General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Wyoming Is First State To Reject Science Standards"
Wyoming Is First State To Reject Science Standardsby Bob Moen at Time
http://time.com/94504/wyoming-is-first-state-to-reject-science-standards/
"SNIP........................
(CHEYENNE, Wyo.) Wyoming, the nations top coal-producing state, is the first to reject new K-12 science standards proposed by national education groups mainly because of global warming components.
The Wyoming Board of Education decided recently that the Next Generation Science Standards need more review after questions were raised about the treatment of man-made global warming.
Board President Ron Micheli said the review will look into whether we cant get some standards that are Wyoming standards and standards we all can be proud
Others see the decision as a blow to science education in Wyoming.
.......................SNIP"
applegrove
(118,460 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)CincyDem
(6,332 posts)They're called the 3 Laws of Thermodynamics for a reason - not the 3 Opinions of Thermodynamics.
When will these hosers learn.
applegrove
(118,460 posts)CincyDem
(6,332 posts)Didn't Degrasse-Tyson just say recently some like this : Don't worry - the earth will survive. "People probably won't but the earth will find it's new equilibrium". Not a direct quote but something along those lines.
Thermodynamics will win. Humans will be collateral damage in the war on science.
But that's ok, we need to focus on benghazi, right? (just in case I need it).
applegrove
(118,460 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,308 posts)Agony
(2,605 posts)what good does it do to accept the science on climate change if you don't take concrete action, when you are in a position of power, like my president is?
"To many people, Obamas "all of the above" sounded like a capitulation to King Coal after climate legislation came to grief last year in Congress. But the strategy has deeper roots. First of all, the federal bureaucracy is notoriously prone to inertia, and the wheels of the BLM, which is responsible for granting mining leases, grind more slowly than most. The leases announced in March were not a new idea: the coal companies had applied for them at least five years ago. So the Obama administration didnt push the plan forward; it simply chose not to pull it back."
from --->http://www.onearth.org/article/coal-on-a-roll
more from the same article
"Commitment to "Clean Coal"
Last December, barely a month after their trip to Black Thunder, Buffett and Gates met privately with President Obama. The White House said they discussed the economy, few details given. A month later Obama gave his State of the Union address, in which he laid out a global energy strategy that some call "all of the above." Nestled among wind, solar, nuclear, and natural gas was that uniquely slippery phrase "clean coal" (better to think of it as "slightly less filthy coal" . Then, in March, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar flew to Wyoming to announce that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) would hold four "competitive" sales for new leases on 758 million tons of Powder River Basin coal. These would be the first of a dozen such auctions over the next three years, with as much as 3.7 billion tons of coal eventually up for grabs.
Very little of this, however, would be for domestic consumption. Although worldwide energy-related CO2 emissions rose more last year than at any time since 1969, and the use of coal grew faster than that of any other fossil fuel, U.S. demand has actually flatlined. In 2000 coal accounted for just over half of our electricity supply. By 2010 it was down to 45 percent. Large banks and insurance companies, uncertain about a future carbon-constrained world, are increasingly reluctant to underwrite the huge investment -- as much as $3 billion -- required to build a new coal-fired power plant, which can have a lifespan of 50 years.
Asia is a different matter. Historically, the global coal market has been famously volatile. But companies like Peabody and Arch Coal are convinced that Asian demand has triggered a "supercycle" that will last at least 20 years, and talk in the industry is of exporting more than 100 million tons annually. The pivotal moment came in 2008, when China, which now uses almost half of all the coal burned on the planet, became a net importer for the first time. Demand in India, though starting at a much lower point, is rising even more rapidly and is likely to go on rising long after Chinas appetite for coal levels off, which is predicted to happen sometime after 2030."
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)rejecting science standards.