In article ,
says...

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 07:11:37 -0400, BAR wrote:

There two critical issues facing the world and they are access to potable water and to oil.

==========

You should change the word "oil" to "energy".

And there is a third critical issue and that is unchecked/out of
control population growth.

There is only a finite amount of oil and supplies will eventually
dwindle no matter how much is newly discovered. At some point it will
become expensive enough that burning it for energy will be
unthinkable. It will have much more value as an industrial/chemical
feedstock.

On the other hand, if global population growth is not reigned in, no
amount of water or energy will be enough.

I used oil on purpose because its use throughout our society is so pervasive and so useful.
Maybe I should have used Petroleum.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:03:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

What do you think my chances are of installing a few panels on the
roof without going through the whole permitting process? If my kids
were younger I could claim it was a science fair project.

It might be financially sound to adopt a 10 year-old.

===

Probably not if past experience with college expenses is any guide.

Surely you haven't forgotten about the military. I used to work with a guy whose teenage son
was not college material and didn't have the drive or ambition to do much at all. He claimed
victory when he got the youth enlisted in the Airforce before he graduated from high schoo.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:08:00 -0400, John H
wrote:

On the other hand, if global population growth is not reigned in, no
amount of water or energy will be enough.

Let's see, one of my first papers in college was about population growth, with the Club of Rome
being a source of information. This was in the early 70's. That would be about 40 years ago, and I
don't see the population growth dwindling by much.


=========

It was true then and it's even more true now. It has actually gotten
much worse in fact since India and China have become industrialized
since they are now consuming and polluting much more per capita than
previously.

The catholic church's position on birth control is only part of the
problem - more of an issue in the western hemisphere. Even here
however the cultural issues outweigh the religious ones.

Therein lies the problem with potable water.

In article , says...

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 08:23:45 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 07:11:37 -0400, BAR wrote:

There two critical issues facing the world and they are access to potable water and to oil.

==========

You should change the word "oil" to "energy".

And there is a third critical issue and that is unchecked/out of
control population growth.

There is only a finite amount of oil and supplies will eventually
dwindle no matter how much is newly discovered. At some point it will
become expensive enough that burning it for energy will be
unthinkable. It will have much more value as an industrial/chemical
feedstock.

On the other hand, if global population growth is not reigned in, no
amount of water or energy will be enough.

And the Catholic Church, with its policy on birth control, isn't helping the situation much.
Although, I'd have to admit it probably has little influence in China, India, Pakistan, etc, it most
assuredly has influence in Mexico and lands south. I believe Mexicans (or Hispanics) are the fastest
growing

I pay bridge in a Catholic Parish and most of the people are couples who are in their 70's
and 80's. Most had from 5 to 10 children. My wife and I, in our 50's, are the second youngest
couple in the group and we only have two children. The cost of raising a child is putting a
damper on the large Catholic families.

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:13:24 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:08:00 -0400, John H
wrote:

On the other hand, if global population growth is not reigned in, no
amount of water or energy will be enough.

Let's see, one of my first papers in college was about population growth, with the Club of Rome
being a source of information. This was in the early 70's. That would be about 40 years ago, and I
don't see the population growth dwindling by much.


=========

It was true then and it's even more true now. It has actually gotten
much worse in fact since India and China have become industrialized
since they are now consuming and polluting much more per capita than
previously.

The catholic church's position on birth control is only part of the
problem - more of an issue in the western hemisphere. Even here
however the cultural issues outweigh the religious ones.

Therein lies the problem with potable water.

======

Interestingly enough, if you can solve the problem of creating cheap
and abundant energy (and I believe we will eventually), then creating
potable water out of sea water becomes relatively easy. It's already
being done in the Bahamas, Caribbean and elsewhere but unfortunately
the energy is not yet cheap. Desalinating seawater with diesel
generators costs over 10 cents per gallon of water. Doing it small
scale on your own boat costs close to 50 cents a gallon.

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:12:43 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:03:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

What do you think my chances are of installing a few panels on the
roof without going through the whole permitting process? If my kids
were younger I could claim it was a science fair project.

It might be financially sound to adopt a 10 year-old.

===

Probably not if past experience with college expenses is any guide.

Surely you haven't forgotten about the military. I used to work with a guy whose teenage son
was not college material and didn't have the drive or ambition to do much at all. He claimed
victory when he got the youth enlisted in the Airforce before he graduated from high school.

====

Heh. I offered both of my sons a free Corvette (or equivalent cash)
if they graduated from one of the military academies. No takers but
they're both doing very well so no regrets on my part.

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:15:05 -0400, BAR wrote:

I pay bridge in a Catholic Parish and most of the people are couples who are in their 70's
and 80's. Most had from 5 to 10 children. My wife and I, in our 50's, are the second youngest
couple in the group and we only have two children. The cost of raising a child is putting a
damper on the large Catholic families.

====

I view it as a good thing if people are thinking about the cost of
doing it right. Too many don't. Raising two was expensive enough
for us but we encouraged them to go to first rate schools and they
did.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:12:43 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:03:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

What do you think my chances are of installing a few panels on the
roof without going through the whole permitting process? If my kids
were younger I could claim it was a science fair project.

It might be financially sound to adopt a 10 year-old.

===

Probably not if past experience with college expenses is any guide.

Surely you haven't forgotten about the military. I used to work with a guy whose teenage son
was not college material and didn't have the drive or ambition to do much at all. He claimed
victory when he got the youth enlisted in the Airforce before he graduated from high school.

====

Heh. I offered both of my sons a free Corvette (or equivalent cash)
if they graduated from one of the military academies. No takers but
they're both doing very well so no regrets on my part.

We offered to buy our daughters cars, not new cars, if they attended the local 2 year college
before they went to UMD. The blew us off.

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:55:57 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:30:35 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:54:21 -0400, BAR wrote:

the "science" is far from settled.

====

And that is most certainly true. Even though there is significant
evidence that warming has ocurred, the amount of warming measured does
not agree with the most widely accepted models. In fact the measured
warming has actually leveled off for inexplicable reasons. This does
not mean that we should take our eye off the ball but it certainly
calls out the need for additional science and less pushing of the
panic button. Reducing our dependence on fossil fuels is still a good
thing for many reasons but global warming/cooling is just one factor.

If fossil fuels are going to cause global warming and doom mankind, we
better just kiss our ass goodby. Europe and the US might cut usage but
Asia, Africa and the sub-continent certainly are not doing it. That is
where the future energy usage growth is coming from.
South America is even more troubling. They are draining the wetlands
and burning the rain forests in Brazil to grow sugar cane fuels. All
you have to do is drive through Clewiston to see the damage sugar
causes.

The one that really gets to me is the argument from the left about
Keystone. They act like, if we don't build the pipeline, Canada will
just abandon that cash cow.

Oh, I agree with your position that there are other things to worry
about, but that doesn't take away from the fact that global warming is
occurring and that the graphs directly correlate with the use of fossil
fuels. Except if you listen to FOX.

The CO2 levels match population levels as close as any other metric
and that holds true from long before the industrial revolution.
Scientific American had an article a few years ago that tracked the
trends in the rise in CO2 all the way back to the rise of agriculture,
about 8000 years ago.,

If I listened to Fox I would not even think the earth was that old

;-)

Point taken!!!!