ERayR Posted June 23, 2014 Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) No. it doesn't. The oil companies are the most profitable companies in the history of the world, and we subsidize them with our tax dollars.That may be but it still doesn't change the fact that Federal and State governments make more off petroleum than the oil companies. How does this compare to what a company like ExxonMobil makes on a gallon of gasoline? As we saw earlier, sometimes a company or an operation may lose money. Other times, it may make money. A competitive market just provides an opportunity, not a guaranteed profit. In the first two quarters of 2011, for example, ExxonMobil made 7 cents and 8 cents a gallon , respectively, on the gasoline, diesel and other petroleum products it refined and sold in the United States. http://www.jb-williams.com/4-25-06.htm For starters, many average Americans who hold stock in the oil companies, either directly or indirectly through their 410k or mutual fund. But the fact is, the gross profit margin for a gallon of gas in America today, is what it has always been, on average, .08 cents per gallon, (2.5% at $3.00 per gallon). Though retail gas prices fluctuate with crude prices and supply vs. demand, the gross profit margin per gallon remains roughly the same at all times. (No evidence of price gouging here.) Edited June 23, 2014 by ERayR
Zakuska Posted June 23, 2014 Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) I don't know what you mean by hydrogen cells releasing oxygen. Please clarify. Oxygen doesn't burn. It does allow for fuels, be it hydrogen, to our bodies, to wood, to burn. There really is no need to stuff the oxygen anywhere. There is more that enough in our atmosphere. One of the most popular ways to generate Hydrogen in cars is an HHO Fuel Cell (Usually a DIY project) which releases the Hydrogen and Oxygen into the same cell. Not like the Highschool Chemistry demonstration where the oxygen collects at one electrode and Hydrogen at the other. Most popular use of an HHO Fuel cell is as a supplement so you can get better Gas Mileage. But I have seen an HHO Fuel cell actually power a VW for 15 miles on 16 oz Bottle of water. http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=hho+generator&qpvt=hho+generator&FORM=VDRE Of course capturing the Oxygen and selling it to places like Hospitals and the Hydrogen for fuel would also be a viable alternative. Edited June 23, 2014 by Zakuska
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 23, 2014 Author Posted June 23, 2014 That may be but it still doesn't change the fact that Federal and State governments make more off petroleum than the oil companies. Stop the politics. This topic is about the church, what the church is doing for the environment, and science and religion.
thesometimesaint Posted June 23, 2014 Posted June 23, 2014 One of the most popular ways to generate Hydrogen in cars is an HHO Fuel Cell (Usually a DIY project) which releases the Hydrogen and Oxygen into the same cell. Not like the Highschool Chemistry demonstration where the oxygen collects at one electrode and Hydrogen at the other. Most popular use of an HHO Fuel cell is as a supplement so you can get better Gas Mileage. But I have seen an HHO Fuel cell actually power a VW for 15 miles on 16 oz Bottle of water. http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=hho+generator&qpvt=hho+generator&FORM=VDRE Of course capturing the Oxygen and selling it to places like Hospitals and the Hydrogen for fuel would also be a viable alternative. I'm not talking about High School chemistry projects. Though the science is fine. The theoretical maximum efficiency of the disassociating the H2O molecule then burning it back to H2O is 80%. No one is denying that adding hydrogen to gasoline doesn't add fuel economy. Hydrogen burns. but that hydrogen is simply an additive. BTW. Gasoline is hydroscopic, it absorbs water right out of the air. Too much water in gasoline actually retards ignition.
ERayR Posted June 23, 2014 Posted June 23, 2014 Stop the politics. This topic is about the church, what the church is doing for the environment, and science and religion. Oh and I thought it was about environmentalism and there isn't much more political than that.
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 24, 2014 Author Posted June 24, 2014 Oh and I thought it was about environmentalism and there isn't much more political than that. According to the church environmentalism is not politics. According to the Ensign, Global Warming is not politics. Only climate change denier ad hominem attacks are politics.
ERayR Posted June 24, 2014 Posted June 24, 2014 According to the church environmentalism is not politics. According to the Ensign, Global Warming is not politics. Only climate change denier ad hominem attacks are politics. I must admire your knack for reading into things only that which you want to see. That coupled with your ability to define your opposition out of the debate makes it easy for you to perceive that you have won. Thus continuing to feed your ego. I backed away from trying to dialog with you once but it seems I have been sucked back in. You know the hope springs eternal thing. Aw well goodby again.
thesometimesaint Posted June 24, 2014 Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) I don't believe there are any "winners" in this debate. That's about as useful as debating which is the higher number 4 or 15. The science is in, CO2 holds heat. The more CO2 in the air the more things heat up. Now the only real debate is how much CO2 can dumped into the air before things get too hot. Edited June 24, 2014 by thesometimesaint
Zakuska Posted June 24, 2014 Posted June 24, 2014 I don't believe there are any "winners" in this debate. That's about as useful as debating which is the higher number 4 or 15. The science is in, CO2 holds heat. The more CO2 in the air the more things heat up. Now the only real debate is how much CO2 can dumped into the air before things get too hot.Well lets see... most living things at least Animals exhale CO2 (even Fish) so just by breathing every creature on this planet is contributing to CO2 output. Population growth in both Animals and Humans will also contribute. So is this mess ALL humans fault as Chicken Little Scientists claim? What the problem is... we need a way to metabolize the CO2 in the air and keep in in balance. One Create can output how much CO2? Ok then... Plant a couple of plants enough to counter act the CO2 output of that new creature. Problem Solved. The problem is... at some point in the far future you are going to eventually run out of natural resources to maintain growth. When populations reach critical mass. 1
thesometimesaint Posted June 24, 2014 Posted June 24, 2014 Well lets see... most living things at least Animals exhale CO2 (even Fish) so just by breathing every creature on this planet is contributing to CO2 output. Population growth in both Animals and Humans will also contribute. So is this mess ALL humans fault as Chicken Little Scientists claim? What the problem is... we need a way to metabolize the CO2 in the air and keep in in balance. One Create can output how much CO2? Ok then... Plant a couple of plants enough to counter act the CO2 output of that new creature. Problem Solved. The problem is... at some point in the far future you are going to eventually run out of natural resources to maintain growth. When populations reach critical mass. Both plants and animals use oxygen. Animals use it all the time and plants only when the sun doesn't shine on them. or at least enough indirect sunlight to maintain photosynthesis. So yes we naturally contribute CO2 to the air, and if that was the only source of CO2 the earth would remain in rough balance. Fortunately or unfortunately animals, including man, breathing isn't the only source of CO2. Every time we burn something we release CO2. Our modern civilization has been built on burning the remains of long dead plants, and animals. We are adding that addition CO2 into our air. So we can either stop burning that finite resource of long dead plants, and animals(not my preferred method), or we can find better ways to achieve the same, or better, results while using less(My preferred method). The third alternative is to do nothing and just let CO2 levels increase with the resulting gains in heat(Again not my preferred method. I don't know what scientists that you are listening to that act like the sky is falling. But the ones I listen to say that climate change is a problem to fixed. That there are a number of good positive steps we as lay people(I'm not a climate scientist, so I'm just a lay person on this subject) can take to use less of those carbon based resources and still have an effective economy that meets our needs. IE; The flat computer screen I'm using right now uses just a small fraction of the power my old Cathode Ray Tube type used, and the Flat Screen is a better bigger screen, with better resolution to boot. Animals can't metabolize CO2. But plants do a good job of it. So part of the solution is to grow more plants. Unfortunately the world looses an area the size of Panama every year to deforestation and desertification. Mother nature isn't replenishing those area's on human time scales. Plus added CO2 isn't necessarily good for plants. Our grains are particularly sensitive to higher concentrations of CO2. So while making what appears to be slightly bigger plants the nutritional value of those grains goes down. No, we'll never completely run out of carbon based oil, gas, and coal. What will and has happened is that more and more economically disadvantageous locations are required to maintain production at ever increasing costs. IOW as a resource becomes less available the more it costs. So we can either go on as before at an ever increasing price in terms of dollars and cents, and damage to our environment; or we use those resources for those things that have more staying power than burning in our cars and factories.
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 25, 2014 Author Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) “The Presiding Bishopric of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints introduced the latest environmentally friendly construction efforts by the Church at its first solar powered meetinghouse in the Northern Hemisphere. The new building in Farmington, Utah symbolizes the continued innovative use of technology by the Church in its construction design. The roof-mounted solar panels are projected to generate enough electricity to completely power the structure, saving an estimated $6000 in energy costs annually..."It’s about creating a place of worship that works in harmony with the environment,” said H. David Burton, Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and responsible for the physical facilities of the Church. “For decades we have looked for innovative ways to use natural resources in our meetinghouses that reflect our commitment as wise stewards of God’s creations.”http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/solar-powered-construction-design-gets-green-light-from-church-leaders So why is a solar power meetinghouse important? Why does it help the environment?The answer is: Global Warming "Solar energy is considered environmentally friendly because the sun is a natural energy source that does not require the burning of fossil fuels and the associated air emissions"http://www.epa.gov/region1/eco/energy/re_solar.html The claim that Global Warming is a hoax has no room in our church. Edited June 25, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker
oremites Posted June 25, 2014 Posted June 25, 2014 The claim that Global Warming is a hoax has no room in our church. I can't help but notice the irony of someone who calls them self "FreeThinker" trying to dictate which thoughts are allowed in "our church". 2
Zakuska Posted June 25, 2014 Posted June 25, 2014 “The Presiding Bishopric of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints introduced the latest environmentally friendly construction efforts by the Church at its first solar powered meetinghouse in the Northern Hemisphere. The new building in Farmington, Utah symbolizes the continued innovative use of technology by the Church in its construction design. The roof-mounted solar panels are projected to generate enough electricity to completely power the structure, saving an estimated $6000 in energy costs annually..."It’s about creating a place of worship that works in harmony with the environment,” said H. David Burton, Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and responsible for the physical facilities of the Church. “For decades we have looked for innovative ways to use natural resources in our meetinghouses that reflect our commitment as wise stewards of God’s creations.”http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/solar-powered-construction-design-gets-green-light-from-church-leaders So why is a solar power meetinghouse important? Why does it help the environment?The answer is: Global Warming "Solar energy is considered environmentally friendly because the sun is a natural energy source that does not require the burning of fossil fuels and the associated air emissions"http://www.epa.gov/region1/eco/energy/re_solar.html The claim that Global Warming is a hoax has no room in our church.I didn't see any mention of the reason being "Global Warming". Call it Climate change and I have no qualms. The climate gets hotter and colder all the time. Even long term trends fluctuate up and down as gravitation pulls fluctuate and planets get closer and farther away from each other, the planet can even heat and cool in long term trends with solar activity. Or even as the milkyway passes near or though gallactic gas clouds. 2
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 25, 2014 Author Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) I didn't see any mention of the reason being "Global Warming". Because non-climatologists politicians made it political, or are trying to make it political. "Global Warming" was mentioned in official church publications in the 90s.Global Warming is science, not politics. So why does the church think that solar panels help the environment? Call it Climate change and I have no qualms. The climate gets hotter and colder all the time. Yes, CO2 causes climate change, and the burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use results in the emission into the atmosphere of approximately 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year worldwide. That is why the church is concern, can you think of another reason why a solar power meetinghouse for the environment is important? Edited June 25, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker
ERayR Posted June 25, 2014 Posted June 25, 2014 . . . can you think of another reason why a solar power meetinghouse for the environment is important? Yuuup. To save money.
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 25, 2014 Author Posted June 25, 2014 Yuuup. To save money. How is that friendly for the environment? Re-read my question
ERayR Posted June 25, 2014 Posted June 25, 2014 So why does the church think that solar panels help the environment? Because they do. It doesn't mean it is an endorsement of global warming. One can and should take care of his/her environment and can do so without endorsing any particular stance.
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 25, 2014 Author Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) Because they do. It doesn't mean it is an endorsement of global warming. One can and should take care of his/her environment and can do so without endorsing any particular stance. Again, how do solar panels help the environment?The Church already stated that solar power meetinghouses help the environment. "Global Warming" was mentioned in official church publications in the 90s. The church hasn't endorsed the Theory of the Solar System, or the Theory of the Atom, or the germ theory of disease. Edited June 25, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker
ERayR Posted June 25, 2014 Posted June 25, 2014 How is that friendly for the environment? Re-read my question In an earlier post you noted that a church spokesman said it would save 6,000 a year in energy costs. Again you have a penchant for reading what you want into the statements and actions of others and ignoring the obvious. The technology has advance to the point it is cost effective to use.
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 25, 2014 Author Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) In an earlier post you noted that a church spokesman said it would save 6,000 a year in energy costs. Again you have a penchant for reading what you want into the statements and actions of others and ignoring the obvious. The technology has advance to the point it is cost effective to use. "The Presiding Bishopric of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints introduced the latest environmentally friendly construction..."It’s about creating a place of worship that works in harmony with the environment,” said H. David Burton, Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/solar-powered-construction-design-gets-green-light-from-church-leaders Edited June 25, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker
thesometimesaint Posted June 25, 2014 Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) I didn't see any mention of the reason being "Global Warming". Call it Climate change and I have no qualms. The climate gets hotter and colder all the time. Even long term trends fluctuate up and down as gravitation pulls fluctuate and planets get closer and farther away from each other, the planet can even heat and cool in long term trends with solar activity. Or even as the milkyway passes near or though gallactic gas clouds. Global Warming is the same thing as Global Climate Change. The two have been used interchangeably since at least the 1950's. No one is denying that over long periods of time climate does change. It is the rate of change that is the problem. Who really cares if 200,000 years from now if it is slightly warmer or colder than now? What is not in dispute is that CO2 traps heat. More CO2 in the air, more heat is trapped. For roughly the last 150 years we have been pumping more CO2 into our air than is gotten rid of through natural means. Our planet is getting progressively hotter. We're just starting to see the effects of that added heat. Edited June 25, 2014 by thesometimesaint
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 25, 2014 Author Posted June 25, 2014 In an earlier post you noted that a church spokesman said it would save 6,000 a year in energy costs. Again you have a penchant for reading what you want into the statements and actions of others and ignoring the obvious. The technology has advance to the point it is cost effective to use. Money is not the reason why the church wants solar power meetinghouses.I will quote the reason again "The Presiding Bishopric of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints introduced the latest environmentally friendly construction..."It’s about creating a place of worship that works in harmony with the environment,” said H. David Burton, Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/solar-powered-construction-design-gets-green-light-from-church-leaders Answer my question please. How do solar panels help the environment? The environment, not the economy. "Solar energy is considered environmentally friendly because the sun is a natural energy source that does not require the burning of fossil fuels and the associated air emissions"http://www.epa.gov/region1/eco/energy/re_solar.html
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 25, 2014 Author Posted June 25, 2014 More CO2 in the air, more heat is trapped. Most of the Warming is going to the Ocean, and that is not a good thing.
ERayR Posted June 25, 2014 Posted June 25, 2014 Money is not the reason why the church wants solar power meetinghouses.I will quote the reason again "The Presiding Bishopric of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints introduced the latest environmentally friendly construction..."It’s about creating a place of worship that works in harmony with the environment,” said H. David Burton, Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/solar-powered-construction-design-gets-green-light-from-church-leaders Answer my question please. How do solar panels help the environment? The environment, not the economy. "Solar energy is considered environmentally friendly because the sun is a natural energy source that does not require the burning of fossil fuels and the associated air emissions"http://www.epa.gov/region1/eco/energy/re_solar.html Show me in an official Church publication where an official Church spokesman endorses "global warming". It has to saw global warming not your extrapolation.
MormonFreeThinker Posted June 25, 2014 Author Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) Show me in an official Church publication where an official Church spokesman endorses "global warming". It has to saw global warming not your extrapolation. Not yet, but I am going to write a letter to a General Authority about this. The reason why Global Warming has not yet been endorsed by the church, it's because politicians try to make it a political subject. Global Warming is not politics, it's science. Anyways, Global Warming was endorsed by official church Magazines in the 90s.The obvious reason why the church is building environmentally friendly chapels, it's because of the Global Warming.Can you think of another reason? for the Environment, not the economy. Edited June 25, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker
Recommended Posts