RV Fuel Issues & Prices - Post 'Em Here!

Also the in the link you provided, in th% e last paragraph, says global warming is real and is happening.

Yes, there are many opinions for and against. The question is are humans causing it. The middle ages were substantially warmer and the 1930's were also slightly warmer. The temperature stations data is very suspect. CO2 has been multiple times higher with colder temperatures. The graphs relating solar activity and temperature agree pretty closely. The CO2 has been continuing to go up during this time that the temperature has remained about the same. Why did we have the warming after the ice age? What caused the extreme cold during the dark ages? What caused the warming during the Viking colonization of Iceland? This all took place before the industrial revolution and any human influence on CO2. These are all questions that remain unanswered and to me it says we don't know what is causing these cycles. The normal state of the earth is much colder than it is now, but there are subtropical remains in Alaska. The ice volume of Antarctica is increasing and the Arctic is decreasing. The average interglacial period is about 10,000 years and we have been 14,000 years. Warmer is better for mankind. (Renaissance was the last warm period.) Since we live in the Northern Hemisphere, we think of the Arctic first, but the Antarctic is much, much larger. The US has spent over $75 BILLION on global warming mostly at universities and tens of thousands of jobs depend on the supply of money coming in. Even the most staunch warmist say proposed actions won't delay CO2 by much. If it is man made, then adaptation is much cheaper than any prevention that won't do much. The notion that 99% of scientist agree human induced global warming is pure poppycock. When you hear that, you can be sure that the person has not gotten into it any further than the New York Times editorial page.


Interesting link with photos of some of the surface temp stations and their obvious leaning towards showing warming. Lots of work in this area, but it is what the warmist hang their hats.

http://www.surfacestations.org/odd_sites.htm

I would question the accuracy of 0.75 degrees. The receding of arctic ice seems more reliable. However, there appears to be a "natural" warming cycle. There is no evidence that it is created by humans. Claims, but no evidence (computer models are not evidence).

Hi Lindsay,

So why did you say the East Anglia Center was "the gold standard"? Or am I simply not understanding what you wrote?

Also the in the link you provided, in the last paragraph, says global warming is real and is happening.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released--chart-prove-it.html

Sorry, that was the Met which is the English equivalent of our National Weather Service. These types of comparison depend a lot on your starting and end time which can be selected to show what you wish. Note the graph in the link. The East Anglia Center was the one that had thousands of emails internally leaked showing that they were fudging the data and getting science writers to do sordid things. The whole thing is based on very shaky data based on temperature station of which 85% have disappeared in the last 15 years and the data has been "adjusted" in various ways. In short the stations have become mainly much more urban and subject to urban heat island affects. You have a station at a certain spot out in the country that now is surrounded by a parking lot, next to a brick wall, or an AC unit. If you are interested, I can send you a link to a study on this. Very informative. Remember the question isn't whether the earth is warming as we are coming out of an ice age 14,000 years ago (one of 7 known) where there was a mile high of ice over Chicago. My state of Florida was 1100 miles wide. According to ice core data, the hottest decade was the 1930 (dust bowl) and the hottest year was 1938. The Mid evil ages were about 1.5 C warmer than now. I really think it is pretty stupid to assign one temp to the earth.

Hi Lindsay,

I don't know where you were reading on the East Anglia site, but here is a quote:

"The period 2001-2010 (0.44°C above 1961-90 mean) was 0.20°C warmer than the 1991-2000 decade (0.24°C above 1961-90 mean). The warmest year of the entire series has been 1998, with a temperature of 0.55°C above the 1961-90 mean. After 1998, the next nine warmest years in the series are all in the decade 2001-2010. During this decade, only 2008 is not in the ten warmest years. Even though 2008 was the coldest year of the 21st century it was still the 13th warmest year of the whole record."

LindsayRichards wrote:
Had you not seen the temperature data from the Univ of East Anglia the gold standard of global warming showing that there has been no warming in the last decade and a half? Getting your "science" from those treehugger website always leads to confusion.

Thanks, great article. In RV'ing through the midwest, I was astounded to see the size of some of these ethanol plants. The corn belt states are all behind it and any politician against it is toast. The sad part is the starvation of the poor in 3rd world countries due to higher grain prices. The damage from ethanol isn't just cars and trucks, but chainsaws, lawnmowers, edgers, tractors, balers, and a whole host of other internal combustion engines.

Seems that $3.25 a gallon is the current "floor" for local gas prices. About 1/2 of the reported stations are still at $3.29. Diesel is still around $4.00 a gallon.

Hi Lindsay,

Nor do I.

But I do have a battery bank that can run the air. I do live in semi arid conditions so air conditioner use would not be 24 hours. I am able to provide some cooling from the dash air. I can do between 600 and 800 watts from the alternator. If I got 600 from the solar and 400 from the alternator I should end the day's travel with a full battery bank.

When I look at it that way, I can see few issues with running the air conditioner long enough to cool down the RV before running out of energy.

LindsayRichards wrote:
I don't see a 1,000 solar panel running a 960 watt AC. That requires nearly 100% efficiency and that won't happen except under the most perfect conditions.