Anyone in the flood zone?

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
India Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: Anyone in the flood zone?
mithradates 8/7/2007 11:14:15 AM

14 million displaced people and hunger is now setting in. This is a messy situation to say the least. Best of luck out there. h!tp://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/08/06/floods.food.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4

mithradates Herald 8/7/2007 10:19:59 PM

Your learned ignorance is only matched by your inherent stupidity. Thank you for regurgitating MY references and distorting it as USUAL. THANK YOU for regurgitating my last reference on Canadian lumber exports which is PREDOMINANTLY softwood while entirely ignoring my references on total wood consumption. Now why don't you do us all a favor and actually post out my the very first reference that I posted ? Oh afraid to do so because it shows you to be a LIAR is it?? Here Let me do it for you.

North American Lumber Market

16-30th June 2007

North America faces sliding demand for lumber
The reduction in North American housing starts resulted in a much lower demand for lumber. Reductions in the lumber production capacity are needed to balance the supply with the low demand.

North American lumber usage stood at 72.8 billion board feet (bf) in 2006, down three billion bf or 4% from 75.8 billion bf in 2005. A similar reduction is anticipated for this year, with estimates anticipated to be below 70 billion bf. Domestic North American suppliers face a demand reduction of close to 5 billion bf of lumber.

http://www.globalwood.org/market1/20070602-wpe45.gif" border="0" height="326" width="423">

The deterioration of the market applies to the entire North American continent, but there are important regional differences. In the US, overall lumber production will decline by about 1.4 billion bf or some 3.6% in 2007, or 39.0 billion bf in 2006 to an anticipated 37.6 billion bf this year. While the southern states are expected to experience only a 2% decline in 2007, the Pacific region may witness a drop of as much as 5%. Canada’s output fell by only 0.25 billion bf from 34.1 billion bf in 2005 to 33.8 billion bf in 2006, but is expected to decline by a full 1.0 billion bf to 32.8 billion bf in 2007.

American housing starts have been advancing almost without interruption for 15 years, reaching a peak level of 2.07 million in 2005. This enormous construction boom led to an oversupplied market in 2006, which coincided with a slowdown of the American economy. As a result of these negative forces, residential housing construction fell by 12.6% last year to a level of 1.81 million units. The haemorrhage in the housing market has not yet come to an end and sources expect an even steeper decline of close to 20% this year. In 2008, the market may be levelling off at the low number of approximately 1.47 million units.

The housing market in Canada followed a similar trend, albeit with less severity. Canadian housing starts culminated last year at 228,000 units but this year they also entered a phase of decline. The decline is expected to bottom out in 2008 at about 185,000 units. This would be 18.9% below the previous peak level, but this still compares quite favourable to a drop of 29.0% in the US.

The weak housing segment was somewhat mitigated by healthy repair and remodelling activities and advances in non-residential and industrial construction.

http://www.globalwood.org/market1/20070602-wpe47.gif" border="0" height="262" width="400">

Source: AKTRIN, Wood Markets Monthly

Canada maintains high exports to the US in 2006
Lumber exports from Canada to the US stood at 20.9 billion bf in 2006. This relatively high volume was partially triggered by the anticipated enactment of the USCanada Softwood Lumber Agreement. Canadian suppliers flooded the US market shortly before the implementation of American import quotas. The deluge of Canadian supplies happened when the demand in the US slipped. As a result, this had a very dampening effect on pric

Quote Reply

Softwar No Myth Running My World 8/8/2007 9:01:05 AM

Quotes from the World Bank report on Chinese pollution - which our dear comrade Myth has elected to

ignore. Myth did admit that he supports using human excrement as fertilizer in an earlier post - which is

reason enough to ban the import of any Chinese agriculture product.

SO2 emissions -

With annual average PM10 concentrations of over 100Ìg/m3, several selected cities in both northern and
southern China are among the most polluted cities in the world...

It is estimated that acid rain, caused mainly by increased SO2 emissions due to increased fossil
fuel use—causes over 30 billion yuan in damages to crops, primarily vegetable crops (about
80 percent of the losses). This amounts to 1.8 percent of the value of agricultural output.
Damage to building materials in the South imposed a cost of 7 billion yuan on the Chinese
economy in 2003. In addition to the human health effects reported above, these damages provide
an additional impetus for controlling SO2. Damages to forests could not be quantified due
to lack of monitoring data in remote areas and adequate dose-response functions.

(Please note - Myth - we don't know how many trees your #1 SO2/acid rain is killing because

your government won't release the data or simply will not dedicate the resource to monitor it.)

WATER Pollution -

In the period between 2001 and 2005, on average about 54 percent of the seven main rivers in
China contained water deemed unsafe for human consumption.

In 2004, about 25,000 km of Chinese rivers failed to meet the water quality standards for
aquatic life and about 90 percent of the sections of rivers around urban areas were seriously polluted
(MWR 2005). Many of the most polluted rivers have been void of fish for many years.

Wasting Non-rechargable Resources -
It is estimated that 25 billion cubic meters of nonrechargeable deep-aquifer groundwater were
mined in China in 2000, 90 per cent of which was used for agricultural purposes.

Killing -

Death rates due to stomach, liver, and bladder cancers in rural China are considerably higher

than world averages and also much higher than in large cities in China.

The World Bank Report was going to publish an estimated figure of 750,000 dead a year due to

Chinese pollution but the PRC government pressed them to censor the report on fears that such

facts would incite the Chinese people to act.

Quote Reply

Herald1234 Something for Myth to consider 8/8/2007 11:47:22 PM

By your racist viewpoint you would call me a Dongyi, though technically by origin I would be more akin to Beidi.

So you face losing dog of Beijing imperialism. You barbarian to use the correct American term let me throw stuff at you that I understand and that your Walmart paycheck supported goydal mind does not.

1. The US used to harvest 50 billion board feet of lumber a year.

An average US treee with a diameter of 12 inches and height of about 100 feet yields about 250 board feet of lumber. So we harvested in those years about 166 million trees.

Each year we plant approximately 1.6 BILLION trees.

Our forest acreage is increasing stupid.

You said that by if we had no importation we would use up eighty percent of our forest to make up our shortfall in near term and deforest ourselves?

You do know that you just fell into one of my proof traps?

I told you long ago that I could make you dance and i could steer your weak mind in any direction I chose?

Welcome to reality, little yapper.

For a slave you take direction very well, even from a Beidi.

Now that you've lost face before your ancestors, before me, and published your humiliating lack of intelligence, maturity, and emotional stability before the whole world and further by falling into my SIMPLE little trap demonstrated that even among your PRC masters you are an incompetent who their handlers they assigned to you for propaganda support cannot save from your loss of face and deserved humiliation, you have but one honorable recourse.

I suggest you take it.

Herald

Quote Reply

mithradates 8/10/2007 1:55:58 PM

So Herald.....after you were cornered and proved to be the liar that you are you resort to the standard practice I see.

More LIES and name calling doesn't cut it. BTW you misstated the U.S annual lumber production by almost an order of MAGNITUDE. The fact that you have to resort to insults, diatribe and REGURGITATING my posted references shows that YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT.

So I ask you again, PROVE your 7% annual import figure? All of mine references and your own propaganda has backed up my initial assertions. What are you afraid of Herald, we all know you were lying out of your ass when you made that 7% statement...go ahead...launch more diatribe my way..that just shows you to be more of a FOOL :D

Have a nice day!

Quote Reply

Herald1234 8/10/2007 4:55:36 PM

An order of magnitude is of the power of ten or 10x, cretin. Figure out your error if you have the wit.

I wipe you from under the sole of my shoe.

I do not obey the entreaties of a fool.

Herald

Quote Reply

mithradates 8/10/2007 7:07:38 PM

An order of magnitude is of the power of ten or 10x, cretin. Figure out your error if you have the wit.

I wipe you from under the sole of my shoe.

I do not obey the entreaties of a fool.

Herald

You are a fool Herald without the ability to do basic math.

Let me dumb it down enough for even you to understand.

Annual U.S Wood harvest over the last 15 YEARS = ~460 million to 500 million cubic feet = ~215 BILLION board feet.

You said....you fascists harvested 50 Billion board feet. I merely corrected you on that note, as in the U.S ACTUALLY harvested 4.3 times as much as your absurd claim. And THAT figure is well within a range of an order of magnitude as I have stated.

And of course I don't expect you to come out with even a half-assed argument....you can't back up that 7% imported wood lie. Thus, your current spate of insults. You are SO VERY predictable Herald, squirming like a toad on a frying man :D

Quote Reply

Softwar Myth - China So Advanced They Poop On their Food 8/10/2007 7:44:21 PM

Once again I repost what you have NOT responded to -

I note you have not responded to my posts - obvioulsy because you can't. The point being that you - whose screen name is after a eunuch murderer assassin - simply post garbage - polluting up SP. I thought you had enough when we pointed out that you posted a photoshopped image of an F-22 claiming it was an advanced PLAAF fighter. I also thought you knew better after I proved that your assertion that pictures of a new PLA missile were the DF-31 was wrong. Of course, you were unable to fathom even the simplest of tests using the wrong scale, the wrong math. Your lack of knowledge of military systems, science, math, chemistry and even a basic understanding of physics is obvious.

In short, you are not only a liar but a bad liar.

Now you claim to be the savior of the GREENIE world by posting the USA is all at fault - meanwhile you ignore the growing filth, soot, and pollution in your own yard.

Here are some more quotes from the RECENT World Bank Report that was censored by your government because it might cause unrest. The truth is hard to swallow or breath - and unrest due to the fact that your nation is polluting the world and itself to death is not unrest but freedom in action:

In addition to the continuous discharges of pollution into river systems, accidents may lead to temporary
high levels of pollutants. In the aftermath of the accident in the Songhua River in northeastern
China in November 2005, where a chemical plant released about 100 tons of the highly toxic
chemical benzene into the river, the government carried out an inspection of 127 major chemical
and petrochemical plants. The inspection found that many plants were located too close to major
bodies of water and that 20 of the inspected plants had serious environmental safety problems.
These plants included oil refineries and ethylene and methanol factories along the Yangtze River,
the Yellow River, and the Daya Bay near Hong Kong. In the period November 2005 to April 2006,
76 more water pollution accidents were reported by the Chinese government...

The degree of treatment of piped water also varies between urban and rural areas. While drinking
water treatment plants in cities and to some extent in smaller townships provide comprehensive
treatment of the water through sedimentation and disinfection, a large share of the piped water in
townships and villages undergoes only limited treatment (either sedimentation or disinfection or
chlorination). The overall effectiveness of treatment is, therefore, very limited. According to 2001–04
monitoring data from 100 township treatment plants in 14 countries upstream of the Three Gorges
area, the levels of a number of contaminants—such as arsenic, fluoride, and nitrate—were not significantly
affected by treatment. Treatment did reduce the total bacteria content, but the resulting
water still had on average 83 percent more coliform bacteria than permitted by the national standard
for drinking water quality (Class I). The mercury in the treated water was on average 38 percent
above the standard...

Water scarcity has led China to make use of excessive amounts of polluted water in its water
supply. Polluted water is supplied to households, industry and, in particular, agriculture....

Although the objective of this study was not to compare the impacts of air and water pollution
on the poor versus the non-poor, the findings suggest that environmental pollution falls disproportionately
on the less economically advanced parts of China, which have a higher share
of poor populations. As shown in Figure 1, Ningxia, Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, and other
low-income provinces are more affected by air pollution on a per capita basis than high-income
provinces such as Guangdong and other provinces in the southeast.

From another perspective, analysis of the 2003 National Health Survey showed that
75 percent of low-income households in rural China with children under 5 years of age have no
access to piped water, compared to 47 percent in the higher-income categories. This implies that
low-income households rely more on other drinking water sources. In fact, about 32 percent
of households within the lowest income quartile rely primarily on surface water as their primary
source of drinking water, compared to 11 percent in the highest income quintile. This
means that the rural poor are at a substantially higher risk from surface water pollution than
the non-poor.

Quote Reply

Herald1234 8/10/2007 11:00:24 PM

An order of magnitude is of the power of ten or 10x, cretin. Figure out your error if you have the wit.

I wipe you from under the sole of my shoe.

I do not obey the entreaties of a fool.

Herald

How much wood does each American use?

[quoting]

We're all familiar with wood as a source of poles, timbers, lumber, plywood, and paper. But it's also a part of many other products: molded interior panels for autos, adhesives, paints, food additives, drapes, tires, even table tennis balls. In total, each of us consumes about 80 cubic feet of wood each year, an amount equivalent to a tree 1.5 feet in diameter and more than 103 feet tall.

250 million tress stupid at about 300 board feet per tree or 90 billion board feet. Now according to your own crap figures you claim the US imports less than half the wood it uses. So stupid by math that I've dumbed down for your PRC intellect you need at least 40 billion board feet harvested from US resources per year the last ten years.

40 billion board feet by 10 years = 400 billion board feet. Still pulling numbers pout of your lying commie ass PRC?

Or another way if you use the 80 cubic feet out of each average tree.

There are 12 board feet in one cubic foot of lumber stupid so the US consumption is 240,000,000,000 all uses.

250,000,000x80=20,000,000,000 cubic feet of lumber x 12= 240 billion board feet.

By the way liar I have a very good memory.

You claimed to work for a company that acquired a contract to put a suspension bridge across a chasm in Tibet.

Then you claimed to be a supply chain manager for an international corporation.

Since you didn't know what an order of magnitude was, couldn't source your numbers at all, or do simple arithmatic and just flat out pull numbers out of you ass, I can cheerfully&nb

Quote Reply

mithradates 8/11/2007 1:59:32 AM

Herald...I am truly impressed by your arm twisting and diatribe....I seemed to have touched off a raw nerve by pointing you out to be the LYING INCOMPETANT that you are!

This is quite entertaining....Squirm little fascist money SQUIRM!!!! :D

Quote Reply

Herald1234 8/11/2007 2:32:53 AM

Unable to defend yourself or to even dispute the numbers that proved you were a liar, you gave exactly the uselesss response you gave three months ago. Couldn't deny that you were a liar or a slave?

Exactly as I programmed you. Reduced you to useless namecalling. I TOLD you that I'm slapping you around for grins and giggles. You see I like beating up the lying imperialist scum of the Earth of which you are a prime cowardly example.

Still haven't proved a single case or published a single sourced calculation that wasn't a pure lie.

So dance puppet dance. let the who;e world see what youn are. Convince them if you can?

What? You want to lose some more face? Keep on coming. I need the amusement, running dog. How do you feel about Pan Hu in reverse, barbarian?

By the way, conme up with something original, you twerp. If you're trying to push somebody's psychological buttons you need to do better than parrot his own words back at him. Parrot hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

So now I will call you a lying parrot..

Squawk on little feathered wretch.

I love plucking little cretins like you.

You are SPORT.

Herald

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4