Global warming: Valley’s residents offer their opinions
By Sam Shawver, sshawver@mariettatimes.comArticle Photos
Fact Box
A definition of 'global warming'
An increase in the average temperature of the earth's atmosphere, especially a sustained increase sufficient to cause climatic change.
As discussions on climate change continued at the global summit in Copenhagen Thursday, some local folks weighed in with opinions on the issue of global warming.
"I think there are knowledgeable people on both sides of the debate, but I don't think anyone is sure about global warming," said James Addison, of Devola. "Temperatures on this planet have varied before. We've had ice ages, but there have also been very warm periods, and we've only been keeping good climate records for the last 150 years.
"We shouldn't completely ignore the issue, but I'm skeptical that we can really do anything about it," he said.
Kristina Vineyard of Marietta doesn't lose sleep over global warming.
"It may be a big deal, but it's not constantly occupying my thoughts," she said.
Belpre resident Richard Briggs noted that global warming has generated a lot of discussion.
"The whole thing is controversial at best," he said. "But I think those who are convinced global warming will be our final end are mistaken. They need to take a closer look at the research.
"And I don't think we should keep reducing our carbon footprint until we're all living like cavemen," Briggs added.
Marietta High School sophomore Chris Prescher, 16, said he and fellow students pay attention to global warming and related issues, and noted that the Copenhagen summit is a good way to get everyone working on the same page.
"It's not an immediate concern, but it is an issue that should be taken seriously," Prescher said. "And global warming will continue to affect us in the future."
Prescher said even in history class students learn how decisions to use certain materials in the past may have had an effect on the current climate change problems.
He's also doing his part to help reduce negative environmental impacts that contribute to global warming.
"At school, each class has a cardboard box where paper is placed to be recycled," Prescher said. "Our family also recycles, and I walk to school or ride my bike to save on gas."
Eric Fitch, director of the environmental science program at Marietta College, agrees that global warming should be taken seriously.
"The science on this issue is about as solid as we can get," he said. "It says yes, the climate is changing; yes, human activity is a driver of that change; and yes, something has to be done."
Fitch said global temperatures have fluctuated widely throughout the planet's history, with ice ages followed by periods of more temperate climate and then more cooling.
"But civilization only started about 10,000 years ago, when the best possible climate developed for building human civilization," he said. "And that climate is what we want to keep going."
As humans began using fossil fuels like coal and oil and other chemicals, especially after the Industrial Revolution, carbon dioxide, methane and chlorofluorocarbons have been released into the atmosphere, causing a "greenhouse effect" that allows solar radiation to penetrate the atmosphere and warm the earth, but traps most of the resulting heat radiation from moving back out into space, which causes global warming.
Fitch said although global warming can occur naturally, the release of carbon dioxide, methane and other chemicals into the atmosphere by humans has accelerated the process.
"It's like turning up the thermostat or putting on a third or fourth blanket when it's not needed," he said. "We want some heat kept in, but not all of it. It's a matter of maintaining a proper balance."
There are three basic camps of thought on climate change, according to Fitch.
"One is made up of scientists who say yes, this is happening, and yes, do something about it," he said. "The second group are people in industry whose oxes would be gored (by climate change legislation) and the scientists who would lose out if they did not support industry. And the third camp is made up of people who believe the whole thing is false and by nature are skeptical of science."
But Fitch believes people should get serious about addressing global warming, and noted that the Copenhagen summit is a way to get world leaders to at least put something on the table toward that goal.
|
Roscoe
|
|
|---|---|
|
12-13-09 9:53 PM
|
Does it really even matter anymore? The U.S.A. is going to turn into a giant welfare state - the haves & have nots. The haves will be comprised of the giant & growing political machine & their compadres - you know they passed the $1.1 trillion bill today right? The have nots will comprise of those that are trying to pay that bill. Wonder if Obama will veto this bill - as he promised to do?
|
|
rocker
|
|
|
12-13-09 2:23 PM
|
hockeypuck, speaking of Al Gore what about those 9 scientific errors a UK judge found 2 years ago in Gore's movie "Inconvenient Truth". "Judge Michael Burton ruled that errors had arisen "in the context of alarmism and exaggeration" in order to support Mr Gore's thesis on global warming". Source: UK Telegraph
|
|
rocker
|
|
|
12-13-09 1:51 PM
|
WittyNickname, excuse me for missing your point but you did say, "MSNBC isn't much better, but at least they're more honest about it." Its no big deal to me what news is better. I don't think it's "on the fringe" to want jobs, low taxes, less regulation and intrusion into our lives by state, fed. and local govts., and being against "extremists" who are trying to destroy ALL of our industries.
|
|
rikrab
|
|
|
12-13-09 12:17 PM
|
climatechangefraud.c o m
|
|
Thoreau
|
|
|
12-13-09 11:03 AM
|
Hockeypuck about global warming is not a myth IPCC is an Intergovermental panel consisting 2500 scientists from 130 countries that has concluded that global warming is happening, and they only state that we human most likely have speeded up the process. The myth has to do with what Al Gore is saying its called "Climate gate" which you can read more about on National Geographics website. All that is about is a couple of students from England claimed they got hold of secret emails I will quote National Geographics website "In late November 2009, hackers unearthed hundreds of emails at the U.K.'s University of East Anglia that exposed private conversations among top-level British and U.S. climate scientists discussing whether certain data should be released to the public. [Do we know who the hackers were? Were they skeptics? Might be worth noting]" You can read more there. Its not a question whether Global warming is happening only at what speed it is happening.
|
|
WittyNickname
|
|
|
12-13-09 1:01 AM
|
Sigh, rocker. Nice work on missing the entire point of my post. Fox and MSNBC are both party mouthpieces. The problem is that Fox puts the opinion pieces in the 'news' part of the broadcast. When Olberman goes off, you know it's an editorial. And don't call it my channel. I hate them both, just for different reasons. MSNBC is pompous and preachy, Fox is disingenuous and dangerous for people who can't tell the difference between opinion and fact. The point is that not all of us are on the fringes like you. Some of us can actually think critically and form our own opinions.
|
|
asknot
|
|
|
12-12-09 11:55 PM
|
a sad thing to pass on to our kids and grandkids.
|
|
asknot
|
|
|
12-12-09 11:54 PM
|
TX there are so many flaws in your rationalizing its hard to even know where to start. Just because you want the country to take a better stance towards moving towards greener energy doesn't necessarily mean you have to rush out a buy the best new AC unit or install a geothermal unit. it means you should do the best you can with that of which is in your power to do. And we can do alot more if we invested into these technologies, and stopped being bullied/paid off by the oil and coal companies. Heck I even agree with nuclear power. There is a new plant getting ready to be built that uses old fuel cells from existing nuclear plants. They're so efficient at using the cells they take them down from a 1000 year half life to a 100. It just needs the funding as do many more technologies. I hope you guys are right about global warming, but as our population, and that of the worlds, skyrockets, i know one thing, our pollution problem isn't a hoax. And doing nothing is arrogant, ignorant, and
|
|
hockeypuck
|
|
|
12-12-09 10:12 PM
|
Globing warming is a myth. If it were not so, then Al Gore would not need a house so large it takes two furnaces to heat it. He uses more energy each month than most normal Americans do in a year. He left quite a carbon footprint flying to Oslo to pick up his prize. What a bunch of hypocrites the global warming crowd is. They still drive cars and fly on planes.
|
|
rikrab
|
|
|
12-12-09 9:18 PM
|
WARNING: The global worming has begun... a: to proceed insidiously or deviously b: to insinuate or introduce by devious or subtle means c: to move or proceed in the manner of a worm.
|
|
rikrab
|
|
|
12-12-09 7:29 PM
|
What about ecoterrorism or environmental warfare?
|
|
TXBuckeye
|
|
|
12-12-09 5:43 PM
|
Thoreau, thanks for supporting my point. We all do economic justification checks on investments like HVAC (or we all should). I doubt I will hear from any liberals that paid extra to jump up to a 21 SEER, but there are plenty of them jumping on the global warming bandwagon. The geothermal option is pretty cool and I like the concept, just don't like the payout time. Like many neat "green" technologies, it is simply not economic.
|
|
Thoreau
|
|
|
12-12-09 3:02 PM
|
TX you are correct on the SEER ratings even my HVAC installer said the cost for a SEER 21 AC compared to SEER 17 doesnt pay back in 5 years compared to the energy savings. When it comes to saving energy lets not become the parents of bubble children believe all we hear from the seller. Lets use some common sense. I will give the geothermal heating one thing, if and I mean if I was using electric to heat my house I would have a geothermal heater due to actual power savings. But here is some facts of electric power it will become more expensive in the future so thats not economically feasible for my wallet.
|
|
TXBuckeye
|
|
|
12-12-09 2:39 PM
|
Thoreau, my comment wasn't directed at you, but was pointed at the common theme seen here. Your comment on nuclear power is spot on, but the environmental nazis won't allow any to be built in the USA. I will be waiting to see how many chime in with confirmation of paying for a geothermal system, or even a 21 SEER air conditioning system. I expect to be waiting a while for that, as hypocrisy is pretty deep on the liberal side.
|
|
rocker
|
|
|
12-12-09 2:37 PM
|
DonDon - Oh real intelligent comment. I would call you "ignorant" but that would be an insult to ignorant people. Have you ever considered suing your brains for nonsupport?
|
|
Thoreau
|
|
|
12-12-09 2:24 PM
|
TX I didnt say it will be cheaper in the future only that it would cost us more if we dont change the way we look on how we generate power. I will be honest this next comment will get flailed by a lot of the green people. But the one thing we have that will not generate a bigger carbon foot print is nuclear power. We need to find other ways than burn things to create energy. There was one comment from Richard Briggs from Belpre in the article that struck me. "And I don't think we should keep reducing our carbon footprint until we're all living like cavemen," its a funny line since it was when we were cavemen we learned how to control fire and so we still live by controling the fire.
|
|
TXBuckeye
|
|
|
12-12-09 2:12 PM
|
This is getting insane, you can't simply say it will be cheaper in the future or we must do it regardless of cost & expect the country to accept it. A geothermal system for the house is great. Are you going to put one in? Let's see how many of you are willing to pay for a system that takes about 20 years to break even. I can tell you right now I won't. The economic return is negative and I will never live in the same house long enough to even see it pay out, much less yield a return. And asknot, your little ommission is kind of critical, don't you think. Many things would be possible if cost didn't matter and human nature wasn't human nature. It's simple, alternatives will be more dominant when the economics for them are favorable. BTW, I am fine with tax incentives for research into alternatives. I am not fine with crippling our entire economic system in the name of being green. Let's see how green you all are. How many of you have 21 SEER A/C system at home?
|
|
Thoreau
|
|
|
12-12-09 1:52 PM
|
Too all who says Global warming is a hoax where are your evidence? You cant just start saying its a hoax without bringing forth any counter arguments to the discussion. About the cost TX you are correct going green will not be cheap but the other side of it to do nothing will become even more costlier in the future. Why are we always so worried about how much it will cost now, we invest in the future and we will see the returns in the future. Global warming is a fact (I will provide facts if needed) but the level of damage it will do to us economically and environmental we can only speculate about.
|
|
rocker
|
|
|
12-12-09 1:14 PM
|
Solar panels and all these other things that save energy or result in free energy are great for homeowners. The problem is lots of homeowners have to fight homeowners associations, get permits to install, complaining neighbors, and some even require Architectural review. Just solar panel installation permits alone in some cities can be as high as %1000 although some cities have reduced these fees.
|
|
rocker
|
|
|
12-12-09 12:44 PM
|
From the Associated Press..."Australia's Parliament defeats global warming bill. SYDNEY – Australia's plans for an emissions trading system to combat global warming were scuttled Wednesday in Parliament, handing a defeat to a government that had hoped to set an example at international climate change talks next week". Looks like not all these countries are agreeing with this hoax called global warming.
|
|
asknot
|
|
|
12-12-09 12:42 PM
|
TX, so my entire post being fantasy is really just one word? And there are current technologies that are cheaper. Geothermal heating and cooling systems and solar panels on your house save you money over the long haul. Tankless water heaters pay for themselves in about 3 years. Volkswagon and another company in Germany are coming out with a natural gas "mini power plant" that installs in your basement next year. It provides free heat for water and your HVAC system. In exchange, they take the extra energy it produces and sell it. Yes alot of the newer big forms of greener energy are currently more expensive. But as with all technology, it will get cheaper, the better we get at it. How long should we wait to start getting greener energy technologies more readily available? its going to take 10-40 years to get them where they need to be. So how long should we wait, before we have to wait?
|
|
rocker
|
|
|
12-12-09 11:40 AM
|
hahahahaha I meant MSNBC.
|
|
rocker
|
|
|
12-12-09 11:36 AM
|
WittyNickname, your post is laughable about FOX. Your line saying "MSNBC isn't much better, but at least they're more honest about it" is very funny! OMG dude what space ship did you fly in on? More honest??? HA hahahahaa! MBMBC is the hub for Obama lap dogs spewing liberal jibber jabber on a daily basis. Amazing your channel is next to last place in the ratings. Wait a minute...theyre next to last? Hmm? Maybe its because only a few misguided individuals view it. Get in the game dude and turn on FOX News or view the Drudge Report.
|
|
TXBuckeye
|
|
|
12-12-09 10:12 AM
|
asknot, the fantasy in your comment is based on your beliefs about cost. Yes, there are all these neat alternatives out there that can supplement energy production. Problem is, they are all more expensive than current fossil fuel sources. These alternatives are available, just be ready to double what you pay for energy as the govt contorts the free market to get alternatives developed. You can be "green" all you want, just be prepared to pay the cost. The whole point of all these skeptics is that the "science" behind the global warming hysteria does not justify the wholesale destruction of our country's economy in the name of being "green". And regarding your doo-hickey for energy management, dealing with energy consumption rather than production. There have been advanced systems for managing power consumption for quite some time in industry. The migration to home use is natural and will again be driven by economics.
|
|
asknot
|
|
|
12-12-09 12:19 AM
|
TX, here's a doo hickey for you. It's a small computer that goes in your house. It's designed to go with an energy system that is both classic based, ie. coal/nuclear power plants, and wind solar systems for a community. It measures when energy is at its highest and lowest, and thus cheapest and most expensive. It then powers your home appliances(washing machine, diswasher etc.) when demand is the lowest, thus saving you money. It also helps conserve any energy your home creates(solar panels) to allow you to sell that energy back. It's(i know this is radical) but a computer to help maximize your energy saving. They are getting ready to do this in germany and a colorado town. How's that for a doo hickey?
|





