Tweet
A few thoughts from the man in Maine...
For most of my life, I have thought of myself as being somewhat of an environmentalist, in that I deeply care about the natural environment that I live in, and do what I can to help preserve and protect it for future generations. I reuse and recycle. I donate to environmental groups such as Rainforest Alliance, because I feel that saving trees is the single most important thing we can do to protect our atmosphere and help our planet thrive. I have been a volunteer lakewater quality monitor here in Maine for more than 30 years, and am keenly aware of the importance of protecting clean water resources from degradating factors, most of which are caused by humans. But years of gathering water quality data shows me that there are also naturally occurring cycles that can have profound effects, and most of these effects are tied to weather and temperature. For example, if the ice out date in a lake occurs two or three weeks later than the normal average, this has a negative effect upon dissolved oxygen in the water. That's because you have less time for wind and wave action to drive oxygen from the surface down to lower depths. There is only a relatively short time, during spring and early summer, when the oxygenation can occur, because the lake stratisfies into layers that become impenetrable by oxygen as the water warms. The reduced oxygen at lower depths, where cold water fish such as Salmon prefer to be, can cause the fish to become lethargic, die, or leave the lake in search of better habitat. Anglers begin to wonder why it is a bad year for fishing, and many people speculate that perhaps acid rain, or some other souce of pollution is the cause. This example illustrates that a little bit of global warming could actually be a good thing for Maine's lakes. On the other hand, a little too much would be a bad thing, as it would cause continual degradation due to stimulated plant growth and increased fish and waterfowl populations. So there is definitely a rather narrow balance that somehow needs to be maintained, and the forces of nature have done a really good job of maintaining that balance. Is it possible that mankind can upset that balance? I think we would all answer that with a resounding yes! Nature, of course, will do whatever is necessary to restore balance, and the interim result could be catastrophic to mankind. Obviously, it is in our own best interest, regardless of the Global Warming controversy, to reduce and eliminate all sources of toxic pollutants which, if left unimpeded, have the ability to degrade our water resources and atmosphere. There's no need to "take sides" in the Global Warming debate. We just need to join hands in protecting this little planet that we all call home, using our resources wisely, and in searching for the answers to a better tomorrow. I think that everyone here is already somewhat in tune with these goals, or we wouldn't be participating in these forums.
As to the price of gas, and the price of everything else that rises because of fuel costs, it has nothing to do with depletion or scarcity of oil. Enough oil, and natural gas, has been found in the North Slope area of Alaska to fully meet the energy needs of the United States for the next 200 years. Now I am not suggesting that we should abandon our quest to develop alternative energies. This is something that should have been brought to fruition by world leaders and scientists long ago. But if you want to understand why they didn't do that, why we are still buying oil from Saudi Arabia, and what is really behind our current "energy crisis," then look to Lindsey Williams, as he has the answers. Watch this eye-opening 9 1/2 minute video of Lindsey, which is part 1 of 8, and you will probably want to see more.
YouTube - Lindsey Williams - The Energy Non-Crisis - Part 1 of 8
You can also read Lindsey's book, The Energy Non Crisis, at The Energy Non-Crisis by Lindsey Williams
Best regards to all,
Rickoff
For most of my life, I have thought of myself as being somewhat of an environmentalist, in that I deeply care about the natural environment that I live in, and do what I can to help preserve and protect it for future generations. I reuse and recycle. I donate to environmental groups such as Rainforest Alliance, because I feel that saving trees is the single most important thing we can do to protect our atmosphere and help our planet thrive. I have been a volunteer lakewater quality monitor here in Maine for more than 30 years, and am keenly aware of the importance of protecting clean water resources from degradating factors, most of which are caused by humans. But years of gathering water quality data shows me that there are also naturally occurring cycles that can have profound effects, and most of these effects are tied to weather and temperature. For example, if the ice out date in a lake occurs two or three weeks later than the normal average, this has a negative effect upon dissolved oxygen in the water. That's because you have less time for wind and wave action to drive oxygen from the surface down to lower depths. There is only a relatively short time, during spring and early summer, when the oxygenation can occur, because the lake stratisfies into layers that become impenetrable by oxygen as the water warms. The reduced oxygen at lower depths, where cold water fish such as Salmon prefer to be, can cause the fish to become lethargic, die, or leave the lake in search of better habitat. Anglers begin to wonder why it is a bad year for fishing, and many people speculate that perhaps acid rain, or some other souce of pollution is the cause. This example illustrates that a little bit of global warming could actually be a good thing for Maine's lakes. On the other hand, a little too much would be a bad thing, as it would cause continual degradation due to stimulated plant growth and increased fish and waterfowl populations. So there is definitely a rather narrow balance that somehow needs to be maintained, and the forces of nature have done a really good job of maintaining that balance. Is it possible that mankind can upset that balance? I think we would all answer that with a resounding yes! Nature, of course, will do whatever is necessary to restore balance, and the interim result could be catastrophic to mankind. Obviously, it is in our own best interest, regardless of the Global Warming controversy, to reduce and eliminate all sources of toxic pollutants which, if left unimpeded, have the ability to degrade our water resources and atmosphere. There's no need to "take sides" in the Global Warming debate. We just need to join hands in protecting this little planet that we all call home, using our resources wisely, and in searching for the answers to a better tomorrow. I think that everyone here is already somewhat in tune with these goals, or we wouldn't be participating in these forums.
As to the price of gas, and the price of everything else that rises because of fuel costs, it has nothing to do with depletion or scarcity of oil. Enough oil, and natural gas, has been found in the North Slope area of Alaska to fully meet the energy needs of the United States for the next 200 years. Now I am not suggesting that we should abandon our quest to develop alternative energies. This is something that should have been brought to fruition by world leaders and scientists long ago. But if you want to understand why they didn't do that, why we are still buying oil from Saudi Arabia, and what is really behind our current "energy crisis," then look to Lindsey Williams, as he has the answers. Watch this eye-opening 9 1/2 minute video of Lindsey, which is part 1 of 8, and you will probably want to see more.
YouTube - Lindsey Williams - The Energy Non-Crisis - Part 1 of 8
You can also read Lindsey's book, The Energy Non Crisis, at The Energy Non-Crisis by Lindsey Williams
Best regards to all,
Rickoff
Comment