Earth day

63 Skier wrote: Eddie, I seriously considered a Tesla a few years ago. Once I realized that $59,000 only bought the 120 mile battery, and it was $80,000 for the 300 mile battery, I was out. Amazing engineering, glad to see them succeeding. There's a very robust re-sale market for them as well, I think for the Roadster model that you can't buy in the U.S. right now. If I have an electric-only vehicle it has to have mega range, that's why the Volt is for me the best tech, long trips are no problem, lack of time to charge is no problem. As an added bit of info about me and vehicles, I've run a few on wvo and also have considered a CNG conversion, they are putting a station in about 8 miles from my house. If it's different, I'm interested!

The price can go up rather quickly when you start talking about the higher output battery option. Another thing that I asked the dealer that I talked to was how long before the battery needs to be replaced and how much are we talking?
The batteries are lithium-ion. Obviously, it's like any other battery that will degrade over time and how it's charged and discharged. They estimated that the battery should probably last 8 years. Replacing it was not cheap. If I remember right it was $15K for the lowest battery to $25K for the high end one. The battery is housed in the chassis so the body is lifted off the car and the chassis is pretty much replaced. Nothing you can do in your driveway by any means. They had special pricing at the time of a new purchase for like $5K that included a first battery replacement when it came time for it. A really good price actually considering the alternatives.

So again, it isn't for everyone and it isn't exactly cheap but it is some pretty awesome technology that can only become more cost effective as technology, demand and competition start to even things out like it normally does.

Now, the bigger question for all the tree huggers is what happens to the old battery when they replace it????????

I want to hear about someone crossing Lake Superior on a snowmobile. Anyone here game to try?

WooooHoooo!
Global Warming is FINALLY here! Its 34 degrees out ... thats ABOVE freezing!

after this on Monday morning I'm ready!

This winter definitely reminds me of the the norm for the 70's in Minnesota. Lots of snow and cold. It seemed like a lot more fun back then! Maybe I should move to Alaska. Seems like everybody is having weather again this year!

Superior they said never gives up your sled when the thaws of April come early!)    

john b wrote: Superior they said never gives up your sled when the thaws of April come early!)

That good sled and true was a bone to be chewed when the cold of 2014 came early.

Jamin,when we have weather, for some the temp goes up, and for some it goes down I was saying I might have to move to Alaska for the warmer weather. You are correct about local weather, although lake superior covers A LOT of local. Globally satellites have temps flat for 17 years now. I will bet you a beer that global temps go down for a few years before they go up again.

John, I am up for Twin cities beers, let me know when you are in (or at least near) town.

Hard to argue that we're not having a much colder/snowier than average winter. It's not just a good old fashioned winter. I'm glad I used the -100 stuff in the boats as we've had far more way below zeros days than usual.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2014/02/13/snow-totals-piling-up-fast/

I hadn't read them, but just did. That's why I've become far less interested and argumentative in politics. Even 2nd amendment stuff doesn't interest me much anyone. I much prefer to talk about Correct Crafts, but I do appreciate the irony of a global warming discussion during a winter when we have a lot of snow, the boiler runs constantly burning up $3.79/gal fuel and I've got ice bombs dropping off my roof trying to cave my bulkhead in. But, that said, the skiing hasn't been very good in Maine as the mountains aren't getting the snow. They finally got more than a foot yesterday, so maybe next time I go it'll finally be good.

I'm a bum Jamin. I can schedule it anytime. It would be nice to arrange it around your schedule and get a look at that sweet ride you have. You may have other ideas and want to hang out with someone younger than your grandfather though. I will be visiting my nephew in St Paul when I go. He is one of " you guys" so I love listening to him.

Who is this evil climate change community? When do they have their little black panther parties where they cook the books?

Data provided by climate scientists tells us the hottest 10 years on record all have occurred after 1998, 2010 was the hottest ever recorded. Statistically the odds of that happening without a global warming trend is somewhere between astronomical and my chances of hitting the mega millions. Yet you seem to argue that global warming is a farce because predictions made in the 50’s didn’t perfectly describe a world 60 years in the future? Even if we were to accept such a high standard of prognostication from the past scientists for us to have any faith in the current scientists… and well that just doesn’t seem fair… these guys weren’t even born yet! But even if that was the requirement you realize that based on those predictions in the past we have changed a fair amount of the underlying assumptions that those conditions were based on. Technology has not stood still.

Deniers are talking about a pause or hiatus, not climate scientists. True, according the data the climate has warmed in the last decade less quickly than it warmed in the decades preceding it, but getting excited about that is the equivalent of getting excited about the deficit going down and not realizing the size of the debt is still going up.

If you wanted to seriously ask where the heat is going on vacation, the scientists would tell you the answer appears to be the heat is going into the ocean, not dissimilar to how sometimes we have floods and sometimes droughts, the water always exists but sometimes it is on vacation in the ocean.

JoeinNY wrote: Who is this evil climate change community? When do they have their little black panther parties where they cook the books?

When I hear you describe them I get really scared. I don't remember ever calling them evil, just misguided and agenda driven. Whats with the black panther comment? I don't see where the race card fits in here, other than who's playbook it comes from.

JoeinNY wrote: Yet you seem to argue that global warming is a farce because predictions made in the 50’s didn’t perfectly describe a world 60 years in the future? Even if we were to accept such a high standard of prognostication from the past scientists for us to have any faith in the current scientists… and well that just doesn’t seem fair… these guys weren’t even born yet!

   

Actually a 2013 article in nature climate change highlighted a study that found 114 out 0f 117 climate models from the 1990's overestimated warming. That is a 97% consensus! And consensus is everything in global warming science. I remain uncomfortable handicapping economies based on models that don't reflect reality. We first need accurate models, then we need good cost vs benefit analysis based on accurate information to determine what is a responsible path forward.

JoeinNY wrote: Deniers are talking about a pause or hiatus, not climate scientists.

Why would deniers talk about a hiatus? From what? I can't remember if the IPCC called it a hiatus or a pause, but if you Google "global warming hiatus", the results heavily lean towards the climate change "community" using the terminology.

JoeinNY wrote: If you wanted to seriously ask where the heat is going on vacation, the scientists would tell you the answer appears to be the heat is going into the ocean, not dissimilar to how sometimes we have floods and sometimes droughts, the water always exists but sometimes it is on vacation in the ocean.

I can readily accept the oceans buffering atmospheric temperatures, but I am a little skeptical about them doing so for 17 years. The global warming supporters will argue to the death against science that conflicts with their view point up to demonizing opponents with the label "deniers", yet they will grasp with little question onto anything that advances their cause. Accepting "Appears to be" seems a little faith based to me at this point.

It is on a consensus of maps ithat I have seen!

I don’t know why I feed the trolls, but what can I say I am annoyed when propaganda is used to dispute science.
You know Dave every cherry picked and then massaged statistic you post now, you already posted earlier in this thread. The responses are already there, along with your evidence of your willingness to seek out and then spread/post fake and easily disproven data that supports your argument. Anyone that had to shovel today and wants to blame it on the democrats should just go back and reread it. It is too tiring to address each repost of the same drivel, now I can see why they have just kicked the deniers off reddit.

The only thing that is marginally interesting in your last post is that you pretend to not know about the modus of operandi of those that so readily seek to control your thought through the propaganda you so hunger to ingest that you literally seek it out. These technics go back to Joseph Goebbel, pushed to redefine business interests as conservative views by the likes of Lewis Powell, perfected by roger alles, karl rove, and the ilk anyway you purport to not understand the classic attacking a straw man technique… to create an easily defeated argument and attribute it to unseen enemies so you can argue against it as protector of logic, freedom, common sense, and the American way.

It’s right up there with projection/flipping basically accusing your opponents of what you are in fact doing… like accusing scientists of grasping with little question onto anything that advances their cause.

However I suspect you know these are the tools of propagandists as they have very traceable roots, and their modern purveyors don’t deny them…

I would bet that you know them well, and think that you are one of the smart ones that sees what they are doing there… but don’t worry about it cause you like to win and it makes you feel all superior like… kinda like what Goebbel said “That propaganda is good which leads to success, and that is bad which fails to achieve the desired result. It is not propaganda’s task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success.” … wait there I go again with another technique.. Character assassination -I just compared you to a nazi propagandist - scandelous.

Of course we missed the biggest propaganda technique embraced by the Lewis Powell created modern conservative movement… repetition, what do you know about that one Dave.. how many times have we heard about your 17 years of data that you say shows something.   It’s like you believe if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it, wait that’s Goebbel again… - more scandel.

So which is it, are you the one who falls for the “Conservative” propaganda unknowingly or are you one of the ones who thinks you are in on the secret and believes that the ends justifies the means?

I will say that I had a good laugh this morning when I see Dr. Krauthammer that respected climate scientist being quoted disagreeing with Obama… oh that’s right he is a paid conservative voice, what science he has done is in psychiatry which doesn’t exactly make him a neutral scientific observer. Anyway, his bread and butter is as a critic of the president, seriously it is in his job description..check it out it is in his biography… so I guess I will write that off as doing what he is paid to do. Not that he isn’t likely more worth listening to than Obama on a variety of topics, but he is in the unfortunate position that when Obama is stating a simple and observable fact like the state of scientific consensus he still is paid to deny that statement even when it makes him look like he has no idea what he is talking about. Just like when he was paid to say that Romney was going to win the last election… it’s tough working for fox news and the weekly standard you have to be willing to lie in public, and do so well enough that people will still take you seriously the next time you lie, at least some of the people anyway.

Hansel wrote: Dave G, I know more than a few climate scientists and I follow the general scientific literature rather closely. Believe me when I say that there is no climate change debate, raging or otherwise. Of course a debate that is not happening cannot be lost. Science is mutable, this is true. Maybe something will happen in the future to spur debate anew, but at the moment it just isn't happening, you can trust me on that.

Jamin....I know you know lots about this subject, and scientists as well, and you present a very level headed, articulate, approach to the topic . Are you saying that there is no debate on climate change any longer, and it is now "settled science"? End of story! Consensus is in! Just checking to make sure I understand.

Hey, when you getting back over to Michigan? I have been spending lots of time over there. It would be good to get together for some of those fine craft brew that your home state produces. Founders Red Rye IPA is now topping my list of favorites.