Invitation to community meeting about Galisteo Basin oil drilling
Locked
Invitation to community meeting about Galisteo Basin oil drilling
 
|
I'm sending this email invitation out on behalf of Kim Sorvig who is off the net
today -Stephen ------------------------------------ Dear FRIAM Colleagues, Do you live in Santa Fe (City or County)? Your home is a risk from proposed oil drilling. PLEASE ATTEND A MEETING TO SHOW YOUR COMMUNITY DEFENSE: Genoveva Chavez Center, Santa Fe <http://www.gccommunitycenter.com/> Thurs, Nov 1 6:15p PUBLIC CONCERN AND PRESSURE IS OUR BEST AVENUE OF SELF-DEFENSE. PLEASE ATTEND! - The Texas Oil Company, Tecton, has secretively bought leases to drill on 65,000 acres between Cerrillos and Galisteo. - The alleged oil-field they want to drill affects the whole county - Madrid to Nambe, east of Santa Fe and west to the Rio Grande and possibly beyond. - If you think you are protected by owning your land, think again. You almost certainly were sold only "surface rights" without disclosure. Outdated (1872) laws give mineral owners grossly unfair precedence over residential owners. You pay mortgage and property tax, but you might as well be renting. Please show your support and attend the protest meeting. |
sometimes is pays to read the definitions
|
|
Perpetual motion machines are ever popular... like Ponzi schemes. You
can sell'm by the dozen. The consensus, scientific/governmental climate models of the IPCC are all use an estimated "level of CO2 stabilization". No one discusses whether that's possible, just what level to pick. It's actually not a valid concept at all. Here's why. How you get to 'stabilizing' CO2 while maintaining continual multiplying economic expansion is answered by the economists'' definition of 'decoupling'. The definition of economic 'decoupling', adopted by the OECD in 2001 and still in use, is increasing wealth faster than its harmful effects. They don't say it quite that way, but check pp #2 of: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/0/52/1933638.pdf. "Decoupling occurs when the growth rate of an environmental pressure is less than that of its economic driving force (e.g. GDP) over a given period." Whether that is a truthful way to define 'decoupling' or not, they need to go much further to fix the definitions to fit continued growth with the need to limit climate change. They provide "absolute decoupling" and the expectation that that will soon occur. Absolute decoupling is needed for CO2 stabilization because CO2 in the atmosphere is largely accumulative, not recycling. The odd thing is that the climate scientists would seem to have accepted this exception to the 2nd law, since it's in their models and they frequently appear on the same stage with the advocates of the absolute decoupling idea. It means quickly separating economies from their principle energy source so atmospheric increases in CO2 end completely, even while industry and habitations double in size every 20 years. You guessed it, it's really just a plan to switch the economies to perpetual motion machines. All right there in the definitions...! This 1pg excerpt shows the 1000 year projection with absolute decoupling as a model assumption, taken from the lengthy and otherwise very thorough DEFRA report on "Defining and Identifying Environmental Limits for Sustainable Development". http://www.synapse9.com/issues/ClimateLags.pdf http://www.defra.gov.uk/science/project_data/DocumentLibrary/NR0102/NR01 02_4079_FRP.pdf An excellent condensed description of the IPCC climate models which all assume CO2 stabilization with continued economic growth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_Fourth_Assessment_Report#Model-based_p rojections_for_the_future Phil Henshaw ????.?? ? `?.???? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 680 Ft. Washington Ave NY NY 10040 tel: 212-795-4844 e-mail: sy at synapse9.com explorations: www.synapse9.com |
sometimes is pays to read the definitions
|
|
On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 03:21:23PM -0400, Phil Henshaw wrote:
> > Absolute decoupling is needed for CO2 stabilization because CO2 in the > atmosphere is largely accumulative, not recycling. The odd thing is Not true. Some processes bury CO_2 on the mantle, or the ocean floor, or in carbonate deposits, or oil and cola deposits. Its all about a balance - for CO_2 stabilisation to occur, generation of CO_2 must balance the rate of removal. However to retain economic growth, absolute decoupling must occur, in order for economic growth not to increase the rate of CO_2 production. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Mathematics UNSW SYDNEY 2052 hpcoder at hpcoders.com.au Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
sometimes is pays to read the definitions
|
|
Of course. I didn't think I was precluding that. You are assuming that 100% permanent sequestration for continuing growing energy uses, regularly doubling, is both the most profitable direction of development and won't just transfer multiplying impacts elsewhere. Isn't that abs. decoupling too?
Phil Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: Russell Standish <[hidden email]> Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 09:21:16 To:sy at synapse9.com, The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] sometimes is pays to read the definitions On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 03:21:23PM -0400, Phil Henshaw wrote: > > Absolute decoupling is needed for CO2 stabilization because CO2 in the > atmosphere is largely accumulative, not recycling. The odd thing is Not true. Some processes bury CO_2 on the mantle, or the ocean floor, or in carbonate deposits, or oil and cola deposits. Its all about a balance - for CO_2 stabilisation to occur, generation of CO_2 must balance the rate of removal. However to retain economic growth, absolute decoupling must occur, in order for economic growth not to increase the rate of CO_2 production. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Mathematics UNSW SYDNEY 2052 hpcoder at hpcoders.com.au Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
«
Return to Friam
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |