Norm48327 schlimm Norm48327 James, If I may add to what you said, natural gas does currently have the advantage, but how long will that last and at whose expense? As is usual, I suspect the expense will be borne by the consumer. Costs have relegated home heating oil to the back burner now that less expensive options are available. Wind and solar power are only viable with subsidies, and as a result of the mandate for Michigan to make 10% of electric generation mandatory I have seen a 40% increase in my electric rates over the past year. Coal is one of our vast resources and I support every effort within reason to make it as clean as we reasonably can. OTOH, green plants need Carbon Dioxide to grow and if we eliminate it from the atmosphere the greenery, including food sources, will suffer and food shortages will become the norm. I have long been of the opinion Global Warming/Climate Change is a scam to benefit the likes of Al Gore and other elites while leaving the masses to pay for their privileges. It is beyond the pale to think humanity plays a mojor role in doing so. I also think academics have deserted their mission to give true information to the public so they can make a rational decision either in agreement or in conflict with what they say we should believe. Universities have failed their students in many ways, leaving the latter deep in debt while reaping the rewards of their efforts. Research shows the GW data has indeed been fudged and only shows their biases. Sorry to get political but that is what I've seen happening over the last few decades. Your post is strictly political. Sources for your assertions? Or just opinion? Your opinion is noted but taken with 286,000 pounds of salt. Academia is not the be all end all you seem to think it is given your propensity to demean those of lesser education. Lack of the PHD you think makes you so much smarter than the rest of us gets boring after a time. Have you ever put your hand an the throttle of a locomotive or ever pulled a pin in switching operations? I have my doubts, and just for clarification I do not claim to be an expert on anything. I will say it again schlimm. You think, because of your being an academic you have an advantage over those who know how to make a railroad run. Those who work the rails day by day are much more in touch with reality. Please take your utopian thoughts elswhere and contribute to the demise of teaching for themselves. I am tired of listening to your left leaning BS. If you have nothing constructive to offer rather that the condemnation of those who you consider beneath you please shut up and go away.
schlimm Norm48327 James, If I may add to what you said, natural gas does currently have the advantage, but how long will that last and at whose expense? As is usual, I suspect the expense will be borne by the consumer. Costs have relegated home heating oil to the back burner now that less expensive options are available. Wind and solar power are only viable with subsidies, and as a result of the mandate for Michigan to make 10% of electric generation mandatory I have seen a 40% increase in my electric rates over the past year. Coal is one of our vast resources and I support every effort within reason to make it as clean as we reasonably can. OTOH, green plants need Carbon Dioxide to grow and if we eliminate it from the atmosphere the greenery, including food sources, will suffer and food shortages will become the norm. I have long been of the opinion Global Warming/Climate Change is a scam to benefit the likes of Al Gore and other elites while leaving the masses to pay for their privileges. It is beyond the pale to think humanity plays a mojor role in doing so. I also think academics have deserted their mission to give true information to the public so they can make a rational decision either in agreement or in conflict with what they say we should believe. Universities have failed their students in many ways, leaving the latter deep in debt while reaping the rewards of their efforts. Research shows the GW data has indeed been fudged and only shows their biases. Sorry to get political but that is what I've seen happening over the last few decades. Your post is strictly political. Sources for your assertions? Or just opinion?
Norm48327 James, If I may add to what you said, natural gas does currently have the advantage, but how long will that last and at whose expense? As is usual, I suspect the expense will be borne by the consumer. Costs have relegated home heating oil to the back burner now that less expensive options are available. Wind and solar power are only viable with subsidies, and as a result of the mandate for Michigan to make 10% of electric generation mandatory I have seen a 40% increase in my electric rates over the past year. Coal is one of our vast resources and I support every effort within reason to make it as clean as we reasonably can. OTOH, green plants need Carbon Dioxide to grow and if we eliminate it from the atmosphere the greenery, including food sources, will suffer and food shortages will become the norm. I have long been of the opinion Global Warming/Climate Change is a scam to benefit the likes of Al Gore and other elites while leaving the masses to pay for their privileges. It is beyond the pale to think humanity plays a mojor role in doing so. I also think academics have deserted their mission to give true information to the public so they can make a rational decision either in agreement or in conflict with what they say we should believe. Universities have failed their students in many ways, leaving the latter deep in debt while reaping the rewards of their efforts. Research shows the GW data has indeed been fudged and only shows their biases. Sorry to get political but that is what I've seen happening over the last few decades.
James,
If I may add to what you said, natural gas does currently have the advantage, but how long will that last and at whose expense? As is usual, I suspect the expense will be borne by the consumer. Costs have relegated home heating oil to the back burner now that less expensive options are available.
Wind and solar power are only viable with subsidies, and as a result of the mandate for Michigan to make 10% of electric generation mandatory I have seen a 40% increase in my electric rates over the past year.
Coal is one of our vast resources and I support every effort within reason to make it as clean as we reasonably can. OTOH, green plants need Carbon Dioxide to grow and if we eliminate it from the atmosphere the greenery, including food sources, will suffer and food shortages will become the norm.
I have long been of the opinion Global Warming/Climate Change is a scam to benefit the likes of Al Gore and other elites while leaving the masses to pay for their privileges. It is beyond the pale to think humanity plays a mojor role in doing so.
I also think academics have deserted their mission to give true information to the public so they can make a rational decision either in agreement or in conflict with what they say we should believe. Universities have failed their students in many ways, leaving the latter deep in debt while reaping the rewards of their efforts. Research shows the GW data has indeed been fudged and only shows their biases.
Sorry to get political but that is what I've seen happening over the last few decades.
Your post is strictly political. Sources for your assertions? Or just opinion?
Your opinion is noted but taken with 286,000 pounds of salt. Academia is not the be all end all you seem to think it is given your propensity to demean those of lesser education. Lack of the PHD you think makes you so much smarter than the rest of us gets boring after a time. Have you ever put your hand an the throttle of a locomotive or ever pulled a pin in switching operations? I have my doubts, and just for clarification I do not claim to be an expert on anything.
I will say it again schlimm. You think, because of your being an academic you have an advantage over those who know how to make a railroad run. Those who work the rails day by day are much more in touch with reality. Please take your utopian thoughts elswhere and contribute to the demise of teaching for themselves. I am tired of listening to your left leaning BS. If you have nothing constructive to offer rather that the condemnation of those who you consider beneath you please shut up and go away.
You have a chip on your shoulder as big as a house. It turns you into an irrational, abusive guy as soon as someone disagrees with your opinions which are always politically charged. My comment had nothing to do with my education or academia. I never drove a locomotive. Did you? I did work in several factories.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
If I've got 2 people to choose from for an office job around here. 1st one has no degree but 30 years in the business. 2nd one is a PhD with no real world experience in the private sector but taught for 15 years. Guess who is getting the job here not the guy with the degree. Sorry I'll take someone who can be thrown into the fire deal with a massive screwup and not panic. The last college educated moron we hired tired to send solo driver's overnight Chicago to Miami.
Nevertheless, there are two thoughts in your post I need to briefly address:1. Yes, green plants do indeed need carbon dioxide to transpire; however there is zero chance of CO2 being reduced far enough as to starve the flora. Plants did just fine before the arrival of fauna. And if the flora does expire, it won't matter to us, as we humans will be dead as a result long before the plants die. We need the plants much more than they need us.2. "Global Warming/Climate Change" is a scam to benefit the likes of Al Gore and other beings that like to breathe oxygen, and the masses that will benefit are the same ones that caused the problem in the first place.
As a person who has a degree (granted, only a B.A.) in meteorology/climatology, I could refer you to numerous studies that show the various effects human-made activity has had on the atmosphere. This is not the place for that.
The Earth has fluctuated between Snowball Earth and Tropical Earth on numerous occasions in the past 4.5 Billion years - all without the help of mankind.
I feel it is supreme human arrogance to feel that human activity is the only cause of 'climate change'. While I have no fear that human activity in some way contributes to rising carbon dioxide levels - I also feel there and any number of natural happenings that are more responsible than human activity. While a lot of natural linkages are known to science, I feel there are hundreds if not thousands more that have yet to be discovered.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Buslist Euclid I am surprised that Mr. Harrison takes that position in this highly political debate. If he knows coal will die, but he does not know when, why bail out right now while there is coal traffic to haul? His announced position is just adding to the politics of killing off coal by regulations sooner rather than later. He's only not buying new equipment, NOT getting out of the business.
Euclid I am surprised that Mr. Harrison takes that position in this highly political debate. If he knows coal will die, but he does not know when, why bail out right now while there is coal traffic to haul? His announced position is just adding to the politics of killing off coal by regulations sooner rather than later.
I am surprised that Mr. Harrison takes that position in this highly political debate. If he knows coal will die, but he does not know when, why bail out right now while there is coal traffic to haul? His announced position is just adding to the politics of killing off coal by regulations sooner rather than later.
He's only not buying new equipment, NOT getting out of the business.
Yep. EHH's whole quote paints it a little different.
“Unless something changes drastically in the market, we’re not going to go out and put a double track in, or buy locomotives or anything for coal,” Harrison said, according to E&E News. “Having said that, the last carload of coal that’s shipped out of this country, I want to be the carrier that shipped it.
An "expensive model collector"
BaltACD The Earth has fluctuated between Snowball Earth and Tropical Earth on numerous occasions in the past 4.5 Billion years - all without the help of mankind. I feel it is supreme human arrogance to feel that human activity is the only cause of 'climate change'. While I have no fear that human activity in some way contributes to rising carbon dioxide levels - I also feel there and any number of natural happenings that are more responsible than human activity. While a lot of natural linkages are known to science, I feel there are hundreds if not thousands more that have yet to be discovered.
Exactly what I was taught in Meterology 101 at the University of Wisconsin back in 1988 before it was fashionable to blame mankind. And to those that assert we didn't have the data back then, the instructor covered that as well saying we would all be long dead before we did have the data to prove any kind of impact of man on the macro climate. Micro climate, entirely different story, man can raise the surface temperature of the earth via putting in a asphalt parking lot over a city park but that is in a tiny area relative to the rest of the Earth (90% of which is covered by water, BTW) and atmosphere to say that exponetially that kind of activity impacts the Microclimate ignores multitude of cubic feet of atmosphere above as well as the multitude of Earths surface covered by water.
n012944Yep. EHH's whole quote paints it a little different. “Unless something changes drastically in the market, we’re not going to go out and put a double track in, or buy locomotives or anything for coal,” Harrison said, according to E&E News. “Having said that, the last carload of coal that’s shipped out of this country, I want to be the carrier that shipped it.
Ah, something reasonable. Nothing is absolute. There is nothing to prevent changing plans if conditions change.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
CMStPnP Earth (90% of which is covered by water, BTW)
More "facts" by CMStPNP...
https://water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html
"About 71 percent of the Earth's surface is water-covered"
Shadow the Cats owner If I've got 2 people to choose from for an office job around here. 1st one has no degree but 30 years in the business. 2nd one is a PhD with no real world experience in the private sector but taught for 15 years. Guess who is getting the job here not the guy with the degree. Sorry I'll take someone who can be thrown into the fire deal with a massive screwup and not panic. The last college educated moron we hired tired to send solo driver's overnight Chicago to Miami.
And just because someone has 30 years in the business does not mean they will make a good manager (if in fact you are hiring for a manager-type position). I've seen guys from the ground absolutely fail as a manager, and guys straight from college have succeeded enough to get in pretty decent high-level positions. The two are very different jobs with different skillsets. Now having someone that is capable of doing both? Now you're onto something. Hope it works out for your company.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Many people feel a lot of things. Which is all good, everyone has the right to their opinions (despite what some on this site think) until politicians (with middle-school level educations) decide to make those feelings official policy, pretending to know more than people that actually do study these things for a living, all in an effort to validate the ignorance of the people that voted them in. I know it's the cool thing to completely discredit any type of acemdemics in certain circles (who knows why?), but we shouldn't let emotions rule. And we wonder why people get millions of dollars when they are trespassing on RR property.
Not trying to defend or destroy EHH here, but could they (the railroads) be a little gunshy after the oil train deal? A lot of money seemed to be spent on that business (track, engines, signals, manpower, etc), only to have it prettty much dry up overnight when the price of oil dropped.
I'm sure if the coal really started to pick up, CSX would buy hoppers and locomotives if needed. But buying them now in case coal picked up would be silly, methinks. But I'm not a railroad executive...so my opinion is worth the paper it isn't written on.
CSX has a lot of locomotives in storage, that could always be placed back in service. As to coal gondolas or hoppers, other than for export coal, most are owned by utilities, aren't they?
But I think he will spin off coal branch lines over the next four years.
A final thought - it is unlikely that CSX will buy any new locomotives during EHH's tenure other than what was contracted for prior to his arrival. That is pretty much what he did at CP - no all new locomotive purchases and just a smattering of remanufactured units.
Factual information presented by experts in their field is certainly of more value than opinions by outsiders with occasional exceptions. So I put more credence in the expert opinion of a railroad engineer about operating a locomotive than that of a Ph.D. in English lit. I prefer the opinion of a chief dispatcher on rail traffic management to that of a neurosurgeon. And I think the opinions of a Ph.D. researcher in climate science on AGCC has more value than that of a Ph.D. chemical engineer.
n012944More "facts" by CMStPNP... https://water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html "About 71 percent of the Earth's surface is water-covered"
Oh wow, I misread a stat, heaven forbid! Though I will point out you probably have misread and misquoted articles on ratio exponentially higher. Not that anyone is keeping track.
I am curious about CSX and coal traffic. I read somewhere that most of their coal traffic was relatively short haul on a mileage basis but because of their terminals, branches, etc. Took CSX a little longer to deliver it compared to Western roads to handle Coal traffic from point A to point B. Compared to the Western roads, wonder how the profitability of coal traffic compared with CSX and how long in a year a coal car on CSX was actually rolling with a load or rolling back to get filled again......... vs parked empty in a yard. So maybe some stats on coal car utilitization rates between CSX and say UP RR if they exist?
“Fossil fuels are dead,”- Harrison
Well Duh!
BaltACDThe Earth has fluctuated between Snowball Earth and Tropical Earth on numerous occasions in the past 4.5 Billion years - all without the help of mankind. I feel it is supreme human arrogance to feel that human activity is the only cause of 'climate change'.
I don't know anybody saying the whole warming is man made but part of it for sure.
There always has been temperature change in the earth's history. It is the speed of the current temperature rise that indicates that part of it is man made. In the our history the temperature rise was about 4° to 5° in 10.000 years between glacial and interglacial periods, without any measures against global warning the same rise might occur in the next 100 years.
In the time from 1906 to 2005 there was a rise of about 0.8°, two third of it in the time from 1956 to 2005.Regards, Volker
[/quote]
I agree with Balt, the climate of the planet has gone through many cycles, long before man exisited or had any kind of impact, so what is "Normal"?
I am sure that man can/has contibuted to climate change in some ways, but I don't believe that our effect has been as great as many Gloom and Doomers want people to believe.
To ME, it only makes sense to reduce pollution as much as practical, but keep the theory of diminishing returns in mind, there does come a point where the cost of pollution reduction is not justifiable for the result, sadly there is much disagreement on where that point is.
Doug
May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails
challenger3980I am sure that man can/has contibuted to climate change in some ways, but I don't believe that our effect has been as great as many Gloom and Doomers want people to believe.
Then perhaps you can explain why the temperature rise has accelerated as described in my previous post? The acceleration started with the industrialisation.Regards, Volker
Most scientists are smart, precise, and accurate enough to say that mankind is A contributor, not the sole contributor.
That doesn't make that contribution insignificant in any way, however.
We gotta do what we can to reduce our impact. Simple. Sensible. Good for future generations.
Labeling concerned people "gloom and doomers" comes off as an attempt to diminish the truth of their message. I personally think that's short-sighted and selfish.
The effect of humankind on climate is scientifically undeniable.
VOLKER LANDWEHRI don't know anybody saying the whole warming is man made but part of it for sure. There always has been temperature change in the earth's history. It is the speed of the current temperature rise that indicates that part of it is man made. In the our history the temperature rise was about 4° to 5° in 10.000 years between glacial and interglacial periods, without any measures against global warning the same rise might occur in the next 100 years. In the time from 1906 to 2005 there was a rise of about 0.8°, two third of it in the time from 1956 to 2005. Regards, Volker
Read up on climate oscillation, this is an unusually well written article on wikipedia so far as it is not yet slanted to say mankind is responsible for current climate change. So I am not sure how long it will last before the extremists modify it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_oscillation
Note the question marks after the shorter climate cycle ranges. There is simply not enough data from the past to form a solid conclusion on climate cycles and their reasons in a lot of cases. Looking at tree rings and ocean sediment provides a glimpse in a lot of cases but is it really absolute evidence or is it speculative? Even so with those ancillary means of collection......still not enough historical data to make a solid conclusion.
Sometimes it is in the interest of a government to make you believe a hokey theory so your dependence on that government increases and your willingness to hand over more of your money for that government to "protect you" is more. So there is a political interest in promoting the theory that mankind is responsible and we can totally fix or even partially impact it. It means a populace willing to submit to ever higher taxes and much more government intrusion into their lives.
Climate research is a still developing science. As more data gets available the climate prognose models get better.
I believe the specialists and I see enough evidence and facts. I am a layman and won't judge a Wikipedia an artice. But I understand climate oscillation as relatively short term phenomena.
And there are enough articles that support climate change
At the moment there is still time to do something. When we have really hard facts and New York or London, to name just two have wet feet, it will be much to late. But before that happens a few islands in Pacific will have disappeared.
If you are wrong that is the scenario to be expected. If we are wrong what would will have happened? We have a cleaner world.
I think we have the obligation to give our planet into the hands of our successors in good shape.
Sometimes I have the feeling that the disgust for the government and resulting conspiracy theories blinds people for the evidence of influence of humans on global warming.Regards, Volker
CMStPnPRead up on climate oscillation, this is an unusually well written article on wikipedia so far as it is not yet slanted to say mankind is responsible for current climate change. So I am not sure how long it will last before the extremists modify it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_oscillation
I suggest you should read the entire article (citations lacking) to the end.
"Given that records of solar activity are accurate, solar activity may have contributed to part of the modern warming that peaked in the 1930s, in addition to the 60-year temperature cycles that result in roughly 0.5 °C of warming during the increasing temperature phase. However, solar cycles fail to account for warming observed since the 1980s to the present day[citation needed]. Events such as the opening of the Northwest Passage and recent record low ice minima of the modern Arctic shrinkage have not taken place for at least several centuries, as early explorers were all unable to make an Arctic crossing, even in summer. Shifts in biomes and habitat ranges are also unprecedented, occurring at rates that do not coincide with known climate oscillations[citation needed]. The extinction of many tropical amphibian species, especially in cloud forests, have been attributed to changing global temperatures, fungal disease and possible influence from unusually extreme phases of oceanic climate oscillations."
VOLKER LANDWEHR Climate research is a still developing science. As more data gets available the climate prognose models get better. I believe the specialists and I see enough evidence and facts. I am a layman and won't judge a Wikipedia an artice. But I understand climate oscillation as relatively short term phenomena. And there are enough articles that support climate change At the moment there is still time to do something. When we have really hard facts and New York or London, to name just two have wet feet, it will be much to late. But before that happens a few islands in Pacific will have disappeared. If you are wrong that is the scenario to be expected. If we are wrong what would will have happened? We have a cleaner world. I think we have the obligation to give our planet into the hands of our successors in good shape. Sometimes I have the feeling that the disgust for the government and resulting conspiracy theories blinds people for the evidence of influence of humans on global warming.Regards, Volker
Very true. The notion that there is some world-wide conspiracy of climate scientists or it is a conspiracy to bring about a "New World Order" is just the rantings of the tin foil hat brigade. Our current WH occupant said AGCC was a theory made up in China to wreck the US economy. More dangerous has been the calculated and heavily-funded campaign by the Koch Bros. to discredit climatology research.
schlimm VOLKER LANDWEHR Climate research is a still developing science. As more data gets available the climate prognose models get better. I believe the specialists and I see enough evidence and facts. I am a layman and won't judge a Wikipedia an artice. But I understand climate oscillation as relatively short term phenomena. And there are enough articles that support climate change At the moment there is still time to do something. When we have really hard facts and New York or London, to name just two have wet feet, it will be much to late. But before that happens a few islands in Pacific will have disappeared. If you are wrong that is the scenario to be expected. If we are wrong what would will have happened? We have a cleaner world. I think we have the obligation to give our planet into the hands of our successors in good shape. Sometimes I have the feeling that the disgust for the government and resulting conspiracy theories blinds people for the evidence of influence of humans on global warming.Regards, Volker Very true. The notion that there is some world-wide conspiracy of climate scientists or it is a conspiracy to bring about a "New World Order" is just the rantings of the tin foil hat brigade. Our current WH occupant said AGCC was a theory made up in China to wreck the US economy. More dangerous has been the calculated and heavily-funded campaign by the Koch Bros. to discredit climatology research.
That notion is a made up caricature intended to make points in the debate by insulting climate change opposition with the overused tool of labeling them as conspiracy kooks. True science does not rely on those sorts of cheap shots. It doesn’t need to rely on them. Nobody is saying that a bunch of world leaders got together around a table in the dark of night and secretly hatch a plot to take over the world using the made up pretext of climate change.
EuclidThat notion is a made up caricature intended to make points in the debate by insulting climate change opposition with the overused tool of labeling them as conspiracy kooks.
How would you judge the last clause in CMStPnP's latest post?Regard, Volker
VOLKER LANDWEHR Euclid That notion is a made up caricature intended to make points in the debate by insulting climate change opposition with the overused tool of labeling them as conspiracy kooks. How would you judge the last clause in CMStPnP's latest post?Regard, Volker
Euclid That notion is a made up caricature intended to make points in the debate by insulting climate change opposition with the overused tool of labeling them as conspiracy kooks.
Assuming you mean Schlimm, too much chicken little sky is falling.
The opposite of Euclid post could be stated as well, "deniers" simply call "truthers" cooky.
I'm in between, but it seems that even the In between are called cooks and deniers by the truthers. It seems like the truthers have an all or nothing attitude. I'm simply asking for proof, does that make me evil?
Modeling the Cleveland and Pittsburgh during the PennCentral era starting on the Cleveland lakefront and ending in Mingo junction
I can count the days on my hands this year that I've had to turn on my air conditioning this year. Same with last year. I can also tell you that this year I had to run my furnace later into the year than any of the year's I've owned it. This year farmers around me didn't finish planting the corn till June beans were mid June. That's the latest my mother-in-law has seen since the 70s and she grew up on a farm. My Roma tomatoes might be ready in mid Aug a full month later than normally. This year so far is 15 degrees below average around here and I'm talking since records have been kept. Normally around the end of July it is 90 today it made it to 75.
As many know, science is based on a large empirical databases, not anecdotal remarks. Of course some people (such as in an earlier post) will say a government database is part of a plot to take your money and control you, but I won't use the clinical term for that.
Here is a longitudinal NOAA report.
ruderunner VOLKER LANDWEHR Euclid That notion is a made up caricature intended to make points in the debate by insulting climate change opposition with the overused tool of labeling them as conspiracy kooks. How would you judge the last clause in CMStPnP's latest post?Regard, Volker Assuming you mean Schlimm, too much chicken little sky is falling. The opposite of Euclid post could be stated as well, "deniers" simply call "truthers" cooky. I'm in between, but it seems that even the In between are called cooks and deniers by the truthers. It seems like the truthers have an all or nothing attitude. I'm simply asking for proof, does that make me evil?
Landwehr referred to this gem from CMStPnP:
"Sometimes it is in the interest of a government to make you believe a hokey theory so your dependence on that government increases and your willingness to hand over more of your money for that government to "protect you" is more. So there is a political interest in promoting the theory that mankind is responsible and we can totally fix or even partially impact it. It means a populace willing to submit to ever higher taxes and much more government intrusion into their lives."
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.