Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/05/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Not to mention here on the LUG. V On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 8:31 PM, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com> wrote: > Oh but I have considered it in my calculations Vince. > > I conclude that the dog's collective national flatulence > cannot begin to approach the collective national flatulence > of the 2.5 overweight children who just super-sized in the back of the SUV. > > > ;~) > > Regards, > George Lottermoser > george at imagist.com > http://www.imagist.com > http://www.imagist.com/blog > http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist > > On May 4, 2010, at 6:56 PM, Vince Passaro wrote: > > George, >> >> You're not thinking of the dogs' collective national flatulence. Cow >> flatulence in our food production industry gets some blame but -- UNTIL >> NOW >> -- the dogs have been left off the hook. Not all of it gets stuck in the >> curtains and couch cushions. >> >> Vince >> >> >> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:30 AM, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com >> >wrote: >> >> Right. >>> I also googled after I posted >>> and found only the claim >>> without any substantiation, facts or science >>> (perhaps the book provides them). >>> >>> I have a hard time imagining that >>> producing and moving dog food for ten years >>> takes more energy than >>> producing and moving steel, plastic, leather, paint, rubber, oil, >>> gasoline, >>> antifreeze, brake and other fluids for ten years; >>> not to mention the carbon cost of recycling the SUV vs. DOG. >>> >>> One of my dogs ate mostly left overs from our kitchen table. >>> >>> I'll remain skeptical without running out to buy their book. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> George Lottermoser >>> george at imagist.com >>> http://www.imagist.com >>> http://www.imagist.com/blog >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist >>> >>> On May 4, 2010, at 10:01 AM, Rei Shinozuka wrote: >>> >>> I guess the Vales want you to buy their book to find out. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/10/23/Book-Dog-SUV-have-same-carbon-footprint/UPI-30131256332111/ >>>> >>>> I'll bet their models are just like any models: the results are only as >>>> good as the assumptions that went into them. >>>> >>>> -rei >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 05/04/2010 10:46 AM, George Lottermoser wrote: >>>> >>>> find this very hard to believe. >>>>> >>>>> what methodology was used to arrive at this conclusion? >>>>> was the total life from conception to disposal and feeding measured for >>>>> 40 lb dog and SUV? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> George Lottermoser >>>>> george at imagist.com >>>>> http://www.imagist.com >>>>> http://www.imagist.com/blog >>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist >>>>> >>>>> On May 4, 2010, at 9:41 AM, simon jessurun wrote: >>>>> >>>>> recently learned that having a pet like a medium sized dog has a >>>>> >>>>>> larger carbon footprint then a SUV >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >