Ping Bil Slowman; The global warming hoax reveiled
in [Design]
|
From: dagmargoodboat on 25 Nov 2009 22:00 On Nov 25, 7:23 pm, Malcolm Moore <abor1953nee...(a)yahoodagger.co.nz> wrote: > On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:25:27 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com > wrote: > > > > >On Nov 25, 7:59 am, Bill Sloman <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> The French genenrate most of their electric power from nuclear > >> reactors and yet you claimed > > >> > >> Hey, if it was not for Exxon-Mobil and the other energy companies, > >> > >> there would be no media, no energy, > > >> Just admit you have no clue and are wrong. > > >Okay boys and girls, FWIW let's whip out the calculator and fact-check > >the authoritative Mr. Bill: > > >France produces > > 447e12 watt-hours of electricity annually, and consumes > > 1.99 x 10e6 bbl of petroleum (37MJ/L) per day, plus > > 49.27e9 m^3 of natural gas (36.4 MJ/m^3) > >(CIA factbook) > > >How much energy is in that oil? > > >1.99e6 bbl/day * 365 days = 726e6 bbl/year, > > x 159L/bbl = 115e9 L/year > > x 37MJ / L = 4.27e18 J/year. > > >Doing the same for natural gas, we get: > > >(view table in fixed font) > >FOSSIL FUELS > > natural gas: 1.79 x 10^18 J > > petroleum: 4.27 x 10^18 J > > -------------- > > Subtotal: 6.06 x 10^18 J > > >ELECTRICAL > > Total > > electricity: 1.61 x 10^18 J > > (nuclear): 1.29 x 10^18 J > > >TOTAL FOSSIL+NUCLEAR > > 7.35 x 10^18 J > > >So, France gets 18% of its energy from nukes, 82% from FOSSIL fuels. > > Comprehension has obviously never been your best skill! > > Bill clearly stated; > > "The French genenrate most of their electric power from nuclear > reactors and yet you claimed" > > Note the words ELECTRIC power. Right. Bill wrongly threw out a red herring. Jan noted that fossil fuels made all this (civilization) possible, and Bill blabbered an irrelevant statistic about one of France's minor power sources, as if that meant France were fossil-fuel independent. That was all bogus, so I brought the thing back on point. > You've used the CIA figures for total fossil fuels, which includes > that used for transportation, heating, industrial processes etc. > > The Wikipedia page for Nuclear Power in France states; > > "In France, as of 2002[update], Électricité de France (EDF) the > country's main electricity generation and distribution company > manages the country's 58 nuclear power plants. As of 2008[update], > these plants produce 90% of both EDF's and France's electrical power > production (of which much is exported),[1] making EDF the world leader > in production of nuclear power by percentage. In 2004, 425.8 TWh out > of the country's total production of 540.6 TWh was from nuclear power > (78.8%)." > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France > > Shame about all those wasted calculations you went through. > Bill's post was authoritative. Bill's post was specious, but thanks for checking. Hope you enjoyed the herring! -- Cheers, James Arthur
From: Malcolm Moore on 25 Nov 2009 23:32 On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:00:13 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com wrote: >On Nov 25, 7:23�pm, Malcolm Moore <abor1953nee...(a)yahoodagger.co.nz> >wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:25:27 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >On Nov 25, 7:59 am, Bill Sloman <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> The French genenrate most of their electric power from nuclear >> >> reactors and yet you claimed >> >> >> > >> Hey, if it was not for Exxon-Mobil and the other energy companies, >> >> > >> there would be no media, no energy, >> >> >> Just admit you have no clue and are wrong. >> >> >Okay boys and girls, FWIW let's whip out the calculator and fact-check >> >the authoritative Mr. Bill: >> >> >France produces >> > �447e12 watt-hours of electricity annually, and consumes >> > �1.99 x 10e6 bbl of petroleum (37MJ/L) per day, plus >> > �49.27e9 m^3 of natural gas (36.4 MJ/m^3) >> >(CIA factbook) >> >> >How much energy is in that oil? >> >> >1.99e6 bbl/day * 365 days = 726e6 bbl/year, >> > �x 159L/bbl = 115e9 L/year >> > �x 37MJ / L = 4.27e18 J/year. >> >> >Doing the same for natural gas, we get: >> >> >(view table in fixed font) >> >FOSSIL FUELS >> > �natural gas: 1.79 x 10^18 J >> > �petroleum: � 4.27 x 10^18 J >> > � � � � � � � -------------- >> > � �Subtotal: �6.06 x 10^18 J >> >> >ELECTRICAL >> > �Total >> > �electricity: 1.61 x 10^18 J >> > � (nuclear): �1.29 x 10^18 J >> >> >TOTAL FOSSIL+NUCLEAR >> > � � � � � � � 7.35 x 10^18 J >> >> >So, France gets 18% of its energy from nukes, 82% from FOSSIL fuels. >> >> Comprehension has obviously never been your best skill! >> >> Bill clearly stated; >> >> "The French genenrate most of their electric power from nuclear >> reactors and yet you claimed" >> >> Note the words ELECTRIC power. > >Right. Bill wrongly threw out a red herring. Jan noted that fossil >fuels made all this (civilization) possible, and Bill blabbered an >irrelevant statistic about one of France's minor power sources, as if >that meant France were fossil-fuel independent. > >That was all bogus, so I brought the thing back on point. Nice try, but as I commented before, comprehension is not your best skill. Jan introduced nuclear energy when he stated >> You really are beginning to sound like an idiot nut case. >> After all the case I made here for nuclear power. To which Bill replied >The French genenrate most of their electric power from nuclear >reactors and yet you claimed.... and then you lost the plot. If you look at the subject for this thread you'll hopefully realise your claim to have brought it back on point is complete nonsense. And who appointed you thread controller of sed! >> You've used the CIA figures for total fossil fuels, which includes >> that used for transportation, heating, industrial processes etc. >> >> The Wikipedia page for Nuclear Power in France states; >> >> "In France, as of 2002[update], �lectricit� de France (EDF) � the >> country's main electricity generation and distribution company � >> manages the country's 58 nuclear power plants. As of 2008[update], >> these plants produce 90% of both EDF's and France's electrical power >> production (of which much is exported),[1] making EDF the world leader >> in production of nuclear power by percentage. In 2004, 425.8 TWh out >> of the country's total production of 540.6 TWh was from nuclear power >> (78.8%)." >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France >> >> Shame about all those wasted calculations you went through. >> Bill's post was authoritative. > >Bill's post was specious, but thanks for checking. Hope you enjoyed >the herring! The fishy smell is all emanating from your direction. -- Regards Malcolm Remove sharp objects to get a valid e-mail address
From: Raveninghorde on 26 Nov 2009 04:47 On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:03:48 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >Bill Sloman wrote: >> On Nov 24, 3:28 am, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: SNIP > >> Sourcewatch gets its data from Exxon-Mobil's published accounts, which >> provide rather better evidence than the kinds of conspiracy theories >> with which Ravinghorde regales us. >> > >Got a link the _proves_ that Exxon tries to fudge science here? Similar >to those embarrassing email? Here's a link to more AGW, academic global warming: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/uh-oh-raw-data-in-new-zealand-tells-a-different-story-than-the-official-one/#more-13215 /quote But analysis of the raw climate data from the same temperature stations has just turned up a very different result: Gone is the relentless rising temperature trend, and instead there appears to have been a much smaller growth in warming, consistent with the warming up of the planet after the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850. /end quote
From: Jan Panteltje on 26 Nov 2009 06:26 On a sunny day (Thu, 26 Nov 2009 13:23:12 +1300) it happened Malcolm Moore <abor1953needle(a)yahoodagger.co.nz> wrote in <cphrg5d3en3gdci010svovfv5l83p6hc3d(a)4ax.com>: >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:25:27 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com >wrote: > >>On Nov 25, 7:59 am, Bill Sloman <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >>> The French genenrate most of their electric power from nuclear >>> reactors and yet you claimed >>> >>> > >> Hey, if it was not for Exxon-Mobil and the other energy companies, >>> > >> there would be no media, no energy, >>> >>> Just admit you have no clue and are wrong. >> >> >>Okay boys and girls, FWIW let's whip out the calculator and fact-check >>the authoritative Mr. Bill: >> >>France produces >> 447e12 watt-hours of electricity annually, and consumes >> 1.99 x 10e6 bbl of petroleum (37MJ/L) per day, plus >> 49.27e9 m^3 of natural gas (36.4 MJ/m^3) >>(CIA factbook) >> >>How much energy is in that oil? >> >>1.99e6 bbl/day * 365 days = 726e6 bbl/year, >> x 159L/bbl = 115e9 L/year >> x 37MJ / L = 4.27e18 J/year. >> >>Doing the same for natural gas, we get: >> >>(view table in fixed font) >>FOSSIL FUELS >> natural gas: 1.79 x 10^18 J >> petroleum: 4.27 x 10^18 J >> -------------- >> Subtotal: 6.06 x 10^18 J >> >>ELECTRICAL >> Total >> electricity: 1.61 x 10^18 J >> (nuclear): 1.29 x 10^18 J >> >>TOTAL FOSSIL+NUCLEAR >> 7.35 x 10^18 J >> >> >>So, France gets 18% of its energy from nukes, 82% from FOSSIL fuels. > >Comprehension has obviously never been your best skill! > >Bill clearly stated; > >"The French genenrate most of their electric power from nuclear >reactors and yet you claimed" > >Note the words ELECTRIC power. > >You've used the CIA figures for total fossil fuels, which includes >that used for transportation, heating, industrial processes etc. > >The Wikipedia page for Nuclear Power in France states; > >"In France, as of 2002[update], �lectricit� de France (EDF) � the >country's main electricity generation and distribution company � >manages the country's 58 nuclear power plants. As of 2008[update], >these plants produce 90% of both EDF's and France's electrical power >production (of which much is exported),[1] making EDF the world leader >in production of nuclear power by percentage. In 2004, 425.8 TWh out >of the country's total production of 540.6 TWh was from nuclear power >(78.8%)." > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France > >Shame about all those wasted calculations you went through. >Bill's post was authoritative. Billie's post was a reply to mine, and was total bull. Billy seems to think storing CO2 under your bed will stop natural climate cycles. Billy is a very confused, misleaded by Al Gore, human being. Quoting out of context from one of his text may mentally hurt you.
From: Jan Panteltje on 26 Nov 2009 06:26
On a sunny day (Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:46:50 -0800) it happened John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin(a)highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote in <0cnrg5h8si41lusotsgkcr6uv5s1dtukmv(a)4ax.com>: >On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:59:25 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >wrote: > >>Bill Sloman wrote: > >>> You live in Oregon. Here is a web site that gives the locations of >>> potentially active volcanoes in your state. >>> >>> http://www.nationalatlas.gov/dynamic/dyn_vol-or.html >>> >>> I'd suggest that if you are worried by potential sources of danger >>> under your feet, you should pack up and move to Barendrecht >>> immediately. >>> >>> http://scienceray.com/earth-sciences/five-worst-volcanic-disasters-in-history/ >>> >> >>I live in Northern California, about 35 miles east of Sacramento. And I >>am rather unafraid of volcanos, earthquakes and fires versus some >>"grand" ideas of man to "solve" a perceived crisis. >> > > >Listen up, Joerg. If Sloman says you live in Oregon, you live in >Oregon. It's a peer-reviewed fact. > >John Yes, exactly, that is real science. |