Do you have any concern for the environment when keeping your equipment 24/7 ?


Or firing up your big amps.
Please say no or not at all.
inna

Showing 17 responses by tomcy6

Please, Let's keep the politics off this forum.  If we don't, I guarantee we'll regret it.
When one of the supervolcanoes (Yosemite, Mammoth Lakes, they have identified about 10 of them around the world) blows, any damage done to the environment by man will be irrelevant.
I was just replying to Elizabeth.  Within the next million years we'll probably have a few cataclysmic natural events.

I believe we have to take care of the Earth, and I try to do my part, but I'm not giving any more control over my life to the folks pushing climate change without a fight.
Just wanted to correct my earlier post, I meant Yellowstone, not Yosemite. 

It might jack up the price of beef, but we could try feeding cows GasX
Just wondering.  Do the climate change advocates drive cars or use Uber, Lyft or taxis?  Fly on airplanes?  Travel on vacation?  Do you live in a space larger than 800 sq ft?  Set your thermostat above 65 in the winter or lower than 85 in the summer?  Eat meat?  Eat in restaurants?  Do you have a stereo?   Do you use amplification other than class D in your stereo?
   
Do you have solar panels or windmills on your property? Do you take reusable shopping bags whenever you shop?   Do you ride a bike or walk for most of your transportation? 

If you answer yes to any of the questions in the first paragraph or no to those in the second, then you need to work on your own wasteful and ecologically destructive habits before pointing fingers at others and calling them names.  Putting other people down does nothing for the environment. 

People will change when they see those preaching climate change practicing what they preach.  Until the preachers do that, they are only spewing hot air and CO2.



I think it is a better idea to reduce our own energy consumption voluntarily, though. There’s no doubt that we can all use less energy without lowering our quality of life and people are more likely to reduce their own energy consumption when they see others doing it.

I really don’t want to see the government mandating what kind of cars we drive, when we can drive them, what temperature we keep our houses at or what we eat (exempting themselves, of course). That way lies certain disaster.

This thread made me look into another hot topic. We all have been made to feel guilty about the plastic in the oceans and local and state governments have begun outlawing things like plastic straws.

It turns out that the UN (not Dow Chemical) put out a report last year identifying 10 rivers that account for 90% of the plastic in the oceans. Nope, no American or European rivers at all. China, Southeast Asia, India and Africa are the sources of all that plastic:

https://www.unenvironment.org/interactive/beat-plastic-pollution/

The map is about halfway down. I haven’t heard much about this report on the evening news.

These are the same countries that are exempt from climate change regulations. Is it really a good idea to shackle our economy and let these countries do whatever they want? Environmentalists applaud when a factory closes in the US, but is the environment really helped when that factory moves to China? If we strangle our economy with climate change regulations, many many factories will be moving to the superpolluter countries. Does anyone really want that?
Yeah, let’s ’strangle’ China, India, South East Asia and parts of Africa.
No, let’s just deal with the problem not emotionally, not with any guilt about something we had nothing to do with, but calmly and rationally. Let’s find solutions that will improve the future, not make people pay for things they had nothing to with. Banning plastic straws may make someone feel good (somone who needs to get a life), but it doesn’t help anything.
It’s always good to see free speech and freedom of thought defended. They are under such heavy attack these days.
Those who don’t care about the environment are parasites and frank assholes. I will put them lower than viruses.
Do you determine who cares for the environment by what they say or by what they do? If by what they do, you just called Al Gore, The Clintons, The Obamas, Bernie Sanders, Bono, AOC and many other "concerned" celebrities parasites and frank assholes.

You might want to check your own carbon footprint and the amount of waste you generate too. You probably despise yourself.
Are those crickets I hear?
If you are talking about what you hear when you ask a climate change advocate what they are doing in their own lives to reduce their impact on the environment, the answer is yes.

Until you give up your car(s) and get your energy bills below $50 a month, you are in no position to point fingers at other people and call them names.  If the climate change preachers practiced what they preach, there would be no concern about a CO2 problem.  So when you give up your car(s) and put solar panels on your roof, we can talk.
Nonoise, I’d swear that you just did what you accused me of doing. I notice that folks like you do that a lot. 

When people who profess to profoundly care about the environment begin to live like they actually believe what they say, they will have my full attention. As long as they say one thing and do another, I will continue to regard them as hypocrites with a hidden agenda. An agenda that benefits them and is probably detrimental to me.

I’ve been through a few of these imminent catastrophes that require that I give more control of my life or more of my money to the government or someone else who has a lot more money than me. I’ve learned that talk is cheap and a lot of it is nonsense.


The real purpose of my participation is to try to convince you that the best way for you (or anyone) to help preserve the environment is to live in a way that lessens your own impact on it. Calling other people hateful names won’t get it done.

Do you really think that statements like this
It appears that climate change and global pollution are already doing brain damage to some, but real fun is yet to come. Dementia is on the rise, so is sociopathy. Let us all die stupid and delinquent but happy and with great audio systems.
convince other people to use less energy? I think a little more self awareness and less name calling would do a lot more to aid the cause you claim to care so much about. I think that you and the rest of the name callers are doing more harm than good at present.
I think I’ve figured it out, inna. You hate Republicans. The country is very bitterly divided along political lines right now and it’s been a tough week for the Democrats. I know how you feel. Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, etc. can drive me nuts too.

I don’t think that conservatives use more energy than liberals, though, and whether you leave your amp on 24/7 or turn it off when not in use has NO effect on CO2 levels, I mean ZERO.

I don’t want to try to change your political views. I know it couldn’t be done if I did want to. I guess what some others have suggested is the best solution, keep this forum about audio and leave the politics out. You can always start a cable direction thread if you need to vent.
Inna, what exactly is the purpose of this thread? Here’s a post from another thread you recently started:


inna OP
5,423 posts 03-05-2019 4:00pm

Can’t be sure of the exact prices and some pieces would very difficult to find, but here is my take on $20k system.

Nottingham Spacedeck/Spacearm, new or used.
Goldring 1042 or Nagaoka MP-500 cartridge, new.

Depending on tube or solid state choice of electronic:
tube - Allnic H-1202 phono, used; solid state - Sutherland 20/20 phono, new.

Gryphon Diablo integrated, used. VAC Sigma SE integrated, used.

Kharma speakers, used.
Purist Audio cabling, used.

That should do it.

I don’t see any concern for climate change. You even recommend a tube phono stage and integrated amp. Tubes are not known for their energy efficiency. So what’s up?  Is this a joke?  Are you just trying to stir up trouble?
Mississippi River flood of 1927, also called Great Flood of 1927

Flooding of the lower Mississippi River valley in April 1927 is one of the worst natural disasters in the history of the United States. More than 23,000 square miles (60,000 square km) of land was submerged, hundreds of thousands of people were displaced, and around 250 people died.

After several months of heavy rain caused the Mississippi River to swell to unprecedented levels, the first levee broke on April 16, along the Illinois shore. Then, on April 21, the levee at Mounds Landing in Mississippi gave way. Over the next few weeks essentially the entire levee system along the river collapsed. In some places, residential areas were submerged in 30 feet (9 metres) of water. At least two months passed before the floodwater completely subsided.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Mississippi-River-flood-of-1927
So, was the epic flooding in the Midwest in March worse than the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927?
I don’t know. I just wanted to say that weather related disasters are not new.  Some people seemed to not be aware that weather is constantly changing and is often devastating.
My last word on the topic is that we should all try to reduce our CO2 emissions. I encourage people to do this voluntarily. I am against giving the government more power to control our lives.

Whatever the US does, it will be for nothing if we do not get China and the rest of the developing world to work on it too. Their increases in CO2 emissions dwarf the decreases occurring in the US and Europe. So if they remain exempt from reducing CO2 emissions, which is what I expect to happen, China has already stated that it will not limit its CO2 emissions, get ready for lots of bad weather, even if we drastically cut our emissions.

https://www.axios.com/china-india-us-pushed-carbon-emissions-to-record-levels-in-2018-1b1e171a-d46a-49b7-bc4a-7250942a1a7d.html

Actually, I don't see much hope of the world as a whole reducing CO2 emissions.  I advise everyone to start preparing for whatever you see as the worst case scenario.