More Global Warming at the Great Lakes ...

Pictures taken from Space show the extent of ice on the Great
Lakes, taken on February 21, 2014:

http://news.yahoo.com/stunning-ice-c...191216821.html

Global Warming at it finest ...

On Sunday, February 23, 2014 9:00:49 AM UTC-8, Hägar wrote:
Pictures taken from Space show the extent of ice on the Great

Lakes, taken on February 21, 2014:


http://news.yahoo.com/stunning-ice-c...191216821.html


Global Warming at it finest ...

Compared to somewhat recent winters as having gone on record as frozen 95%, that's certainly a lot of open water for this winter.

Wonder how the other half of the Northern Hemisphere did this winter, or doesn't that count?

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
...

On Sunday, February 23, 2014 9:00:49 AM UTC-8, Hägar wrote:
Pictures taken from Space show the extent of ice on the Great

Lakes, taken on February 21, 2014:


http://news.yahoo.com/stunning-ice-c...191216821.html


Global Warming at it finest ...

Compared to somewhat recent winters as having gone on record as frozen 95%,
that's certainly a lot of open water for this winter.

Wonder how the other half of the Northern Hemisphere did this winter, or
doesn't that count?



***Seems the "Other Half" is Siberia, and it's always freezing cold
there in the winter, you Dufus ... if you knew your Geography, you
wouldn't make idiotic statements like that.

On Sunday, February 23, 2014 9:00:49 AM UTC-8, Hägar wrote:
Pictures taken from Space show the extent of ice on the Great

Lakes, taken on February 21, 2014:



http://news.yahoo.com/stunning-ice-c...191216821.html


Global Warming at it finest ...

Crater Nipigon certainly looks iced solid.

What California needs is a 72" pipeline (3000 gallons/sec) of fresh water from those icy wet Northern Territories of Canada. With a supply wholesale cost of $1/gallon would make Canada the wealthiest nation on Earth, receiving $95B/year for their water that they have way more than their fair share of. Plus of course the pipeline itself with pumping stations also powered by same raw Canadian natural gas should only cost California another 250 billion by the time everyone is happy.

After all, they do not seem to mind exploiting their natural resources and trashing their environment in order that pouring half again as much energy into exploiting their oily sands than the energy worth of hydrocarbons coming out, so why not use vast volumes of their sour natural gas in order to melt ice and to otherwise pump their surplus of fresh water to California, or at least into the nearest PNW river headed towards California?

At least not too many towns and their people have been burned to the ground by way of any derailed tanker cars spilling their loads of water.

Obviously you wouldn't mind having to pay $1/gallon plus numerous associated state, county and city fees for your fresh water plus sewer and garbage that's usually tagged along with whatever water consumption, as such might only end up being $1.25/gallon (roughly the same price as Walmart water).

Are there any glaciers left to melt in California?

On Sunday, February 23, 2014 10:44:31 AM UTC-8, Hägar wrote:
"Brad Guth" wrote in message

...



On Sunday, February 23, 2014 9:00:49 AM UTC-8, Hägar wrote:

Pictures taken from Space show the extent of ice on the Great



Lakes, taken on February 21, 2014:





http://news.yahoo.com/stunning-ice-c...191216821.html





Global Warming at it finest ...



Compared to somewhat recent winters as having gone on record as frozen 95%,

that's certainly a lot of open water for this winter.



Wonder how the other half of the Northern Hemisphere did this winter, or

doesn't that count?







***Seems the "Other Half" is Siberia, and it's always freezing cold

there in the winter, you Dufus ... if you knew your Geography, you

wouldn't make idiotic statements like that.

According to your GOP certified science, the other half of the Northern Hemisphere had yet another record heatwave winter, and not nearly enough snow. Go figure.

On Sunday, February 23, 2014 9:00:49 AM UTC-8, Hägar wrote:
Pictures taken from Space show the extent of ice on the Great

Lakes, taken on February 21, 2014:

http://news.yahoo.com/stunning-ice-c...191216821.html

Global Warming at it finest ...

Crater Nipigon certainly looks iced solid.

What California needs is a 72" pipeline (3000 gallons/sec) of fresh water from those icy wet Northern Territories of Canada. With a supply wholesale cost of $1/gallon would make Canada the wealthiest nation on Earth, receiving $95B/year for their water that they have way more than their fair share of. Plus of course the pipeline itself with pumping stations also powered by same raw Canadian natural gas should only cost California another 250 billion by the time everyone is happy.

Any surplus of Canadian piped water could be sold off to the highest bidder among 6 or 7 states. In other words, lots of room for all the usual speculators, hoarding plus insider trading and corruption that your ENRON and a few others of your energy ratepayer extorting kind perfected for us.

After all, those Canadians not seem to mind exploiting their natural resources and trashing their environment in order that pouring half again as much energy into exploiting their oily-sands than the energy worth of hydrocarbons coming out, so why not use vast volumes of their sour natural gas in order to melt ice and to otherwise pump their surplus of fresh water to California, or dumped into the nearest PNW river headed towards California.

At least not too many towns and their people have been burned to the ground by way of any derailed tanker cars spilling their loads of water. Unlike the issues of burned and/or spilled liquid hydrocarbons and especially of coal and its ash that's practically good for nothing, at least spilled water does not make everything toxic or creating yet another superfund cleanup fiasco.

Obviously you wouldn't mind having to pay $1/gallon plus numerous associated state, county and city fees for your fresh water plus sewer and garbage that's usually tagged along with whatever water consumption, as such imported water might only end up being $1.25/gallon (roughly the same price as Walmart water).

You seem to think absolutely nothing has been wrong or getting out of whack about the global or local environments, and that our planet has unlimited resources that the lower 99.9% caste can easily afford. Are there any spare glaciers left to melt in California? (because there sure as hell used to be)

No doubt a Russian floating nuclear power plant could be configured to produce a great deal of fresh water. Supposedly 240,000 m3/day (63.4 million gallons per day or 734 gal/sec), so you'd need at least four of those in order to deliver 1.2 GW of heat in order to match the what the 6' ID pipe from Canada could deliver of their surplus of extremely cold and pure water to start with.

Of course my position has always been to dam off the Grand Canyon and fill it up as much as possible. At least then we'd have a national reservoir that would essentially benefit everyone except a few cranky natives and their fellow tree-huggers that want the public to always pay for accommodating their sport of whitewater rafting.

Do you have any better plan?

On Sunday, February 23, 2014 9:00:49 AM UTC-8, Hägar wrote:
Pictures taken from Space show the extent of ice on the Great

Lakes, taken on February 21, 2014:



http://news.yahoo.com/stunning-ice-c...191216821.html



Global Warming at it finest ...



Crater Nipigon certainly looks iced solid. However, those Great Lakes have been worse, such as 1979 had them at 95% iced over.

What California needs is a 72" pipeline (3000 gallons/sec) of fresh water from those icy wet Northern Territories of Canada. With a supply wholesale cost of $1/gallon would make Canada the wealthiest nation on Earth, receiving $95B/year for their water that they have way more than their fair share of. Plus of course the pipeline itself with a pumping station every 100 km as also powered by the same raw Canadian natural gas, should only cost California another $250 billion by the time everyone is happy.

Any surplus of Canadian piped water could always be sold to the highest bidder among 6 or 7 states. In other words, lots of room for all the usual speculators, hoarding plus insider trading and corruption that your ENRON and a few others of your energy ratepayer extorting kind perfected for us.

After all, those Canadians do not seem to mind exploiting their natural resources and trashing their environment, in order that pouring half again as much energy into exploiting their oily-sands than the energy worth of hydrocarbons coming out, so why not use vast volumes of their sour natural gas in order to melt ice and to otherwise pump their surplus of fresh water to California, or dumped into the nearest PNW river headed towards California.

At least not too many towns and their people have been burned to the ground by way of any derailed tanker cars spilling their loads of water. Unlike the issues of burned and/or spilled liquid hydrocarbons and especially of coal and its ash that's practically good for nothing, at least spilled water does not make everything toxic or creating yet another superfund cleanup fiasco.

Obviously you wouldn't mind having to pay $1/gallon plus numerous associated state, county and city fees for your fresh water plus sewer and garbage that's usually tagged along with whatever water consumption, as such imported water might only end up being $1.25/gallon (roughly the same price as Walmart water).

You seem to think absolutely nothing has been wrong or getting out of whack about the global or local environments, and that our planet has unlimited resources that the lower 99.9% caste can easily afford. Are there any spare glaciers left to melt in California? (because there sure as hell used to be)

No doubt a Russian floating nuclear power plant could be configured to produce a great deal of fresh water. Supposedly 240,000 m3/day (63.4 million gallons per day or 734 gal/sec), so you'd need at least four of those in order to deliver 1.2 GW of heat in order to match what the 6' ID pipe from Canada could deliver of their surplus of extremely cold and pure water to start with.

Of course my position has always been to dam off the Grand Canyon and fill it up as much as possible. At least then we'd have a national reservoir that would essentially benefit everyone except a few cranky natives and their fellow tree-huggers that want the public to always pay for accommodating their sport of whitewater rafting.

Do you have any better plan?

Brad Guth wrote:
On Sunday, February 23, 2014 9:00:49 AM UTC-8, Hägar wrote:
Pictures taken from Space show the extent of ice on the Great

Lakes, taken on February 21, 2014:



http://news.yahoo.com/stunning-ice-c...191216821.html



Global Warming at it finest ...



Crater Nipigon certainly looks iced solid. However, those Great Lakes
have been worse, such as 1979 had them at 95% iced over.

What California needs is a 72" pipeline (3000 gallons/sec) of fresh
water from those icy wet Northern Territories of Canada. With a supply
wholesale cost of $1/gallon would make Canada the wealthiest nation on
Earth, receiving $95B/year for their water that they have way more than
their fair share of. Plus of course the pipeline itself with a pumping
station every 100 km as also powered by the same raw Canadian natural
gas, should only cost California another $250 billion by the time
everyone is happy.

Any surplus of Canadian piped water could always be sold to the highest
bidder among 6 or 7 states. In other words, lots of room for all the
usual speculators, hoarding plus insider trading and corruption that
your ENRON and a few others of your energy ratepayer extorting kind
perfected for us.

After all, those Canadians do not seem to mind exploiting their natural
resources and trashing their environment, in order that pouring half
again as much energy into exploiting their oily-sands than the energy
worth of hydrocarbons coming out, so why not use vast volumes of their
sour natural gas in order to melt ice and to otherwise pump their
surplus of fresh water to California, or dumped into the nearest PNW
river headed towards California.

At least not too many towns and their people have been burned to the
ground by way of any derailed tanker cars spilling their loads of
water. Unlike the issues of burned and/or spilled liquid hydrocarbons
and especially of coal and its ash that's practically good for nothing,
at least spilled water does not make everything toxic or creating yet
another superfund cleanup fiasco.

Obviously you wouldn't mind having to pay $1/gallon plus numerous
associated state, county and city fees for your fresh water plus sewer
and garbage that's usually tagged along with whatever water
consumption, as such imported water might only end up being
$1.25/gallon (roughly the same price as Walmart water).

You seem to think absolutely nothing has been wrong or getting out of
whack about the global or local environments, and that our planet has
unlimited resources that the lower 99.9% caste can easily afford. Are
there any spare glaciers left to melt in California? (because there
sure as hell used to be)

No doubt a Russian floating nuclear power plant could be configured to
produce a great deal of fresh water. Supposedly 240,000 m3/day (63.4
million gallons per day or 734 gal/sec), so you'd need at least four of
those in order to deliver 1.2 GW of heat in order to match what the 6'
ID pipe from Canada could deliver of their surplus of extremely cold
and pure water to start with.

Of course my position has always been to dam off the Grand Canyon and
fill it up as much as possible. At least then we'd have a national
reservoir that would essentially benefit everyone except a few cranky
natives and their fellow tree-huggers that want the public to always
pay for accommodating their sport of whitewater rafting.

Do you have any better plan?





Yup.
Hagar lives in california, right ?
Lets give the whole state to Mexico.

No need for the water and we rid ourselves of unwanted rubbish.

On Tuesday, February 25, 2014 3:42:02 AM UTC-8, Bast wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:

On Sunday, February 23, 2014 9:00:49 AM UTC-8, Hägar wrote:

Pictures taken from Space show the extent of ice on the Great



Lakes, taken on February 21, 2014:







http://news.yahoo.com/stunning-ice-c...191216821.html







Global Warming at it finest ...







Crater Nipigon certainly looks iced solid. However, those Great Lakes

have been worse, such as 1979 had them at 95% iced over.



What California needs is a 72" pipeline (3000 gallons/sec) of fresh

water from those icy wet Northern Territories of Canada. With a supply

wholesale cost of $1/gallon would make Canada the wealthiest nation on

Earth, receiving $95B/year for their water that they have way more than

their fair share of. Plus of course the pipeline itself with a pumping

station every 100 km as also powered by the same raw Canadian natural

gas, should only cost California another $250 billion by the time

everyone is happy.



Any surplus of Canadian piped water could always be sold to the highest

bidder among 6 or 7 states. In other words, lots of room for all the

usual speculators, hoarding plus insider trading and corruption that

your ENRON and a few others of your energy ratepayer extorting kind

perfected for us.



After all, those Canadians do not seem to mind exploiting their natural

resources and trashing their environment, in order that pouring half

again as much energy into exploiting their oily-sands than the energy

worth of hydrocarbons coming out, so why not use vast volumes of their

sour natural gas in order to melt ice and to otherwise pump their

surplus of fresh water to California, or dumped into the nearest PNW

river headed towards California.



At least not too many towns and their people have been burned to the

ground by way of any derailed tanker cars spilling their loads of

water. Unlike the issues of burned and/or spilled liquid hydrocarbons

and especially of coal and its ash that's practically good for nothing,

at least spilled water does not make everything toxic or creating yet

another superfund cleanup fiasco.



Obviously you wouldn't mind having to pay $1/gallon plus numerous

associated state, county and city fees for your fresh water plus sewer

and garbage that's usually tagged along with whatever water

consumption, as such imported water might only end up being

$1.25/gallon (roughly the same price as Walmart water).



You seem to think absolutely nothing has been wrong or getting out of

whack about the global or local environments, and that our planet has

unlimited resources that the lower 99.9% caste can easily afford. Are

there any spare glaciers left to melt in California? (because there

sure as hell used to be)



No doubt a Russian floating nuclear power plant could be configured to

produce a great deal of fresh water. Supposedly 240,000 m3/day (63.4

million gallons per day or 734 gal/sec), so you'd need at least four of

those in order to deliver 1.2 GW of heat in order to match what the 6'

ID pipe from Canada could deliver of their surplus of extremely cold

and pure water to start with.



Of course my position has always been to dam off the Grand Canyon and

fill it up as much as possible. At least then we'd have a national

reservoir that would essentially benefit everyone except a few cranky

natives and their fellow tree-huggers that want the public to always

pay for accommodating their sport of whitewater rafting.



Do you have any better plan?











Yup.

Hagar lives in california, right ?

Lets give the whole state to Mexico.



No need for the water and we rid ourselves of unwanted rubbish.

Now that we have a replacement Harlow(HVAC ****tard) back in with us, all the children are once again at risk. No doubt our Hagar couldn't be more pleased.

Californians having to buy their toilet flushing water from Walmart is after all what Hagar always wanted. Now all that's left is getting those electric utility rates jacked up to $1/kwhr, and he'll be ecstatic.

Actually, those floating Russian nuke powered water makers would be a really cheap solution, as each capable of extracting 10,000 m3/hr from their 300 MW of fission heat, so all they'd need is four of those at a cost of perhaps as little as $20,000/hr each, or $2/m3. A full scale nuclear powered water maker of 3.6 GWT would cut that cost of making fresh water to less than $.5/m3 and only $.1/m3 if it were thorium fueled, but that's only if it were run by Mexicans. With Hagar in charge, make that $5/m3 as our only option, and at least ten years before the first drop of desalinated water ever flows towards whatever is left of California.

On 2/25/2014 9:58 AM, Brad Guth wrote:


Now that we have a replacement Harlow(HVAC ****tard) back in with us, all the children are once again at risk.


I see Guth is still ****ed in the head.

'The more things change, the more they stay the same'


No doubt our Hagar couldn't be more pleased.


Highly unlikely. I am an equal opportunity kook basher.
Left wing, right wing (or in Guth's case, wingNUT) I bash them all.


Actually, those floating Russian nuke powered water makers would be a really cheap solution, as each capable of extracting 10,000 m3/hr from their 300 MW of fission heat, so all they'd need is four of those at a cost of perhaps as little as $20,000/hr each, or $2/m3. A full scale nuclear powered water maker of 3.6 GWT would cut that cost of making fresh water to less than $.5/m3 and only $.1/m3 if it were thorium fueled, but that's only if it were run by Mexicans. With Hagar in charge, make that $5/m3 as our only option, and at least ten years before the first drop of desalinated water ever flows towards whatever is left of California.


Wtf are you on about NOW?


--
HVA© - Shock Treatment For Believers