Carrboro suing Duke Energy over climate change

[Turd Ferguson]

Duke Energy is probably the most corrupt company in the state.

Carrboro sues Duke Energy over climate change

A North Carolina town filed a lawsuit Wednesday accusing Duke Energy, one of the nation's largest utility companies, of deceiving the public about climate change and contributing to the warming of the planet.

www.wral.com

 

[sringwal]

Counterpoint: The Albemarle Corporation

 

[ZenMode]

I think it's more likely than not that man-caused climate change is real to some degree, but I don't see it being so well established, scientifically speaking, that you could sue over it.

 

[superrific]

I think it's more likely than not that man-caused climate change is real to some degree, but I don't see it being so well established, scientifically speaking, that you could sue over it.

Just stop. It is absolutely well-established enough to sue over. Courts entertain less reliable evidence all the time. It seems to me that you vastly underestimate how much we know about the causes of climate change.

The problem with this lawsuit isn't the science. It's whether you can reasonably trace climate change to Duke Energy. I mean, let's accept that Duke Energy misled investors and the public, and all that. What's the injury to Carrboro from Duke Energy? If Duke Energy had behaved like an angel, we'd still have climate change.

 

[gtyellowjacket]

Ironic that Carrboro renamed the town after the guy that paid to bring electricity to the town or just interesting?

Also, please be sure not to mention the silent Sam connection and hijack the thread.

 

[Callatoroy]

Carrboro being a political activist at the taxpayers expense. This is a bad move by the mayor and town council because its just a political stunt that will wind up costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and not achieve a damn thing. My comment doesn't mean I don't believe in global warming. I'm closer to the left on climate change than to the right. But this isn't the job of mayor to lead a crusade against dook energy and bring attention to global warming. That money should be spent on improving the infrastructure in Carrboro or not spent and returned to taxpayers.

 

[TitanNC]

Carrboro being a political activist at the taxpayers expense. This is a bad move by the mayor and town council because its just a political stunt that will wind up costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and not achieve a damn thing. My comment doesn't mean I don't believe in global warming. I'm closer to the left on climate change than to the right. But this isn't the job of mayor to lead a crusade against dook energy and bring attention to global warming. That money should be spent on improving the infrastructure in Carrboro or not spent and returned to taxpayers.

Like abusing disenfranchised people is a winning action for the GOP this is a winning action in the minds of Carrboro citizens.

 

[Callatoroy]

Like abusing disenfranchised people is a winning action for the GOP this is a winning action in the minds of Carrboro citizens.

You conducted a poll on that? Maybe this is a winning action in the mind of the mayor. Bullshit like this is why taxes are so high in Orange County. Spend tax money on something that will have no tangible benefit to the taxpayers

 

[TitanNC]

You conducted a poll on that? Maybe this is a winning action in the mind of the mayor. Bullshit like this is why taxes are so high in Orange County. Spend tax money on something that will have no tangible benefit to the taxpayers

No, I didn’t conduct a poll on that but, like I know that GOP’ers have orgasms when disenfranchised citizens are abused, the average Carrboro resident has an orgasm when folks are trying to stick it to one of the most regulated corporations in the state.

The taxes in Carrboro/Orange County are so high because its citizens choose to invest in the public education of their children.

 

[Zoo_View]

You conducted a poll on that? Maybe this is a winning action in the mind of the mayor. Bullshit like this is why taxes are so high in Orange County. Spend tax money on something that will have no tangible benefit to the taxpayers

Orange County doesn’t fund much in Carrboro.

The Chapel Hill/Carrboro School System is why taxes are relatively high in Chapel Hill and Carrboro; the Orange County School System is why taxes are higher in Orange County than Person or Alamance or Granville Counties. The CHCSS and the Orange County School Systems are among the best in North Carolina (admittedly, that’s a low bar).

 

[mpaer]

No, I didn’t conduct a poll on that but, like I know that GOP’ers have orgasms when disenfranchised citizens are abused, the average Carrboro resident has an orgasm when folks are trying to stick it to one of the most regulated corporations in the state.

The taxes in Carrboro/Orange County are so high because its citizens choose to invest in the public education of their children.

Come back and tell me how much they spend in a year or two Taxes are high for two reasons
1. They fund schools
2. Their two gigantic multibillion dollar industries pay zero property tax

 

[chrissteel]

Global Warming and Hurricanes – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory

Contents Summary Statement Global Warming and Atlantic Hurricanes Statistical relationships between SSTs and hurricanes Analysis of century-scale Atlantic tropical storm and hurricane frequency Analysis of other observed Atlantic hurricane metrics Model simulations of greenhouse warming...

www.gfdl.noaa.gov

We conclude that the historical Atlantic hurricane data at this stage do not provide compelling evidence for a substantial greenhouse warming-induced century-scale increase in: frequency of tropical storms, hurricanes, or major hurricanes, or in the proportion of hurricanes that become major hurricanes.

 

[ZenMode]

Global Warming and Hurricanes – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory

Contents Summary Statement Global Warming and Atlantic Hurricanes Statistical relationships between SSTs and hurricanes Analysis of century-scale Atlantic tropical storm and hurricane frequency Analysis of other observed Atlantic hurricane metrics Model simulations of greenhouse warming...

www.gfdl.noaa.gov

We conclude that the historical Atlantic hurricane data at this stage do not provide compelling evidence for a substantial greenhouse warming-induced century-scale increase in: frequency of tropical storms, hurricanes, or major hurricanes, or in the proportion of hurricanes that become major hurricanes.

Here's the issue....

The Earth is more complex than anyone, including the science community, can completely understand. There have been studies showing no connection between CO2 levels and temperature and there are studies showing a correlation between CO2 levels. It was about 5 or so years ago when people lost their minds about a huge oil spill, only for scientists to discover that there's an oil-eating bacteria that basically cleaned up the whole spill.

MIT put out a study just a couple of years ago about a process called silicate weathering that they believe allows the Earth to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere and, therefore, regulate it's own temperature over the long term.

That's why I believe man-made climate change is a real thing...but am also skeptical because there very well could be other forces in play that we simply don't understand. The idea that man-made climate change is so certain that it can be the basis for a lawsuit...that just seems silly to me. IMO, it would turn into dueling studies with nobody likely to win.

But what do I know? I'm just some xenophobic, racist, homophobic, trans hating, segregationist.

 

[an0maly]

Here's the issue....

The Earth is more complex than anyone, including the science community, can completely understand.

This is an utterly worthless statement; there is nothing in the real world that any knowledgeable person claims we can "completely" understand, and that is not needed for levels of understanding that allow us to take action to make the world better. The idea that we don't know everything and thus know nothing is know-nothingism. It is useless idiocy used by people who think they can win a debate of some sort with it, but all they do is show they are the ones who actually know nothing.

There have been studies showing no connection between CO2 levels and temperature and there are studies showing a correlation between CO2 levels.

This false. The causation has been known since the 1860s.

The History of Climate Science

Introduction The fact that carbon dioxide is a 'greenhouse gas' - a gas that prevents a certain amount of heat radiation escaping back to space and thus maintains a generally warm climate on Earth, goes back to an idea that was first conceived, though not specifically with respect to CO2, nearly...

skepticalscience.com

It was about 5 or so years ago when people lost their minds about a huge oil spill, only for scientists to discover that there's an oil-eating bacteria that basically cleaned up the whole spill.

That is wildly false, and probably a direct lie on your part. I don't know why, in your mind, you brought this up, but the Deep Water Horizon spill (assuming you mean that, because you do not know) has 26% to this day that fell to the bottom of the sea and is still there.



Bacteria has eaten some of it, but long, long after countless millions of life forms were lost, an ecosystem damaged, and hundreds of human lives and livelihoods wrecked. Again though, why are we here ^ ?

MIT put out a study just a couple of years ago about a process called silicate weathering that they believe allows the Earth to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere and, therefore, regulate it's own temperature over the long term.

That long term, assuming that study is valid, is many millennia. It says that in your link. Why are you bringing this up? We are concerned about human lifetimes and the upcoming decades.

That's why I believe man-made climate change is a real thing...but am also skeptical because there very well could be other forces in play that we simply don't understand.

This is basically a self-contradictory statement of more know-nothingism. We know that man-made climate change is doing the damage.
Exxon scientists knew it decades ago (though Exxon of course kept it secret and produced the great sweep of right wing lies, some of which you parrot.

Exxon scientists predicted global warming with 'shocking skill and accuracy,' Harvard researchers say

In the study, scientists showed how the multinational energy giant worked to cloud the issue.

news.harvard.edu

The idea that man-made climate change is so certain that it can be the basis for a lawsuit...that just seems silly to me. IMO, it would turn into dueling studies with nobody likely to win.

False, and virtually all the posts of yours I have seen are in fact actually silly. This one of yours is as ridiculous as any.

But what do I know?

One thing I think it's time for you to begin to know is that you do not use evidence, and do not know how to use facts, logic and evidence to free yourself of reactionary ideology and find out about the real world.

 

[heelinhell]

Come back and tell me how much they spend in a year or two Taxes are high for two reasons
1. They fund schools
2. Their two gigantic multibillion dollar industries pay zero property tax

Not only that but our bus transportation is free...

Don't be fuckin' round with The Peoples' Republic of Carrboro !

Paris of the Piedmont, baby

 

[ZenMode]

This is an utterly worthless statement; there is nothing in the real world that any knowledgeable person claims we can "completely" understand, and that is not needed for levels of understanding that allow us to take action to make the world better. The idea that we don't know everything and thus know nothing is know-nothingism. It is useless idiocy used by people who think they can win a debate of some sort with it, but all they do is show they are the ones who actually know nothing.

This false. The causation has been known since the 1860s.

The History of Climate Science

Introduction The fact that carbon dioxide is a 'greenhouse gas' - a gas that prevents a certain amount of heat radiation escaping back to space and thus maintains a generally warm climate on Earth, goes back to an idea that was first conceived, though not specifically with respect to CO2, nearly...

skepticalscience.com

That CO2 and other green house causes increased temperatures is not "known". It's believed to be true and there is a decent amount of evidence that it's true. True "knowns" are things like a water molecule is 2 Hydrogens and 1 Oxygen.

That is wildly false, and probably a direct lie on your part. I don't know why, in your mind, you brought this up, but the Deep Water Horizon spill (assuming you mean that, because you do not know) has 26% to this day that fell to the bottom of the sea and is still there.



Bacteria has eaten some of it, but long, long after countless millions of life forms were lost, an ecosystem damaged, and hundreds of human lives and livelihoods wrecked. Again though, why are we here ^ ?

Well of course it was a lie. It couldn't be that it happened over a decade ago and I got it wrong. I'm just an evil racist, segregationist, xenophobic, homophobic, lying transphobe.

The important take away is that scientists, even a little over a decade ago are still making discoveries.

That long term, assuming that study is valid, is many millennia. It says that in your link. Why are you bringing this up? We are concerned about human lifetimes and the upcoming decades.

I bring it up as an example of the Earth's natural ability to regulate temperatures. The warming were seeing now isn't the first of its kind. It happened about 7,000 years ago....and temperatures stabilized between then and now.

This is basically a self-contradictory statement of more know-nothingism. We know that man-made climate change is doing the damage.
Exxon scientists knew it decades ago (though Exxon of course kept it secret and produced the great sweep of right wing lies, some of which you parrot.

Exxon scientists predicted global warming with 'shocking skill and accuracy,' Harvard researchers say

In the study, scientists showed how the multinational energy giant worked to cloud the issue.

news.harvard.edu

False, and virtually all the posts of yours I have seen are in fact actually silly. This one of yours is as ridiculous as any.

One thing I think it's time for you to begin to know is that you do not use evidence, and do not know how to use facts, logic and evidence to free yourself of reactionary ideology and find out about the real world.

Anyway, it really doesn't matter. I'm all for taking reasonable steps to decrease CO2 output. I have solar panels. I use mass transit for 90% of my commute to work, but the US and other on-board countries probably can't implement reasonable steps to fix the problem, in the timeframe believed to be necessary, as long as countries like China and India exist.

 

[superrific]

Global Warming and Hurricanes – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory

Contents Summary Statement Global Warming and Atlantic Hurricanes Statistical relationships between SSTs and hurricanes Analysis of century-scale Atlantic tropical storm and hurricane frequency Analysis of other observed Atlantic hurricane metrics Model simulations of greenhouse warming...

www.gfdl.noaa.gov

We conclude that the historical Atlantic hurricane data at this stage do not provide compelling evidence for a substantial greenhouse warming-induced century-scale increase in: frequency of tropical storms, hurricanes, or major hurricanes, or in the proportion of hurricanes that become major hurricanes.

LOL LOL LOL. You didn't read that whole link. You probably didn't read any of it. Let me offer some refinements of your out-of-context quote:

1. Note the "greenhouse warning induced" qualifier. In fact, the researchers do find that human activity has intensified all of those metrics. It's just that some of the increase might be due to reduced aerosols.

2. Note also what isn't being described in your snippet: severity of the storms. This is old news. People have known for a long time that factors like wind shear are more important to the formation frequency of hurricanes, because wind shear can break up hurricanes before they really get started. But severity of storms is a different matter entirely.

 

[superrific]

That CO2 and other green house causes increased temperatures is not "known". It's believed to be true and there is a decent amount of evidence that it's true. True "knowns" are things like a water molecule is 2 Hydrogens and 1 Oxygen.

The composition of a water molecule is actually a theory, not a fact. It's one of hte predictions of our models of chemical processes. Those models happen to be exceedingly accurate, which is why we use the word known. But climate models are also incredibly accurate compared to most of the things we refer to as "knowledge."

I guarantee you that you accept plenty of assertions as "known" that are far less grounded than climate predictions. You're just fucking around with words yet again, insisting on your own selectively applied meanings with no care at all for whether anyone else thinks language works that way.

 

[superrific]

Well of course it was a lie. It couldn't be that it happened over a decade ago and I got it wrong. I'm just an evil racist, segregationist, xenophobic, lying transphobe.

The important take away is that scientists, even a little over a decade ago are still making discoveries.

Anyway, it really doesn't matter. I'm all for taking reasonable steps to decrease CO2 output. I have solar panels. I use mass transit for 90% of my commute to work, but the US and other on-board countries probably can't implement reasonable steps to fix the problem, in the timeframe believed to be necessary, as long as countries like China and India exist.

1. I don't begrudge you an error if you admit it. You admitted it here. I guess that's progress.

2. Scientists are still making discoveries in every field of science. Astrophysicists continue to make discoveries, and cosmology as a field looks different than it did 50 years ago. But it's still based on relativity, which remains one of the most empirically tested and accurate theories in science, even though some refinements have been needed.

That scientists are still making discoveries means absolutely nothing. It is a truism that affects nothing at all.

3. As long as China and India "exist"? WTF? Anyway, you are wrong about "reasonable steps to fix the problem," just as you are wrong to characterize the US as an on-board country. We just elected a climate-change denier for a second term.

 

[chrissteel]

LOL LOL LOL. You didn't read that whole link. You probably didn't read any of it. Let me offer some refinements of your out-of-context quote:

1. Note the "greenhouse warning induced" qualifier. In fact, the researchers do find that human activity has intensified all of those metrics. It's just that some of the increase might be due to reduced aerosols.

2. Note also what isn't being described in your snippet: severity of the storms. This is old news. People have known for a long time that factors like wind shear are more important to the formation frequency of hurricanes, because wind shear can break up hurricanes before they really get started. But severity of storms is a different matter entirely.

But that is not what you hear all the time.

Stronger hurricanes are becoming more common in a warmer climate.

Researchers suggest that the most damaging U.S. hurricanes are three times more frequent than 100 years ago, and that the proportion of major hurricanes (Category 3 or above) in the Atlantic Ocean has doubled since 1980.

How climate change makes hurricanes more destructive

As our climate warms, storms are becoming more destructive and costly. Why do hurricanes bring more rain in a warmer climate? Learn about it here.

www.edf.org