listening to the economists, and as a result, had played into the hands of the powerful foes of climate action.

Previous climate proposals in Washington focused first on costs, not benefits. That made it easy for the fossil fuel industry and its allies to defeat the Clinton administration’s BTU tax proposal and the cap-and-trade plan that died in Congress under President Barack Obama, whereby carbon emissions would have been capped and polluting industries could have purchased credits from non-polluters.

In contrast, President Joe Biden is about to put his signature on a climate plan that is entirely focused on benefits—not just cleaner energy, but prevailing wage jobs, relief for disadvantaged neighborhoods overburdened with pollution, and revival of communities left behind by coal.

“You don’t go to these communities with some sort of vague promises that you’re interested in them,” said Wyden. “You show them with concrete actions relating to wages and opportunities, that here’s some of the tools that can help them get through the transition.”

Matto Mildenberger, political scientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, whose anti-carbon tax writings have been influential among many of those working on the legislation, called the Inflation Reduction Act “serious, transformative industrial policy.”

“It’s about generating the conditions so that it is always the cheapest choice to adopt clean energy, carbon-free technologies, and about helping the public understand that the technology is not only better for climate change, but also for improved quality of life,” Mildenberger said.

But the Inflation Reduction Act—for all its importance as a landmark moment—won’t be the last word on U.S. climate policy or on carbon pricing. Although a number of independent analysts agree the legislation can get the United States within striking distance of Biden’s pledge of a 50 percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, more action will be needed to reach that target as well as the much more difficult goal of net zero emissions by 2050. Advocates of carbon pricing say they will continue to make the case that there is no better way to drive greenhouse gas pollution out of the economy than to recognize its true costs.

Republican Votes Never Coalesced Behind Cap-and-Trade

The idea that governments should levy taxes on goods or activities that create adverse side effects for society dates back to the 1920s. British economist Arthur Pigou described these as negative external costs, pointing to the example of an industrialist who builds a factory and “so destroys a great part of the amenities of the neighbouring sites.” By the early 1990s, the consensus of scientists was that such destruction was underway and the neighborhood was the Earth’s atmosphere. The harmful goods—coal, oil and natural gas—were the products that fueled the world economy.

For a solution, the world looked first to the United States, which over history has released more fossil fuel pollution into the air than any other country—some 20 percent of the total since the Industrial Revolution, by some calculations. But at President George H.W. Bush’s insistence, the 1992 United Nations Framework Agreement on Climate Change contained no targets or timetables for reduction of greenhouse gas pollution.

Proposals circulated for putting a price on carbon through a “cap-and-trade” system, like the one that Bush had signed into law for control of acid rain pollution in 1990. The cap would grow more stringent each year but polluters would have flexibility to meet their targets. An international agreement based on this approach was reached at Kyoto in 1997, but in his first year in office, President George W. Bush pulled the U.S. out of the deal.

Europe launched its own cap-and-trade system, and it had modest success. One study concluded 4 percent more greenhouse gas emissions reductions than the continent would have achieved otherwise. But the price of carbon on the European market has always been low, in part because national governments handed out too many free pollution permits to its industries. In 2006, economist Nicholas Stern, in an influential report for the British government, wrote that climate change “is the greatest market failure the world has ever seen.”

Congress considered several carbon cap-and-trade proposals, some of them championed by the late Republican Senator John McCain. The one that advanced furthest, the so-called Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade measure passed by the House early in the Obama administration, died in the Senate in 2010. Democrats held 57 seats, a commanding majority compared to the 50 they hold today, but they couldn’t get the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.

“It seemed to me that you had to do a major regrouping and think through how you would be ready for the next opportunity,” Wyden said.

One element of the reappraisal is that Wyden and other Democrats focused on measures that would have a direct impact on the federal budget, which under the Senate’s arcane rules could pass with a simple majority. Another element was to back away from carbon pricing as the primary driver of change.

“Carbon pricing has the politics backward,” wrote Mildenberger and his UCSB colleague, political scientist Leah Stokes, in the Boston Review just before the 2020 election. Policymakers need to disrupt the political power of carbon polluters first, they argued. They should be focused on building coalitions around climate policy that give people something to fight for, instead of serving up an easy target — taxes — for foes of climate policy to rally against.

“We need to be thinking at least as hard about the politics of climate policy as we are about economic efficiency,” they wrote — in essence, the theme of Mildenberg’s book, Carbon Captured, released earlier that year.

Joe Goffman, then a Harvard environmental law professor who later would be appointed to head up air pollution policy in Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency, heard the message. “Do *not* allow your next thought to form about carbon taxes before listening to this brilliant discussion,” tweeted Goffman, linking to a Harvard podcast featuring Mildenberger.

Stokes, for her part, later joined as an adviser to Evergreen Action, the climate advocacy group formed by former staffers to Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, one of the nation’s climate policy leaders. Biden adopted large portions of the elaborate climate action platform that Inslee developed during his short-lived presidential run in 2020. Stokes worked closely with activists and Congressional staff through all the ups and downs of Biden’s Build Back Better proposal, through to the near-death of the scaled down version, and its later resurrection as the Inflation Reduction Act.

Academics, said Wyden, “made a very significant contribution” on the legislation. “They said the main reason that past proposals went down is that there wasn’t even a coalition within the party that had come together,” he said. Wyden said he worked to build coalitions of support by making the clean energy tax provisions as broad as possible. They’d be available not just for wind and solar development, but for carbon capture and storage, advanced nuclear, clean hydrogen. The tax incentives would be available to nonprofit rural electric cooperatives as well as for-profit companies. And they would be in place for 10 years, long enough that clean energy developers of all sizes would be able to put together projects — not just those with the political savvy and clout to make it through the short window of availability.

“We’re out of the business of picking winners and losers, and just handing out tax breaks like they were practically lollipops,” Wyden said. “Instead, we’re looking to a future built around science-driven approaches.”

‘We Are Going to See the Politics Move in Our Direction’

But there’s one group the Democrats couldn’t bring aboard on their climate plan: Republicans.

Wyden said that wasn’t for lack of trying. “It was, in my view, literally right in our grasp,” he said. “When I talked to my Republican colleagues, and I said, ‘Do you have any problem with a market-oriented, technology-neutral system that wouldn’t pick winners and losers and would have competition?’ They would all look at their shoes and say, ‘No.'”

Wyden said he also asked them to contribute ideas for cutting carbon, and assured them he would work to include them in the bill. “I think that a lot of them wanted to work on this issue,” he said. But in Wyden’s view, they wouldn’t cross the line in the sand drawn by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who was determined for the GOP to stick together in opposition to any Democratic climate plan.

“It’s just a catalog of tax hikes and green boondoggles that Democrats have wanted for years, with a false new label slapped on the front,” McConnell said last week on the Senate floor. “The only things their ‘Inflation Reduction Plan’ will reduce is American jobs, wages, after-tax incomes, energy affordability and new life-saving medicines.”

The fact that only one party claims authorship of the nation’s first climate law is troubling to some long-time observers of the battle. If Republicans gain power in Congress, they could take steps to tie up the government pursestrings. If Republicans regain the White House, they could weaken implementation and enforcement, just as President Donald Trump did with the much less sweeping measures to cut carbon emissions instituted by Obama.

But Wyden believes the Inflation Reduction Act will have a positive impact that Republicans will not be able to ignore. “Once we get the system up and running, I expect we will have bipartisan support,” he said. “Legislators will go home, and they will have their companies and their industries saying, ‘Hey, look, I’m using this new system, I can be competitive against anybody. It’s helping us create good paying jobs.’ And I think we are going to see the politics move in our direction.”

Will the Carbon Tax Make a Comeback?

Environmental analysts at Energy Innovation, Rhodium Group and Princeton University’s REPEAT Project all have concluded that implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act would help bring U.S. greenhouse gas emissions about 40 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, closing in on Biden’s 50 percent goal.

Environmental numbers-crunchers at another nonpartisan think tank, Resources for the Future, project that far from increasing energy prices, as McConnell claims, the legislation will save households around $200 annually and will reduce electricity price volatility overall.

But most environmental advocates agree that more policy will be needed to complement the Inflation Reduction Act’s effects in the long-run effort to bring carbon emissions to net zero by mid-century, which climate scientists say is required to fend off the most catastrophic impacts of climate change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has called carbon pricing “central” to strategies for keeping warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, while stressing the importance of a mix of policies.

Charles Komanoff, co-founder of the New York-based Carbon Tax Policy, remains convinced that there is nothing that would be as effective as a price on carbon for meeting the monumental challenge the world faces to halt emissions. “The carbon price–it infiltrates, it puts its tendrils into every single action and decision, billions of which determine every day, every year, every decade how much fuel is burned and how much carbon is emitted,” Komanoff said. He says one problem with an all-carrots, no-sticks approach is that there’s nothing driving consumers to conserve energy—which he argues will be necessary even in a transition to clean fuels, especially given the constraints on siting new transmission lines and mining for raw materials.

“Don’t get me wrong. What [Senate Majority Leader Chuck] Schumer has managed to get Manchin to agree to and that the Democrats are now passing is a small miracle, and it’s a great thing,” Komanoff said. “But once it has been shown to be insufficient, and maybe woefully insufficient, I hope that will spur a reappraisal” of the value of carbon taxing.

Mildenberger is not ready to say that carbon taxing will one day be needed. But he argues that the Inflation Reduction Act will ease that pathway for whatever additional action the nation takes on climate change. “This is a bill whose theory of change is crushing fossil fuel demand,” he said. “And I honestly believe it’s probably the only political pathway that was available in this very tenuous Congress.”

There is, he believes, reason for optimism. “This strategy that was politically possible may also be up to the task of really undermining the ability of the fossil fuel industry,” Mildenberger said, “to mess up all the other efforts we need to make to address climate change over the coming decade.”

Marianne Lavelle

More stories at https://insideclimatenews.org/news/12082022/after-25-years-of-futility
-democrats-finally-jettison-carbon-pricing-in-favor-of-incentives-to-counter-climate-change/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 13, 2022 9:29 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
After 25 Years of Futility, Democrats Finally Jettison Carbon Pricing in Favor of Incentives to Counter Climate Change

The $370 billion Inflation Reduction Act is the nation’s first comprehensive climate plan to curtail greenhouse gas emissions and boost renewable energy and green technology. It relies on tax credits and other “carrots,” not sticks.


"Carrots" for the rich, subsidized by the poor and lower middle-class.

Now all the Blacks and Mexicans that used to vote Democrat will feel the same taxation pain that single people when paying through the teeth for other people's kids.

Only it's rich white people who they're subsidizing to drive around coal burning cars and put solar panels on their roofs.

Get fucked.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, August 13, 2022 11:16 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
After 25 Years of Futility, Democrats Finally Jettison Carbon Pricing in Favor of Incentives to Counter Climate Change

The $370 billion Inflation Reduction Act is the nation’s first comprehensive climate plan to curtail greenhouse gas emissions and boost renewable energy and green technology. It relies on tax credits and other “carrots,” not sticks.


"Carrots" for the rich, subsidized by the poor and lower middle-class.

Now all the Blacks and Mexicans that used to vote Democrat will feel the same taxation pain that single people when paying through the teeth for other people's kids.

Only it's rich white people who they're subsidizing to drive around coal burning cars and put solar panels on their roofs.

Get fucked.

--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
6ix, I checked to see if you are correct. You are not. See Table 3. Conventional Distributional Effects of Major Revenue-Raising Tax Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act, 2023

It will cost people in the bottom quintile $5.00 more taxes per year. Well, actually the 12.2% of that group who are cheaters will be paying more taxes. The people who don't cheat won't be paying more.

August 12, 2022, Senate-Passed Inflation Reduction Act: Estimates of Budgetary and Macroeconomic Effects
https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2022/8/12/senate-passed-i
nflation-reduction-act

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 18, 2022 7:38 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Inflation Reduction Act Adds First-time Charge for Methane Emissions for the Oil and Gas Sector

It imposes a fee of $900 per metric ton of methane emissions starting in 2024, rising to $1,500 by 2026.

https://www.omm.com/resources/alerts-and-publications/alerts/inflation
-reduction-act-adds-first-time-charge-for-methane-emissions-for-the-oil-and-gas-sector/

Firms will also receive tax credits worth $85 per tonne for carbon capture and storage.

https://www.verdantix.com/insights/blogs/the-inflation-reduction-act-p
aves-new-ground-for-us-climate-change-action

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 18, 2022 9:45 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Inflation Reduction Act Adds First-time Charge for Methane Emissions for the Oil and Gas Sector

It imposes a fee of $900 per metric ton of methane emissions starting in 2024, rising to $1,500 by 2026.

https://www.omm.com/resources/alerts-and-publications/alerts/inflation
-reduction-act-adds-first-time-charge-for-methane-emissions-for-the-oil-and-gas-sector/

Firms will also receive tax credits worth $85 per tonne for carbon capture and storage.

https://www.verdantix.com/insights/blogs/the-inflation-reduction-act-p
aves-new-ground-for-us-climate-change-action

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two




The IRS Booster Act does not give a tax credit for a single coal burning car that is made in the world right now because of the requirement that 50% of the materials for the battery need to be from North America, and none of them are.

Ford also raised it's price of the F-150 coal burning truck $7,500 just in time to get your subsidy, paid for by the poor and lower middle class.



--------------------------------------------------

Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 19, 2022 7:56 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
single coal burning car . . . F-150 coal burning truck . . .
Is Coal-Powered Energy Charging These Electric Cars? No. It is a falsehood from Trumptards: “Coal powered electric cars…. helping liberals pretend they are solving a make-believe crisis.”

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/coal-powered-electric-cars/

https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.9ZD7BV

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE
SECOND 10.31 14:25

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Will religion become extinct?
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:59 - 90 posts
Japanese Culture, S.Korea movies are now outselling American entertainment products
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:46 - 44 posts
Elon Musk
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:33 - 28 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:24 - 594 posts
A.I Artificial Intelligence AI
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:16 - 237 posts
How do you like my garbage truck?
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:49 - 2 posts
Trump on Joe Rogan: Full Podcast
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:05 - 7 posts
Israeli War
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:04 - 62 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:58 - 4657 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:45 - 4425 posts
Spooky Music Weird Horror Songs...Tis ...the Season...... to be---CREEPY !
Thu, October 31, 2024 16:19 - 56 posts
Sentencing Thread
Thu, October 31, 2024 15:11 - 381 posts
 VIEW MORE TOPICS 

FFF.NET SOCIAL