[brown_thumb]

Originally Posted by Spaventa

Show us your calculations to back that up.

I referenced only the waste that is landfilled, not all household waste.

Whatever the amount, its obvious we could also burn green waste and be better off than mining coal and transporting it from places like Russia.

I don't need to... it's commons sense. Think about the refuse you produce. Would burning all of that provide a significant amount of the power you use? To turn this around, you provide proof (calculations) of your premise. After all, you're the one who suggested it.

ANYWAY... my state is backwards so whatever Sessions does probably won't affect me in any significant way, in the short-term.

EDIT: I just realized, I'm being baited. I won't respond to Spaventa's troll-ish silliness again.

[stewart169]

Originally Posted by ridnovir

You obviously jump to conclusions and you are too fast to throw people into this or that camp. I have been following fusion reactor in France since 2000s ie 17 years already and it is still only half way done and still 20 years away to be be fully on line. (FYI I am also following the Wendelstein 7-X reactor in Germany) I meant the French will not be providing electricity to your neck of the woods form that reactor anytime soon. And as far as I know there is no fusion reactors build in US of A. I am all for fusion it is clean and potentially limitless and in future each house might have a scaled down version to power its needs but we are decades away from that. BTW I am way to the right of you that is not even funny and a little scary for some I just have sense and am conscious about environment because I want to be healthy and I want my kids to enjoy the beauty of Mother Nature. Back on topic. Trumps' choices of EPA and AG are dismal to say the least.

OK you win. Your the mostest smartest person on earth and have all the answers. I wonder how many mirrors are in your home. Now time to add a new name to the ignore list.

[iBogart]

Oregon’s U.S. Attorney says he has “significant concerns” about state’s marijuana regs and enforcement



y Polly Washburn, The Cannabist Staff
Billy J. Williams, the United States Attorney for the District of Oregon, said in an editorial published Friday that he has concerns about the state’s marijuana regulatory structure, and current enforcement practices.

In an editorial published January 12 on OregonLive.com, Williams wrote, “I have significant concerns about the state’s current regulatory framework and the resources allocated to policing marijuana in Oregon.”

Williams said that he has been given “wide latitude” from U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “deploy department resources,” after Sessions’ memo last week rescinding the Holden-era Justice Department Cole memo that restricted federal enforcement of federal marijuana laws in states that had legalized the sale of cannabis.
U.S. Attorneys in different regions have released statements regarding their approach. Massachusetts’ federal prosecutor said he “cannot provide assurances” for legal marijuana businesses, while Maine’s has said marijuana users are “not a priority.”

Williams, however wrote, “It would be an inappropriate abdication of my duties to issue any blanket proclamations on our marijuana enforcement strategy in light of federal law.”

Williams cited issues with black and grey market grows, saying they are the source of “money laundering, violence, and environmental degradation.”
Jeff Sessions’ letter to Oregon Gov. Kate Brown in July 2017 had cited “pervasive illicit cannabis cultivation” a phrase he took from an Oregon State Police report.
When Gov. Brown and Police Superintendent Travis Hampton responded to Sessions in August, they indicated that the report Sessions was referring to was meant to be an internal draft.

In his op-ed, Williams wrote, “We need more information from the state” and called on the state to release the final version of the report.
Williams said in his editorial that he is convening a summit to “address and remedy” concerns and will be inviting federal, state, local and tribal law enforcement, plus public health organizations, Oregon marijuana interests and concerned citizen groups. “This summit and the state’s response will inform our federal enforcement strategy,” he wrote.

Echoing sentiments expressed over the last year by Sessions, Williams expressed concern as to the effects of adult-use marijuana on Oregon’s citizens. “Even recreational marijuana permitted under state law carries ill-effects on public health and safety, as Colorado’s experience shows,” citing a rise in marijuana-related traffic deaths, and marijuana-related emergency and hospital admissions.

Williams also claimed that Colorado youth marijuana use is “up 12 percent, 55 percent higher than the national average. We must do everything in our power to avoid similar trends here in Oregon.”

In fact, one recent study showed that teen use in Colorado has decreased, although Colorado school police disputed this decline.

Williams summed up his statement, “We will continue to look at cases individually and assess whether charges are appropriate considering the best needs of our community.”
Oregon was the first state to decriminalize personal possession, in 1973. It legalized medical marijuana in 1998 and recreational use in 2014, with adult-use sales commencing in October 2015.

Brown and Oregon’s congressional representative Earl Blumenauer have said they will fight Sessions’ move to change federal enforcement.


https://www.thecannabist.co/2018/01/...rijuana/96649/

[TychoMonolyth]

In the meantime, the Canadian government is considering Pardons for marijuana related criminal convictions once legalization comes into force.

[Spaventa]

Originally Posted by brown_thumb

I don't need to... it's commons sense. Think about the refuse you produce. Would burning all of that provide a significant amount of the power you use? To turn this around, you provide proof (calculations) of your premise. After all, you're the one who suggested it.

ANYWAY... my state is backwards so whatever Sessions does probably won't affect me in any significant way, in the short-term.

EDIT: I just realized, I'm being baited. I won't respond to Spaventa's troll-ish silliness again.

I didn't specify any output or even claim that household waste would fulfil the entire demand for electricity. All I said was we should burn landfill waste. Never said it would be all we needed.

The only behaviour so far that could be described as "trollish" is the guy who starts accusing and throwing insults when he's doesn't have an answer, or can't back up an assertion they made.
Thats you - you have nothing to prove your assertion and are the one calling me silly and a troll. This makes YOU a troll.

[Dave Coulier]

Originally Posted by Sam_Skunkman

No the solution is not to burn our trash.
We should start reducing the population. as that is the only way to save the planets resources before 10-20 or 100 billion humans eat, drink, mine, fish, cut all forests and pollute the entire planet and oceans.
You can not fight high population once it gets way to high, we all need to do something today to stop the increase.
Maybe we should consider giving a $1000 award to anyone that will commit to not having children before they do, or et them adopt. There must be a way to insure that one birth child is the norm, just by allowing people to make that choice. I am not for forced sterility but it might be better then where the world is headed.
SamS

But Sam, you'll be branded a racist by the liberals for even encouraging that idea because it will disproportionaly affect communities of color. Particularly the poor communities.

The optimal solution would be to eradicate poverty(yeah that'll happen). People who live in poverty tend to have more children than people from more affluent nations. While people from non-poor backgrounds are having less children today than before.

I have no doubt there would be reduction in global population growth if poverty could be eradicated or greatly reduced. Unfortunately, poverty is here to stay.

[TychoMonolyth]

Originally Posted by Dave Coulier

I have no doubt there would be reduction in global population growth if poverty could be eradicated or greatly reduced. Unfortunately, poverty is here to stay.

I don't agree. We know that poverty breeds crime. Get rid of poverty, get rid of crime, ignorance and prejudice.

[CosmicCharlie]

Hemp is the solution to all of our problems.

It can be made into fuel, plastics, food, fiber, can replenish the earth where it’s grown, and can sequester CO2.

[samiam]

https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosli...growth/up-next

[TychoMonolyth]

Originally Posted by samiam

https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosli...growth/up-next

Hans Rosling passed away in 2017. A great speaker who knew how to present and communicate numbers and trends. RIP.