Money to burn: As the wealthy get wealthier, carbon emissions grow in US states

April 7, 2017
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

Across the U.S., state-level carbon emissions are higher in states where income is more highly concentrated among the wealthiest residents, according to a new study by two Boston College researchers.

On a global level, the connection between national wealth and carbon emissions has been well documented. The study, by sociologists Andrew Jorgenson and Juliet Schor, is the first to link inequality and carbon emissions within and across the individual U.S. .

The study found that state-level carbon emissions between 1997 and 2012 were positively associated with the income share of the top 10 percent of a state's population, according to the findings, published online and in the April edition of the journal Ecological Economics.

Using the 2012 state data for carbon emissions, and based on the statistical analysis reported in the research article, a one percent increase in the income share of the top 10 percent of a state's population results in tons of additional carbon emissions, led by:

  • 1. Texas - 812,325 to 934,174 metric tons
  • 2. California - 437,035 to 502,590 metric tons
  • 3. Pennsylvania - 284,980 to 327,728 metric tons
  • 4. Florida - 269,030 to 309,395 metric tons
  • 5. Illinois - 261,170 to 300,966 metric tons
  • 6. Ohio - 260,622 to 299,716 metric tons
  • 7. Louisiana - 246,618 to 283,611 metric tons
  • 8. Indiana - 232,886 to 237,819 metric tons
  • 9. New York - 196,234 to 225,670 metric tons
  • 10. Michigan - 184,835 to 212,560 metric tons

South Carolina was the median in the analysis, with income share growth adding 89,175 to 102,551 metric tons of carbon emissions in 2012. The District of Columbia saw the lowest growth in carbon emissions at an increase of 3,251 to 3,738 metric tons for each 1 percent increase in wealth.

The findings come as states are increasingly taking the lead in their own environmental protection. California Gov. Jerry Brown recently pledged the state would maintain its broad environmental regulations, regardless of any federal shift toward deregulation.

"We think it is safe to say, in terms of environmental policy and action, it is going to be much more active at the state level than the federal level," said Jorgenson, a professor of sociology and environmental studies. "Given the uncertainty of the regulatory environment at the federal level, states like California are saying they will not move away from their policies even if the federal agenda on climate change makes a 180-degree turn from the prior administration."

Spending power drives carbon-intensive consumerism. But so do the political clout and economic power of the wealthiest individuals, according to Jorgenson and Schor, whose analysis with co-author and BC graduate student Xiaorui Huang employed established economic models that assess the political and economic influence of individual wealth on society.

"First, income concentration leads to concentrated political power and the ability to prevent regulations on carbon emissions," said Schor, a professor of sociology. "Second, high income consumers are disproportionate carbon polluters."

The researchers tested the influence of a well-established statistical measure of income inequality, known as the Gini coefficient. That analytical tool reports inequality in a general sense, but doesn't show where inequality exists, said Jorgenson. So the researchers turned to a measure that captures the top 10 percent of a state's population.

"What we find here in the context of income inequality and carbon emissions is that it's about the concentration of income at the top of the distribution," said Jorgenson. "In our statistical models, where the Gini coefficient is non-significant, across the board the wealth of the top 10 percent is. That tells us that it really is about income concentration at the top end of the distribution."

In addition to income, the analysis weighed additional factors - some already well-established as contributors to emissions - such as population size, per capita gross domestic product, urbanization, manufacturing as a percentage of state GDP, fossil fuels production, and the level of state's commitments to environmental regulation.

The researchers drew from a broad array of sources, including statistics from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the League of Conservation Voters, and databases including the U.S. State-Level Income Inequality Database at Sam Houston State University and the internationally supported World Wealth and Income Database.

In addition to advancing the understanding of the factors that force changes in the climate, Jorgenson said the findings contribute to a more expansive view of the harmful effects of income inequality, which has been shown to foster poor outcomes in measures such as health and well being.

"Equalizing incomes has all kinds of potential benefits," Jorgenson said. "This suggests a holistic view of sustainability, equalizing income distribution within the U.S. can have social and environmental benefits. And they can have a global benefit too, since the U.S. is such a significant contributor to climate change."

Explore further: Support for democracy linked to income inequality

More information: Andrew Jorgenson et al, Income Inequality and Carbon Emissions in the United States: A State-level Analysis, 1997–2012, Ecological Economics (2017). DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.12.016

Related Stories

Support for democracy linked to income inequality

November 17, 2016

Voter satisfaction with democracy may have less to do with who actually wins an election and more to do with income inequality, or the gap between rich and poor, indicates a new study by Michigan State University political ...

New study delves into income inequality and inflation

March 6, 2017

A new study by Edgar Ghossoub, associate professor of economics at The University of Texas at San Antonio, posits that income inequality, in varying economies, can have substantial positive and negative effects for people ...

Recommended for you

Hot spot at Hawaii? Not so fast

August 18, 2017

Through analysis of volcanic tracks, Rice University geophysicists have concluded that hot spots like those that formed the Hawaiian Islands aren't moving as fast as recently thought.

Greenland ice flow likely to speed up

August 16, 2017

Flow of the Greenland Ice Sheet is likely to speed up in the future, despite a recent slowdown, because its outlet glaciers slide over wet sediment, not hard rock, new research based on seismic surveys has confirmed. This ...

87 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Shootist
1.5 / 5 (22) Apr 07, 2017
Money to burn: As the wealthy get wealthier, carbon emissions grow in US states


Sounds like old style Soviet propaganda. Of course Greenpeace and the Sierra Club is exactly where the nomenklatura ended up after the dissolution of the old Soviet Union.

Climate Change, you say? Warming, you say? Call me when Greenlanders have been raising dairy cattle for 400 years. Only then will the Northern Hemisphere by as warm as it was 1000 years ago.
manfredparticleboard
4.5 / 5 (24) Apr 07, 2017
Call me when Greenlanders have been raising dairy cattle for 400 years.

You keep trotting this one trick pony out as if to imply Greenland was as verdant and productive as some Swiss canton. It wasn't, it was marginal at best and was only sustained by the sheer belligerence of the settlers who refused to adapt to the local conditions and eat fish.
Anonym
1.2 / 5 (20) Apr 07, 2017
Weird but revealing article. If only we lived in an egalitarian society, like North Korea's, then we could hope for a happy, healthy, climate-neutral future.

No discussion of any correlation between wealth and productivity, productivity and economic activity, economic activity and CO2 "pollution."

The U.S. since WWII has been the dominant global economy. Emissions track that activity in a linear fashion until the '90s. U.S. CO2 emissions have been nearly flat since the early '90s. The additional CO2 since then must be coming from rapidly developing economies, like China and India. Funny, they are not required by treaty to reign in their "emissions." Why do you suppose that is?

Benni
1.3 / 5 (15) Apr 07, 2017
The additional CO2 since then must be coming from rapidly developing economies like China and India


Actually no, it is coming from my two woodstoves & huge fireplace I included in the house I built in the 90's, it's the reason I'm WEALTHIER, not China or India, because I cut down trees (carbon) to produce my own heat without needing to resort to some overpriced public utility to supply that energy.

Funny, they are not required by treaty to reign in their "emissions." Why do you suppose that is?


So what, neither am I required to reign in emissions. Don't you know that emissions from volcanoes & annual forest fires far outstrip those of manmade emissions? No wonder you AGWs can't figure out why there is so much GW, it's because it isn't AGW.

HeloMenelo
4.1 / 5 (18) Apr 07, 2017
Call me when Greenlanders have been raising dairy cattle for 400 years.

You keep trotting this one trick pony out as if to imply Greenland was as verdant and productive as some Swiss canton. It wasn't, it was marginal at best and was only sustained by the sheer belligerence of the settlers who refused to adapt to the local conditions and eat fish.


Shootist the potty miss aka antigoracle sock churns out this dumb one liner on every second climate topic, those two beans inside his skull frisky to compete on who will signal his dumb thumbs to write it again on the next topic, only for everyone to laugh at his stupidity... again... ;)
HeloMenelo
4.1 / 5 (17) Apr 07, 2017
The additional CO2 since then must be coming from rapidly developing economies like China and India


Actually no, it is coming from my two woodstoves & huge fireplace I included in the house I built in the 90's, it's the reason I'm WEALTHIER, not China or India, because I cut down trees (carbon) to produce my own heat without needing to resort to some overpriced public utility to supply that energy.

Funny, they are not required by treaty to reign in their "emissions." Why do you suppose that is?

...........................issions? No wonder you AGWs can't figure out why there is so much GW, it's because it isn't AGW.


Again numbty here demonstrates his clear ability to not understand anything at all about what causes climate change. Only vaguely seeing part of the full picture, but the fog is thick in that little skull, those 2 beans not helping to clear the fog either ;)
RealityCheck
3.9 / 5 (14) Apr 07, 2017
@Shootist: I already falsified your "The Polar Bears will be fine" spiel. I already explained why the temps change and what disastrous 'trade-offs' are involved in such cases as Greenland warming enough to sustain what you want. I already explained what would transpire globally if the warming trend continues. I even pointed out the 'back-to-back' series of disastrous climate warming consequences affecting us NOW (Australia/Queensland in particular). Forget the models (and the propaganda you spam for self-interested multinational/political/religious profiteers and criminals; just look at evolving reality under your nose globally/locally). Use your time/intellect for constructive science/humanity interests instead of your own petty/mercenary/ego interests, mate. Ok?

@Benni: Concentrate on science/logics, mate. Renewable ('re-grown' wood/biomass) CO2 sources/emissions NOT the problem, as they do NOT 'permanently' increase CO2 ratio of atmos/oceans like FOSSIL burning does. Ok?
BubbaNicholson
1 / 5 (12) Apr 07, 2017
Communism's poverty is associated with the worst pollution disasters on this planet. Chernobyl was but one on a long list. Many millions of people have been poisoned needlessly.
Indeed, Wealth is part of economic activity, as is breathing out more CO2. Increased atmospheric CO2 is beneficial for rice production, because photosynthesis is CO2 limited. The less than 1/2 % of CO2 in our atmosphere does indeed cause greenhouse warming, but that can be easily offset by very large Lagrangian or earth orbital reflective balloons sufficient to block 1.6-1.7% of the sun's earthbound radiation.
omegatalon
1 / 5 (14) Apr 07, 2017
This is another failure of Barack Obama who was President of the United States for 8 years as it's obvious Obama just didn't understand how anything works or how to fix issues.
RealityCheck
3.8 / 5 (13) Apr 07, 2017
@BubbaNicholson.
Communism's poverty is associated with the worst pollution disasters on this planet. Chernobyl was but one on a long list...
Indeed, Wealth is part of economic activity, as is breathing out more CO2. Increased atmospheric CO2 is beneficial for rice production, because photosynthesis is CO2 limited. The less than 1/2 % of CO2 in our atmosphere does indeed cause greenhouse warming, but that can be easily offset by very large Lagrangian or earth orbital reflective balloons sufficient to block 1.6-1.7% of the sun's earthbound radiation.
Have you forgotten what early/recent history of 'unfettered' CAPITALISM wrought in the USA (pollution, poverty, NUCLEAR PLANT disasters, criminal activity/monopolies etc) detrimental to economy/society health? It was only when DEMOCRATIC SOCIAL (not 'unfettered' COMMUNISM, that's bad) policies were introduced to REGULATE for 'community good' did things improve. Balanced research/comparisons/conclusions helps everyone.
RealityCheck
3.8 / 5 (13) Apr 07, 2017
@omegatalon.
This is another failure of Barack Obama who was President of the United States for 8 years as it's obvious Obama just didn't understand how anything works or how to fix issues.
Yet another propaganda shill? Have you considered the problem which an obstructive/sabotaging GOP and then Trump presented for otherwise sane and calm objective policy making and implementation? GOP types and their CAPITALIST paymasters OUTSOURCED jobs and industry expertise/resources; sabotaged all sane and reasonable attempts to correct that untenable situation). Trump even opposed Obama/Clinton re intervention in Syria when it would have prevented prolonging the horror there (Trump NOW 'considers the innocent victims, dropping his opposition to intervention....too late (after too much horror since Obama considered intervening but was 'politically' stymied by GOP/Trump political hypocrisy/expediency lies churned out over Fox News for the gullible types to swallow and 'demonize' Obama.
snoosebaum
Apr 08, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
RealityCheck
3.9 / 5 (11) Apr 08, 2017
@snoosebaum.
Any warmer and I'll have to buy a snowplow.
It's snowing there now? Link to a video/pic of the snow falling right now where you live. Where do you live, BTW?

Perhaps you may be a victim of the badly disturbed patterns of (previously more predictable) atmospheric 'stream' pattern due to the increased 'churn' in the atmosphere from increased energy building up and causing more extreme 'excursions' than the previous normal variations-range. If the moisture load of the unseasonal/unusual storm is also unpredictable/increased, you may have more snow OR more rain to contend with now GW is affecting global patterns everywhere (as Australians/Queenslanders found out to their horror/cost over the last few years and in recent weeks in particular). Good luck with AGW where you live, @snoosebaum. You'll need it if you get your way! Don't say you weren't made aware when the AGW induced disasters strike you and yours, mate.
highzone
4.7 / 5 (12) Apr 08, 2017

Any warmer and I'll have to buy a snowplow.


Not gonna help in removing the snow covering your eyes from real life.
antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (14) Apr 08, 2017
Hmm...so when did False "Profit" Al, move to California?
gkam
2.5 / 5 (8) Apr 08, 2017
We have to teach the rich what character is all about.

Their lack of it is what made them rich, so it may not be easy.
Guglielmo Tell
2.3 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2017
The comments in this column are unf******believable. "If you talk about climate change, then you are a commie. If you're against the war, then you are a Russkie" and so forth. Well, you know what? I AM A RUSSKIE and I AM A COMMIE. "Communism's poverty" - GO TO HELL! Stalin gets popular in Russia again because he turned the USSR into a world economic power TWICE and ON ITS OWN! The industrialization and collectivization created the machine that beat the Nazis - although some say the War would have lasted less had not it been for the purge and had Stalin been building an anti-fascist coalition with people's movements instead of Churchill and the French - and Khruschev, now in disgrace again, would not have launched the Sputnik had the USSR been squeezed into the Bretton Woods system.
dustywells
1.4 / 5 (11) Apr 08, 2017
This article is proof that if you throw in a few numbers and blame the rich, you can get fools to believe anything you say, even if your basic assumptions are untrue.

Guglielmo Tell
1.8 / 5 (5) Apr 08, 2017
The Soviet decline started with DEBTS WITH THE WEST Brezhnev sunk the whole Soviet bloc in.Soviet elites became the new "communist" right-wing – THE ELITES against their own people. Ceausescu's Romania joined the IMF in 1973, "socialist" Poland and Hungary – around that time.In fact, Polish crisis may well have been an IMF-default-crisis. Evidence erased by the global powers.
Guglielmo Tell
4.4 / 5 (7) Apr 08, 2017
American cult for waste is the same thing that cult for the elites there has ever been in every society: climbing up is interpreted as getting closer to the Sun. But then the societies get sick of it and start looking for ways to organize themselves and by themselves (NOT doing so is the false image of "losers" which the global elites of today brainwash their societiies into obedience with). There are two basic ways to solve any economic and financial mess: to liquidate the domestic economy by selling it all off to the big guys and pushing people into marginality (and then to kill them all off – "preferably" in their own countries of origin) or to repair the domestic economy by applying protectionism and re-distributing the property.
Guglielmo Tell
4.5 / 5 (8) Apr 08, 2017
In one word, the solution to world's problems is TO SHARE it – something that a child understands before being brainwashed into hate and lies by the adults. The "adults" don't want to share the world – they want the whole world for themselves (for their group) and no one else. Kids are sent to war to fight those who dare to decide what to do by themselves in their own countries. And the ideology then is to blame it all on the victims.
So, WILL HUMANITY FIX THE WORLD? It's an open question. The elites are certainly working against it because they can't afford to let it happen. And they need morons like Shootist to spread the hate, the propaganda and the idea of toxic-pigsty-waste as of "normal" condition for humans.
dustywells
3.9 / 5 (9) Apr 08, 2017
This article is proof that if you throw in a few numbers and blame the rich, you can get fools to believe anything you say, even if your basic assumptions are untrue.
By reversing the argument you get a clearer picture. If 90% of the population earns less income, the amount of CO2 as well as real pollutants is increased. The factor is not how much more a few people earn, but how much less many people are able to spend. For example, who will be impacted more by California's $0.12 increase in fuel tax? The 10% or the 90%?

But why pick 10%? Why not 50%? Why not 70%? Because most of us consider ourselves part of the 90% and but we know of people who are in better positions and people who are in worse positions, but we don't know where we fit in.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Apr 08, 2017
Stalin gets popular in Russia again because he turned the USSR into a world economic power TWICE and ON ITS OWN!
Yeah, Sometimes expending millions of workers fighting wars actually works. But you may have to ship the entire middle class off to gulag as well.

Say - what class do you belong to? The mafia class? They seem to be doing the best over there-
snoosebaum
1 / 5 (11) Apr 08, 2017
re any warmer,, , long winter here in bc , cool wet spring , NFLD , 186cm snow last week. Suspect sun cooling off , cool summer may be a shock , Friends report cool summer in NZ. HOTTEST 2017 EVER !!!! headline coming soon ,,,
Benni
1.3 / 5 (12) Apr 08, 2017
We have to teach the rich what character is all about.

Their lack of it is what made them rich, so it may not be easy.


I'm glad you don't have my address.
Homebrook
1 / 5 (15) Apr 08, 2017
Great news! With more carbon dioxide, plants grow better. Plants love carbon dioxide. We can hope that our climate gets warmer as a result, that the Sahara gets wetter, that northern Canada, Greenland, and Siberia become bread baskets of the world, and if it gets warmer still, maybe some of the Antarctic continent will become arable land. After all tropical plants used to grow there, why not again? Why are we even concerned with sub-percentage-point increases. Lets shoot for the moon for a 2,000% increase in carbon dioxide the same as when this planet was overrun with an explosion of plant life 500 million years ago. More carbon dioxide means more LIFE!
dlethe
1 / 5 (10) Apr 09, 2017
The paper says it all ... Income Inequality and Carbon Emissions in the United States. This is junk science created to justify socialism. Income inequality? How about some people are just smarter, more talented, or can throw/catch/hit a ball better than others, or they can sing better than others.

HeloMenelo
3.8 / 5 (13) Apr 09, 2017
realitycheck@Shootist: I already falsified your "The Polar Bears will be fine" spiel. I already explained why the temps change and what disastrous 'trade-offs' are involved in such cases as Greenland warming enough to sustain what you want. I already explained what would transpire globally if the warming trend continues. I even pointed out the 'back-to-back' series of disastrous climate warming consequences affecting us NOW (Australia/Queensland in particular). Forget the models (and the propaganda you spam for self-interested multinational/political/religious profiteers ...


shootist the potty miss aka antigoracle sock does not have the concentration span to read and understand the evidence, as soon as his dumb thumbs smack the buttons on his keyboard, he immediately goes into ape mode and tries to touch his nose with his tongue, forgetting even what he has typed 10 seconds ago.
HeloMenelo
3.8 / 5 (13) Apr 09, 2017
This article is proof that if you throw in a few numbers and blame the rich, you can get fools to believe anything you say, even if your basic assumptions are untrue.


Except climate change has been backed up by empirical evidence for decades, something you as an antigoracle sock is unable to comprehend.
HeloMenelo
3.8 / 5 (13) Apr 09, 2017
re any warmer,, , long winter here in bc , cool wet spring , NFLD , 186cm snow last week. Suspect sun cooling off , cool summer may be a shock , Friends report cool summer in NZ. HOTTEST 2017 EVER !!!! headline coming soon ,,,


Still using your "friends" reports as your "source" for evidence instead of empirical scientific evidence.
Those 2 beans must be working hard with all your sockpuppets today churning out all this claptrap on physorg. ;)
Benni
1 / 5 (7) Apr 09, 2017
Except climate change has been backed up by empirical evidence for decades, something you as an antigoracle sock is unable to comprehend.


The reason most people don't care about your claptrap stories about the cause of climate change is because we've already got it figured out that the Sun is too far away for us to do much of anything about it.

Your so-called "empirical evidence" needs to be updated by a couple of decades to comport with what we now know are the astro-physics effects imposed by conditions of the Sun.

Oh, by the way, I estimate that it would cost $7K more per year if I were not burning all that wood (carbon) for my woodstove & fireplace installations. It's free energy save for the tiny costs of the gasoline to run the chainsaws. I know that pisses off poor urban apartment dwellers like you living in crowded subsidized housing, but screw you, I don't care one whit about your crime ridden cities & towns.
gkam
1.6 / 5 (7) Apr 09, 2017
"screw you, I don't care one whit about your crime ridden cities & towns."
-------------------------------------

Yes, the character of conservatism.

No wonder nobody wants to live around you.

BTW, I live in a detached house with a yard containing ornamental and fruit trees and a garden, and my power comes from solar PV. The PV also powers my car, without the pollution you emit.

We like and watch out for each other here. Sorry you are on your own.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
@STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
The PV also powers my car, without the pollution you emit
repeating a lie doesn't make it more true
you said you charge your EV at night: http://phys.org/n...gas.html

PV's do not work at night
plus, your claim was totally debunked here: https://phys.org/...-eu.html

and several other threads on PO alone

one reason people aren't more willing to get PV's etc or consider green options is because of the blatant misinformation they see from people like you claiming to have expertise that is directly refuted by a short search or a licensed engineer

.

then per your own request to clean up the site....
gkam
1 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
Gt over it, Rumpy. We have been over and over this, and you cannot seem to understand how it works. I produce the power in the daytime and take it out at night, using the grid as a storage device. It works great. It means I did not have to buy and maintain those batteries you had to have.

Pretty clever, huh?
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
@STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
We have been over and over this
https://phys.org/...-eu.html]https://phys.org/...-eu.html[/url]
using the grid as a storage device
no, you use the grid

also: https://phys.org/...-eu.html]https://phys.org/...-eu.html[/url]

Gt over it,
if you had any legitimate argument you would have been able to provide links and references to support your claim

you do not

if you could prove your point with evidence, you would be able to link it and prove it

you cannot

.

this means your comment is, by definition, pseudoscience and blatantly false ( http://www.auburn...ion.html )

as such, continually repeating this lie makes you spamming and trolling

.

so again, since you cannot provide an actual evidence based argument and you choose to simply keep repeating the lie that was debunked multiple times...

and per your own request to clean up the site...
gkam
1 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
Gosh, Rumpy, you can see my PV system on your android phone, and you know it.

Please get help for your condition.

And don't forget to keep those batteries from polluting the area, okay?
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
@STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
Gosh, Rumpy, you can see my PV system on your android phone, and you know it
nope
http://s1027.phot...&o=0

i did find a new picture of you that your wife posted: http://s1027.phot...&o=0

since you're attempting distraction from topic
and you're still presenting blatant false claims repeatedly posted as fact

and you still can't produce an evidence based argument

...per your own request to clean up the site...
gkam
1 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
Once again, you use a picture taken two months before we put up the panels. I see you hid the date of the pic. The panels went up on January 28, 2016.

Use your android phone for a newer version, one with the panels.

These little lies add up, Rumpy, as Trump is finding out, too.

Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
@STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
I see you hid the date of the pic
are you really that illiterate? or are you just really, really stupid?

ask your wife to please read the date in the lower right hand corner of the screen cap i posted... in the BIG RED CIRCLE i drew around it for you

i was hoping that BIG READ CIRCLE would catch your attention
guess i was wrong, eh?
Use your android phone for a newer version, one with the panels
you made the claim, you provide the evidence

These little lies add up, liar-kam, as your best bud Trump is finding out, too

PS - still can't provide an evidence based argument, so you resort to lies and distraction from facts
none of your "PV pics" will prove that you charge your EV at night, nor will it prove you don't use the grid

this was explained using small words and your own PG&E contracts more than once- https://phys.org/...-eu.html
gkam
1 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
Your "big re(a)d circle" was the date of your perusal of the image, not the date it was taken, which was 10/30/2015. The panels went up on 1/28/2016. Some others here maybe fooled, but not anyone who checks up on your lies.

Why do you pretend to be educated when these show you are not?
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
@STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
Your "big red circle" was the date of your perusal of the image, not the date it was taken
the date on the picture is screencap - this means it was the date on my computer when i hit the screencap button while on Google Maps

anyone capable of comprehending logic (at least equivalent to a 9 year old) would then comprehend that the date on the pic is the date that i viewed your idiot house on Google Maps

i know this is hard for you to understand, but if you look at your own keyboard, at the top right near the delete key, there is a key that either says "prt sc" (print screen) or something similar
Why do you pretend to be educated when these show you are not?
just because you're inept and f*cking stupid doesn't mean everyone else is

i notice you still can't actually provide an evidence based argument, just like you couldn't provide evidence here: https://phys.org/...nts.html

per your request then....
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
for those who want to know more about how to screencap your session ...
follow my instructions or read the link below
https://www.thoug...-1699971

as you can see, the easiest (cheapest and free) way to screencap is to use the key
then open MS Paint to a new image
click on CTRL+V or use the "paste" function in the menu

this applies the screencap to the blank image - you can see that i have Paint open on my task bar here: http://s1027.phot...&o=0

at this point, use the "save as" function and save as an easily compressible format for transmission, like JPG

you can now access your picture of your screencap and upload it to any site that accepts them

gkam
1.2 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
"the date on the picture is screencap - this means it was the date on my computer when i hit the screencap button while on Google Maps"
-----------------------------

Yes, . . thank you for confirming my statement.

Go find a pic of the PV system taken after 1/28/2016
HeloMenelo
4 / 5 (12) Apr 09, 2017

The reason most people don't care about your claptrap stories about the cause of climate change is because we've already got it figured out that the Sun is too far away for us to do much of anything about it....bleeeblaah.blooo...


And herewith continues your babble filled with nothing but Hot Air. Monkey Antigoracle Benni sockpuppet, that so called "most people" is guess what... YOU and your socks, which is YOU alone :D
My confidence in support here is beyond overwhelming, and so it will stay ;) So is my confidence in your ability to sound ridiculous at every opportunity you can get, including this one.

And there you have it, YOU don't care about anything at all but your selfishness, greed, and lies which btw is exposed Everyday, making you look like the idiot you portray yourself to be, every single day

Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
@STOLEN VALOR LIAR_kam
thank you for confirming my statement
it did not confirm your statement

it confirms you don't know sh*t about the internet, google maps and computers though
Go find a pic of the PV system taken after 1/28/2016
it's your stupid claim, *you* provide the evidence
then link the source so it can be validated

otherwise you're simply attempting to spread yet more lies about your PV system

please note that this continued distraction still in NO WAY validates your claims about charging your EV from your PV panels becuase:
1- you claim to charge your EV at night
2- you still require the grid
because
3- PV's don't work at night
and
4- this has already been discussed and you were proven to be a liar here:
https://phys.org/...-eu.html

as you continue to keep making this false claim and you can't provide empirical evidence that can be validated to support your claims...

and per your own request
HeloMenelo
4.4 / 5 (13) Apr 09, 2017
@benni aka antigoracle sockpuppet, So You know better ? those 2 beans working hard to convince yourself you are the big chest thumper of the jungle... :D (but we know that already)

Over the last 35 years the sun has shown a cooling trend. However global temperatures continue to increase. If the sun's energy is decreasing while the Earth is warming, then the sun can't be the main control of the temperature.
The sun's energy fluctuates on a cycle that's about 11 years long. The energy changes by about 0.1% on each cycle. If the Earth's temperature was controlled mainly by the sun, then it should have cooled between 2000 and 2008. but it didn't

The solar fluctuations since 1870 have contributed a maximum of 0.1 °C to temperature changes. In recent times the biggest solar fluctuation happened around 1960. But the fastest global warming started in 1980.
gkam
2.1 / 5 (7) Apr 09, 2017
We are fortunate to have new money in this society. They are the ones who are building the 21st Century for us, with electric vehicles and renewable energy.

The others, the Trumps, the 1%, the selfish, are still a problem.

The answer is social pressure and sanctions on that behavior.
gkam
Apr 09, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ZergSurfer
4.4 / 5 (7) Apr 09, 2017
Much as I dislike appearing to support gkam, I took a look at his address with google earth pro, and there are panels on the roof. The data is from '16.
Taken a snip (I like the snipping tool).
https://docs.goog...=sharing
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
Much as I dislike appearing to support gkam, I took a look at his address with google earth pro, and there are panels on the roof. The data is from '16
@ZergSurfer
thanks for the input

and i know you aren't supporting the idiot so much as giving information that can be validated

.

considering there are several ways to share this information, one of which i left instructions for, this makes me wonder: why didn't the idiot simply snip, screencap or share it?

gkam
1 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
Rumpy knew I had them, he is only playing his hate game.

Sometimes it is better to let the liars hang themselves.

And I do not know why you disliked validating the truth.
gkam
1 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
ZergSurfer, this is a long battle, with Ira and otto and Rumpy all screaming I am a liar, but when I send them to the truth, they get even more angry and unstable.

I'll save you the progression of attacks, but all have been proven false and manifestations of poor character in action. I had to send them to NASA catalogs, three military websites, and copies of real documents, but they are not able to be embarrassed.

It is the price of allowing anonymous snipers, internet vandals, on this site.
Caliban
5 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
The additional CO2 since then must be coming from rapidly developing economies like China and India

[......] that energy.

Funny, they are not required by treaty to reign in their "emissions." Why do you suppose that is?


So what, neither am I required to reign in emissions. Don't you know that emissions from volcanoes & annual forest fires far outstrip those of manmade emissions? No wonder you AGWs can't figure out why there is so much GW, it's because it isn't AGW.


Hahahaha.

That is just too damn funny, Bannoi. You are attacking Anymoney as if he is an AGW supporter.

Not the case. He's another denier LibertaRANDite, like you, and in fact, fell from the very same tree.

You don't recognise your very own cousin?

Caliban
5 / 5 (3) Apr 09, 2017
This article is proof that if you throw in a few numbers and blame the rich, you can get fools to believe anything you say, even if your basic assumptions are untrue.



And this comment from mustysmells is just the most recent installations of his only trick: introducing a straw man comment to enable a conversation with himself in a comment thread.
Caliban
5 / 5 (3) Apr 09, 2017
This article is proof that if you throw in a few numbers and blame the rich, you can get fools to believe anything you say, even if your basic assumptions are untrue.


By reversing the argument you get a clearer picture. If 90% of the population earns less income, the amount of CO2 as well as real pollutants is increased. The factor is not how much more a few people earn, but how much less many people are able to spend. For example, who will be impacted more by California's $0.12 increase in fuel tax? The 10% or the 90%?

But why pick 10%? Why not 50%? Why not 70%? Because most of us consider ourselves part of the 90% and but we know of people who are in better positions and people who are in worse positions, but we don't know where we fit in.


Neat trick, huh?

ZergSurfer
3.7 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
gkam, I'm fully aware of your history here, it's not impressive.
gkam
Apr 09, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
RealityCheck
1.8 / 5 (5) Apr 09, 2017
@Benni.

Those NATURAL factors NEVER in dispute; they have always obtained.

The REAL problem NOW is 'factors' ON TOP OF those natural factors; making climate change faster, more damaging; because more extreme TRANSITIONAL disturbances/disasters; to which we humans and wildlife cannot adapt to (if at all) without HIGH COST in lives/extinctions/damage in social/economic, infrastructure, agriculture, transportation etc etc upheavals which become 'back-to-back' to the point we cannot 'recover' from one disastrous 'event' before the next hits (ask Queenslanders!).

Re:

- Insolation from Sun: this ALWAYS ON; but ATMOSPHERE determines NET effects on atmosphere, land, sea TEMPS-----Egs: PLANET MERCURY has NO atmos, so 'night side' is CRYOGENICALLY COLD despite HUGE insolation heat; and some deserts FREEZING at night!

- Vocanism/ejecta etc: eventually 'neutralised' when minerals 'weather' and re-absorb CO2; plus Super-volcanism can TEMPORARILY cause an ice age.

Be aware, Benni.
RealityCheck
1.7 / 5 (6) Apr 09, 2017
@Zerg.
gkam, I'm fully aware of your history here, it's not impressive.
I was reading this thread and was impressed when I came across your earlier post confirming the facts re gkam's PV installation. Then I was taken aback by your above comment. So, Zerg, if being honest and correct as to the facts does "not impress" you, then are you "impressed" by his stalkers and detractors lying and half-truthing all over the threads about something which you just confirmed gkam was truthful about? Have you posted to them and told them how "impressed" you are with their trolling gkam without true cause?

@Zerg, it is this sort of trolling-motivated double standards that made your "TehDog" username untenable; causing you to re-register as ZergSurfer. You have a new opportunity to shine in intellect and fair play. Don't fritter way this new opportunity because your old "TehDog" (and now "ZergSurfer") persona are STILL captive to a gang of trolling bot-voters who are a BAD influence.
ZergSurfer
3.9 / 5 (7) Apr 09, 2017
@RC
Maybe you noticed when physorg went to https existing log-in cookies were no longer valid.
Nah, you didn't :)
I'd forgotten my password, and really couldn't be bothered to retrieve it.

gkam has made many claims, some of which may have merit, but his many claims to authority and military service (I don't doubt he served), coupled with the poorly scanned photocopies linked on this forum lead me to view his posts with extreme caution. (I have done some research on http://www.kamburoff.com/
Awful website. Non https, but I'm not seeing any problems (I wouldn't use that site to contact George, viewing should be fine)
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2017
Hey, Zerg, that site was done in the late 1980's, I think, and the phone numbers have not been good for decades.

I got it because back then ISPs were changing monthly, and I wanted a stable email address. I have it. A friend starting to make websites did it for me back then.

If you want to start calling me a liar, I suggest you think first.

"poorly-scanned photocopies"? Mine look clear. Show us yours.
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (5) Apr 10, 2017
@zerg
sorry about the downrate... page jumped

.

@STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
If you want to start calling me a liar, I suggest you think first
it's not like it isn't hard to prove with evidence like here
http://phys.org/n...ity.html

http://phys.org/n...und.html

https://phys.org/...uns.html

http://phys.org/n...sed.html

http://phys.org/n...ate.html

so no one is calling you a liar... they're pointing out that you lied
big difference

and if you have a legitimate argument or could prove your oft used "libel" claims you would be following through with your litigation threats... you know, like you threatened here: http://phys.org/n...ens.html
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Apr 10, 2017
Are you ready to apologize for lying about my PV panels?

My service and awards?

My work for NASA?

Like Trump, you accuse others of having your character.
dustywells
5 / 5 (2) Apr 10, 2017
Neat trick, huh?
@Caliban

Thanks, but it's not original. It's one I learned from Stumpy.

I do note that you ignored the comments but are only interested attacking the commenter.
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (5) Apr 10, 2017
@STOLEN VALOR LIAR-kam
Are you ready to apologize for lying about my PV panels?
1- didn't lie, you idiot
otherwise you could prove it

2- this continued distraction and your ownership of PV panels still in no way validates your claims about charging your EV from your PV panels:
2a- you claim to charge your EV at night

2b- you still require the grid to charge your EV (and even admitted this)

2c- PV's don't work at night, so you can't charge your EV with them

2d- this has already been discussed here:
https://phys.org/...-eu.html

the rest of your post is still irrelevant and has no bearing on the topic

so, per your own request ....
ZergSurfer
4.2 / 5 (5) Apr 10, 2017
"Hey, Zerg, that site was done in the late 1980's, I think,..."

Creation Date: 1997-05-05
Updated Date: 2016-04-26
Registrant Name: George Kamburoff
Admin Name: ditto
Tech name: ditto

"A friend starting to make websites did it for me back then..."

I didn't call you a liar. I said I viewed your posts with extreme caution.
This is why.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Apr 10, 2017
That's when it got to the present host, I think.

No change was done by me in 2016.

I think you have made this up. But someone could have hacked into it.

I never go there.

Time to check.

ZergSurfer
4 / 5 (4) Apr 10, 2017
Oh, and your choice of hosting leaves a lot to be desired. 99.9% uptime is terrible, and their site looks like a still from a crap tv advert, not to mention the lack of https, critical flaw for a webhost.

whois is your friend.
gkam
Apr 10, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ZergSurfer
4.2 / 5 (5) Apr 10, 2017
I am ZergSurfer. (Well, that's my name here :)
The whois info I posted is publicly available to anyone.
whois -h whois.tucows.com kamburoff.com
Feel free to verify it yourself.

"But someone could have hacked into it. "
Did you even begin to think through the implications of that statement?
If that were so, the whole hosting company would be owned.
Caliban
4 / 5 (4) Apr 11, 2017
Neat trick, huh?
@Caliban

Thanks, but it's not original. It's one I learned from Stumpy.

I do note that you ignored the comments but are only interested attacking the commenter.


Your comment, and your comment on your comment were so vacuous as to make any criticism of their content unnecessary. Which only leaves the mustysmells chicanery itself to comment upon.

dustywells
5 / 5 (2) Apr 11, 2017
Your comment, and your comment on your comment were so vacuous as to make any criticism of their content unnecessary. Which only leaves the mustysmells chicanery itself to comment upon.
That tells me that:
A) you did not read the article;
B) you are unable to comprehend when you are being manipulated;
C) A and B
Caliban
3.7 / 5 (3) Apr 11, 2017
Your comment, and your comment on your comment were so vacuous as to make any criticism of their content unnecessary. Which only leaves the mustysmells chicanery itself to comment upon.
That tells me that:
A) you did not read the article;
B) you are unable to comprehend when you are being manipulated;
C) A and B


No.

What my comment says is that I wasn't taken in by mustysmells chicanery.

Project much?

howhot3
5 / 5 (3) Apr 12, 2017
Well now that Tesla will start moving solar roofing to the market, I suspect we will see more and more solar homes and more people willing to do EV for the daily commutes. I think the Tesla vision is will take off this summer when the sweltering heat waves of global warming swamp and overwhelmes the US new cycle. Just like it will year after year hotter and hotter into the next 1000 years.

And don't deny it dumb deniers.

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (1) Apr 13, 2017
I suspect we will see more and more solar homes and more people willing to do EV for the daily commutes
@Howhot
i am kinda hoping for the development of a 4WD off road EV that can double as a farm truck with towing capacity
... i know there are some ok hybrid SUV's - http://www.hybridsuv.com/

but there isn't anything that can compete for the rural market, really

dustywells
3 / 5 (2) Apr 13, 2017
What my comment says is that I wasn't taken in by mustysmells chicanery.
It only shows that I do NOT need a sock puppet or a supporting cabal to help me explain my comments.

The musty smell that keeps bothering you is your inability to comprehend when you are being manipulated even if it is being pointed out to you.

Or worse, that you support the hate-mongering and divisiveness that this article conveys.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.7 / 5 (3) Apr 13, 2017
Are you ready to apologize for lying about my PV panels?
You know I did look at google maps and I did see those black rectangles on georges roof but Im inclined to believe that george went up there with a coupla cans of krylon and some cardboard and did the only PV 'installation' he could afford. You know, just to impress the rubes.

Kind of like how he sent out his MS popsci thesis with 80 pages missing including the crit describing it as about as worthwhile as a popsci article.

That would be in keeping with the character we have come to know.
Caliban
5 / 5 (1) Apr 14, 2017
What my comment says is that I wasn't taken in by mustysmells chicanery.


It only shows that I do NOT need a sock puppet or a supporting cabal to help me explain my comments.

The musty smell that keeps bothering you is your


Allow to finish this for you, since you've gotten the whole shooting match ass-backwards: ...is the dank stench of your LibertaRandite NeoCon confirmation bias frictioning against the cognitive dissonance of your knowing self deception.

It is unfortunate that you suffer so, mustysmells.

But don't expect me to support your "philosophy".

sascoflame
not rated yet Apr 14, 2017
Good! They would rather die them give a working man a break.
dustywells
1 / 5 (1) Apr 14, 2017
But don't expect me to support your "philosophy".
Hasn't it occurred to you yet that if it were not for those wealthier than you, the target would be on your back?
gkam
Apr 14, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
dustywells
2 / 5 (1) Apr 14, 2017
The target is on our back,. . . by the wealthy.
Yes, George, it is we who are targeted, not by the wealthy but by the many government agencies who take our money in taxes, user fees, licenses and permits. We may be able to track how much we pay directly to government agencies, but we are ignorant of how much government cost is added to the goods and services we buy.

Sure, the rich get rich by our work. But they pay us for that work. Government, on the other hand, may give back $500 after taking $20,000 and brag about how privileged we are to benefit from their generosity.
gkam
Apr 14, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Apr 14, 2017
Government, on the other hand, may give back $500 after taking $20,000 and brag about how privileged we are to benefit from their generosity
@dusty
yes and no
when it comes to taxes, americans have a little more power than most even know about
http://www.gao.gov/

sure, there are some payments that have to remain secret due to the sensitive nature of national security, but all in all, they do a "fair" job

i use the term fair because of the nature of all bureaucracies - there will always be waste or bad decisions simply because of the nature of red tape

but back to the power of a citizen: we have far more power than most realise, not only because we can influence the primary members of GAO through elections or direct input, but also because we have the power of numbers through democracy and standing together (which so many seem to have forgotten, even when there have been great recent examples, from the 1960's to the more modern CO)
dustywells
not rated yet Apr 15, 2017
I do not share your hatred of government.
It is not a hatred of government. It is a simplified illustration of the way our economy works.

The government gives tax breaks to the wealthy to encourage them to create jobs. As a reward the wealthy get to enjoy a better lifestyle, we get jobs and a better lifestyle, and the government collects taxes that pay for society's support structure.

That is why I felt compelled to disagree with the picture presented by the above report which implies that the lifestyles of the wealthy cause pollution when in fact it is our need for income to support our wants and needs. But, after connecting the dots, the article does raise the question: Would there be less pollution if more people were unemployed?

Bottom line, there will always be a top 10%. The faces may change and the absolute income may change, but the division remains. We just have to understand it and live with it.
gkam
1 / 5 (4) Apr 15, 2017
"We just have to understand it and live with it."
------------------------------------

Yes, . . by keeping it from owning and controlling us.

Good luck with that.
Caliban
5 / 5 (2) Apr 15, 2017
But don't expect me to support your "philosophy".
Hasn't it occurred to you yet that if it were not for those wealthier than you, the target would be on your back?


Obvviously it has escaped mustysmells that what they are referring to in this research is the fact that the class of people in question have many times the footprint than the proles that they exploit in order to sustain their grotesquely lavish lives.

I am one of those proles, mustysmells-- just like you.

But I also understand that persons of your stripe are only too eager to defend this gross overreach of THEM, for the pure and simple reason that you wish to BE one of them, and will feel zero compunction about using the same methods to achieve the same results, at the same cost to everyone and everything else. For you to criticize them, you would also be criticizing YOURSELF --in advance-- in your efforts to attain the same status as them.

Thus YOU PROJECT.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.