Latviesu problemas

Amakatanav

domā naudas rausēji (uzņēmēji) vai pro kremlis, ko citu darītu?

farruhs

Vot es vnk ujeju no šitā - Ko paši ievēlēja, to paši dabūja.

Es šajā sakara nepiekā nejūtos vainīgs, tāpēc šitāda replika mani parasti sadusmo. :grudaks:

vabo

Citēt:

27 November 2010 00:23:32 farruhs rakstīja:
Vot es vnk ujeju no šitā - Ko paši ievēlēja, to paši dabūja.

Es šajā sakara nepiekā nejūtos vainīgs, tāpēc šitāda replika mani parasti sadusmo. :grudaks:

mda, izderjma problemoti4no konfetku slepitj...

Max

Par atgazem un dabas piesarnojumu. :shura:

Vel tiem kugjiem japieskaita klat aviaciju. Interesanti cik aviacija ir videi draudziga.

The bottom line: One giant container ship pollutes the air as much as 50 million cars. Yes, that`s 50 million. Which means that just 15 ships that size emit as much as today`s entire global "car park" of roughly 750 million vehicles. Among the bad stuff: Sulfur, soot, and other particulate matter that embeds itself in human lungs to cause a variety of cardiopulmonary illnesses.

Since the mid-1970s, developed countries have imposed increasingly strict regulations on auto emissions. In three decades, precise electronic engine controls, new high-pressure injectors, and sophisticated catalytic converters have cut emissions of nitrous oxides, carbon dioxides, and hydrocarbons by more than 98 percent. New regulations will further reduce these already minute limits.

But ships today are where cars were in 1965: utterly uncontrolled, free to emit whatever they like. Just one of many statistics: A car driven 9,000 miles a year emits 3.5 ounces of sulfur oxides--while the engine in a large cargo ship produces 5,500 tons.

And in the near term, very little is going to change. Why? Two reasons: Bunker fuel, and jurisdiction.