Oil into Waterways

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by fredrosse, May 15, 2015.

  1. kerosene
    Joined: Jul 2006
    Posts: 1,285
    Likes: 203, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 358
    Location: finland

    kerosene Senior Member

  2. Rurudyne
    Joined: Mar 2014
    Posts: 1,170
    Likes: 40, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 155
    Location: North Texas

    Rurudyne Senior Member

  3. FAST FRED
    Joined: Oct 2002
    Posts: 4,519
    Likes: 111, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1009
    Location: Conn in summers , Ortona FL in winter , with big d

    FAST FRED Senior Member

    well ozone layer IS doing much better

    That makes me feel great. A couple of billion spent on systems replacement and forever higher energy costs.

    If ALL the ozone left the radiation a person in NYC received would be the same as he would receive in Atlantic City 100 miles south , with the ozone intact,

    WOW.All for only a few billion!!
     
  4. Rastapop
    Joined: Mar 2014
    Posts: 278
    Likes: 5, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 46
    Location: Australia

    Rastapop Naval Architect

    The world is bigger than NYC. Australia already has the highest rate of skin cancer in the world, thanks to its location under the ozone layer hole.
     
    1 person likes this.
  5. SamSam
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 3,899
    Likes: 200, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 971
    Location: Coastal Georgia

    SamSam Senior Member

    I can't find it on the web, where can I read about that?
     
  6. Rurudyne
    Joined: Mar 2014
    Posts: 1,170
    Likes: 40, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 155
    Location: North Texas

    Rurudyne Senior Member

    More to the point: ozone is created by the sun's influence on the upper atmosphere.

    We could not destroy the ozone layer without destroying either our atmosphere or the sun.

    One would expect long term ozone concentrations to lag behind the natural variations in the sun's output (the specific composition of the atmosphere overall being the less variable in the short term). Though of course in the very short term the dramatic drop off of high latitude ozone production during the winter months is what actually produced the so-called holes.

    The period of largest ozone depletion coincided with a cool period where people were concerned we were about to face a new ice age. After the relatively strong solar maximum through the late 1980s to 90s, compared to the 70s to early 80s, the ozone layer predictably rebounded.

    One could also observe that we began studying the ozone layer in any great detail during the period when solar output was climbing through various cycles to a so-far recorded maximum during the 1960s with our best data only starting in the 40s and 50s ... so we've really only seen, in the science, just this one wedge of atmospheric fluctuations.

    So one might easily claim that solar sourced glowball warming fixed the ozone layer.
     
  7. Pericles
    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posts: 2,015
    Likes: 141, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1307
    Location: Heights of High Wycombe, not far from River Thames

    Pericles Senior Member

    Rastapop,

    Forget the hole in the ozone layer con. It's a 10% depletion, that's all They just want your money

    http://www.theozonehole.com/help.htm

    Of much more importance, Australia should stop replacing cream in bottled milk with vegetable, because polyunsaturated oils suppress the immune system. Omega 6 & Omega 9 oils were given to transplant patients to prevent rejection of the new organ. That is one of the reasons for increased skin cancers in Australia; a weakened immune system cannot track down & kill rogue cells.

    Eat butter, olive oil, coconut fat & Astaxanthin. Troops on both sides in the North Africa campaign were very sun tanned, but they did not have skin cancers. Their food may have been canned, but it was much less engineered. Never eat Flora, nor any margarine.

    Read the whole article. http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/fats_and_cancer.html#.VVuRNflViko
     
  8. kerosene
    Joined: Jul 2006
    Posts: 1,285
    Likes: 203, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 358
    Location: finland

    kerosene Senior Member

    internet has a pseudo science theory to match any and every need. This is handy as one can justify opposing inconvenient choice or compromise you might have to make to make the world a better place.
    just saying...
    Oil in waterways or spilled on the yard, no problem the bacteria will eat it in a year. Ozone layer is not really needed. Oh and its not even destroyed by CFCs, evil industries just wanted to make their life harder. Shell is lying in the 4 centigrade estimate of temperature rise (fresh news)...
     
  9. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 16,790
    Likes: 1,714, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    Rather than engaging in personal attacks, show what you call science is.
     
  10. Pericles
    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posts: 2,015
    Likes: 141, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1307
    Location: Heights of High Wycombe, not far from River Thames

    Pericles Senior Member

    Gonzo,

    Sadly for Kerosene, he's been hoodwinked by the European Union nonscience. There's none so blind as those who will not see. However, we could pour oil on troubled waters to calm the tempest:?::p:p:p

    http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/pour-oil-on-troubled-waters

    Hang on a moment! Isn't that what this thread is all about:?: 'Oil into Waterways'.

    BTW, no one I know disputes the changing climate. We know it gets warm & it gets cold, naturally.

    5,500 years ago, the monsoons that had watered the Sahara ceased.

    http://www.indiana.edu/~geol105/images/gaia_chapter_4/milankovitch.htm

    In 15,00 years time the monsoons will be back. Mark my words, Man proposes; Nature disposes.

    http://www.astrobio.net/news-exclusive/how-earths-orbital-shift-shaped-the-sahara/
     
  11. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 16,790
    Likes: 1,714, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    I don't expect everyone to agree with me. However, personal attacks in lieu of evidence is not going to convince me. There is more politics than facts on the whole debate.
     
  12. Rurudyne
    Joined: Mar 2014
    Posts: 1,170
    Likes: 40, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 155
    Location: North Texas

    Rurudyne Senior Member

    Poly = many

    ticks = blood sucking vermin

    Politics = many blood sucking vermin

    The above is non partisan
     
  13. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 16,790
    Likes: 1,714, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    No, it is universally inane
     
  14. Rurudyne
    Joined: Mar 2014
    Posts: 1,170
    Likes: 40, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 155
    Location: North Texas

    Rurudyne Senior Member

    I've often said that part of the brilliance of the doctrine of limited government that was intended for the US federal is that in not letting it do much it helped to insure it was, for a time, effectively among the least competent at being incompetent (though not for lack of trying with what it had), whereas now it's easily among the most competent at being incompetent.

    I believe there may be more nitwittery within Washington DC than any other city on earth.
     

  15. kerosene
    Joined: Jul 2006
    Posts: 1,285
    Likes: 203, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 358
    Location: finland

    kerosene Senior Member

    I bet you have a pretty good image of what I am like. And I bet I am pretty far from that image. Rather than hinting at my personal traits or level of awareness give something concrete. What is EU nonscience?

    I am pretty realistic person. I own 3 tractors, one logging forwarder, one telescopic loader and plenty other machinery. My machines are old and many of leak or ooze oil, hydraulic fluid or diesel on occasion. As much I would like, none of the spill marks disappear on their own. Yes there is bacteria that eats certain oil products and diesel can go bad in a tank but that doesn't equal that a spills would disappear in reasonable time. As suggested here.

    My point about pseudo science was that one can find ANY kind of information these days. If you want to justify eating just fatty pork meat while suffering from heart disease and are overweight - you can find information that tells you that its the way to go. There are partial truths that can be extrapolated to what one wants to hear. Probably smoking isn't bad for you either (I wish it wasn't).

    Catalytic converters, unleaded fuel, banning CFCs, stopping acid rains - these are examples of successful environmental battles. I will pull 2 anecdotes from these:
    1. I remember reading seriously written critical texts about how used catalytic converters will be a huge time bomb with all the pollutants. As if all the bad stuff that cats convert got stored in them. People believing in 100% misconception and raging about it.
    2. Acid rains have stopped pretty much altogether here. In the DDR days it was a visible problem. Now as a farmer I have to supplement soil with sulfur. This never used to be the case.
    This kind of factoid is a prime candidate for twisting truths. "Limiting sulfur burning in fuel has gone too far. Farmers need to add it to soil! It must be below natural levels". Sulfur needs to be added on soil where you haul crops (that contain sulfur) out every year.
    The fact that sun creates ozone layer does in no way contradict the information that CFCs destroyed it. If one wants to believe that skin cancer is not result of raised UV levels then just go ahead, knock yourself out.


    I find it bit weird how people tend to rely on mainstream science on most things but when it happens to suggest that something one does is maybe not so harmless then (but really only then) science is faulty and corrupt etc.

    I know a few scientists. Its not that lucrative. They do it genuinely to find information - and really they are after the objective "truth". To think that its always a science community's conspiracy for funding when something unpleasant is suggested is pretty silly in my opinion. How is it that when a fraction of the science community has opposing view they are to be considered pure and uncorrupt? Oh yeah their message is convenient.

    And if not for the corrupt science community it is the politicians. let me tell you our politicians are very busy trying to sort out how to get at least some economical growth in out country. What on earth would make it their motivation to make things harder for the industries we (as a country) rely on if all these things were so harmless. Just weigh the scale and influential power of the parties who lose $ when enviro reg steps in and the power of the entitites that win. This alone makes it pretty obvious how fictional the conspiracy schemes are.

    There are conspiracies and messed up things. And the _green_ is often alarmist, impractical etc. But to thing the greenies have taken over the world is ridiculous.



    As far as me being bureaucracy loving EU-nerd. Not quite. As a farmer I have to face stupid ill conceived rules, regulations (and potentially serious sanctions) along with huge piles of paperwork and "procedures" and inspections.

    I burn oil, I fly abroad, use herbicides, drive when I want etc. But I don't pretend that those things don't have consequences.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.