European nations agree on offshore North Sea electric grid

[RandomGuy]

As density increases, places for children decline, and we end up with more troubled children, gangs, crime, etc.

We need more cities perhaps. Not more density.

Good urban planning includes places for children. Parks, playgrounds, museums.

City planners who work for government (gasp) know to include stuff like this, although Austin's build up seems to have been targeted at people without kids, i.e. hipsters/retirees.

[Drachen]

One other striking thing I noted during my reading was how efficient small motorcycles or bicycles are.

Encourage density and usage of those two modes of transportation, and you can spend money on things other than replacing cars every few years. THAT process uses up massive amounts of energy.

Moving away from importing a lot of cars would also have the twofold effect of making our trade imbalance much smaller. Less imported oil and less imported cars.

The Chinese used to have this model, but have moved to cars with no real emission controls. Every day they add tens of thousands of new drivers.

(that is not fog, folks)

I love my motorcycles... and as to the first article you posted, I see no reason that motorcycles are not a valid commuter for suburbia, especially in a southern city like san antonio.

[Wild Cobra]

Good urban planning includes places for children. Parks, playgrounds, museums.

City planners who work for government (gasp) know to include stuff like this, although Austin's build up seems to have been targeted at people without kids, i.e. hipsters/retirees.

But how many kids have a park they can walk to, that their parents will let them go to alone?

Planning on paper is not the same as real life.

[TeyshaBlue]

I love my motorcycles... and as to the first article you posted, I see no reason that motorcycles are not a valid commuter for suburbia, especially in a southern city like san antonio.

I'm a bike guy, but riding on I635 up here in DFW is vehicular suicide.

[RandomGuy]

Cameras see what the human eye doesn't. Without the right filters, you capture images and effects not seen by the naked eye.

I'll bet that it is a humid day, and the camera is capturing the greenhouse effect, or there is enough ultraviolet scattering in the humidity to look that way.

Ever take the same photo, minutes apart, with and without UV filters?

Where was that picture taken anyway?

Check the URL, it is Beijing apparently.

Or



click here to get a google image search for "chinese smog pictures"

or

Know that the most polluted cities on earth are all in China, and probably places you haven't heard of. I can provide ample links to this, if you want.

It is very bad.


Pollution May Cancel Out China's Economic Growth

Much has been made of China's dazzling economic growth, but when the negative effects of China's pollution are factored in, the growth rate is less impressive.

The Chinese government has calculated that the effects of pollution wiped out $67 billion, or 3 percent of the nation's GDP, in 2004.

The World Bank calculates that pollution costs China about 5.8 percent of GDP every year.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2895653.shtml

A total of 16 of the world’s top 20 most polluted cities are in china. No. 1 on the World Bank list is Linfen City in Shanxi Province, China.

The province, which is known for its coal industry, stood out on the list.

A Chinese watchdog group, in a separate list, included two other Shanxi cities: Yangquan and Datong. Others included: Shizuishan in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Sanmenxia in Henan Province, Jinchang in Gansu Province, Shijiazhuang in Hebei Province, Xianyang in Shaanxi Province, Zhuzhou in Hunan Province and Luoyang in Henan Province.

Beijing is listed at number 28 out of 113 on the Chinese list.

It may be a trick of the camera for any given picture, but en masse, they probably are more accurate than one might think.

[RandomGuy]

But how many kids have a park they can walk to, that their parents will let them go to alone?

Planning on paper is not the same as real life.

Planning for pedestrian/bicycle friendly places does indeed take place on paper.

Kids have been living in cities as long as there has been cities.

At some point you have to figure that kids can take care of themselves, and worrying over every minute of their lives is silly. But that is a whole other conversation.

[Drachen]

I'm a bike guy, but riding on I635 up here in DFW is vehicular suicide.

This is where the superior agility of bikes comes in handy.

[Wild Cobra]

Check the URL, it is Beijing apparently.

.
.
.
.
.

It may be a trick of the camera for any given picture, but en masse, they probably are more accurate than one might think.

Yes, I agree they are close to real life shots. The camera will still add some hazing without proper filtering. You can get hazing on film that is completely invisible/clear to the naked eyes.

That said, haven't I pointed out the pollution issue/black carbon from Asia as the primary culprit to the melting if ice in the northern hemisphere?

You see that level of smog in the less advanced countries. Not in the USA. We have people wanting to harm our economy with carbon credits when it's other nations that need to clean up their act. Mexico city is also really bad.

[Wild Cobra]

Planning for pedestrian/bicycle friendly places does indeed take place on paper.

That's not what I menat. I mean the reality of planning seldom is achieved.

Kids have been living in cities as long as there has been cities.

Yes, but there ised to be haouses with yard, not apartments that want kids to stay off the little grass there is.

Years ago, I lived in Beaverton, OR, real near the city center. We has a three bedroom house on a nice lot. A large field behind the house. The whole area is now nothing but apartments.

At some point you have to figure that kids can take care of themselves, and worrying over every minute of their lives is silly. But that is a whole other conversation.

yes, it is. My point stands that kids cannot play like the did years ago. Increasing population density is not a good thing for kids. Anyone interesting in fostering good behavior in children knows a large area to play in is a necessity.

[RandomGuy]

You see that level of smog in the less advanced countries. Not in the USA. We have people wanting to harm our economy with carbon credits when it's other nations that need to clean up their act. Mexico city is also really bad.

1) Smog is not carbon, generally. It is a mix of stuff, as you already know.

2) The US has the highest per capita carbon emissions of any major industrialized country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ons_per_capita

Carbon credits won't harm the economy, it will help it. I can, and have already made the case for that.

[RandomGuy]

Increasing population density is not a good thing for kids.

Prove it.

I want something better than your 99.99999% certainty, I want something that corroborates that statement even mildly.

[Wild Cobra]

1) Smog is not carbon, generally. It is a mix of stuff, as you already know.

2) The US has the highest per capita carbon emissions of any major industrialized country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ons_per_capita

Carbon credits won't harm the economy, it will help it. I can, and have already made the case for that.

Smog in the USA no. CO2, yes, but it is invisible, and not a component of smog.

How is taxing most energy related usage helping this nation? Do you realize the cost effect that will have with supply and demand forces? Prices rise sharply as supply diminishes, then the poor are left without.

[Wild Cobra]

Prove it.

I want something better than your 99.99999% certainty, I want something that corroborates that statement even mildly.

How do I relate my experience on this topic over the span of my life? My God man. It's very clear to anyone who has witnessed urban growth.

[MannyIsGod]

No one cares about your personal experiences. We want proof. This is your safety net when you can't prove . I need only pull up the wind energy thread to provide another glaring example.

[Wild Cobra]

No one cares about your personal experiences. We want proof. This is your safety net when you can't prove . I need only pull up the wind energy thread to provide another glaring example.

I'm sorry if you haven't lived enough years to witness it yourself.

I understand. You are do dumb, if I cant find it on the internet, it just isn't true.

Bye moore-on.

[RandomGuy]

Smog in the USA no. CO2, yes, but it is invisible, and not a component of smog.

How is taxing most energy related usage helping this nation? Do you realize the cost effect that will have with supply and demand forces? Prices rise sharply as supply diminishes, then the poor are left without.

How does the libertarian argument go?

"They are poor because of their choices. All they have to do is take responsibility for themselves and they won't be poor."

Full speed ahead.

[RandomGuy]

I'm sorry if you haven't lived enough years to witness it yourself.

I understand. You are do dumb, if I cant find it on the internet, it just isn't true.

Bye moore-on.

The internet has become the repository of all human knowledge.

If you can't find it on the internet, then the chances of it being true fall markedly.

I'm not about to take a public policy stand based on your personal experiences, sorry.

Either you can support your assertion with something approaching a reasonable argument or actual data, or we can discard it as false.

I see little reason why city planning, which is a professional discipline, can't take into account places for children to play. The very existance of parks with playgrounds seems to run counter to your assertion.

[MannyIsGod]

I never said anything bout it having to be on the internet. I asked for proof. Apparently you believe your perceptions to be infallible proof. I'm quite sure nobody else does.