:
..@gmail.com eorge H.
d that it would be hopelessly ineffective and the environmental damage woul d be huge.
all would reduce the number of border patrol agents needed to stop illegal border crossings. And also places where erecting a wall would cost more tha n it saved.
ould be large.
re are around 1.8 kilograms of carbon dioxide emissions embodied within a k ilogram of steel. That means the steel would contribute a further 4.1 milli on metric tons of CO2.
that a kilogram of steel would contain 1.8 Kg of CO2. I could believe 1.8 grams, but have a problem with steel containing more CO2 than steel.
at's what they're talking about. Concrete is the worst at 900 Lbs CO2 per c ubic yard, and a cubic yard doesn't get you much in any kind of constructio n, you need a bunch of them.
. sGET LOST!
There is certainly a lot of emotionally loaded language. The denialist prop aganda machine seems to be good at digging out - or inventing - rabid envir onmentalist rantings. John Larkin claims that environmentalist want to take us back to the Stone Age, which isn't something I've ever seen in the envi ronmentalist articles I've read.
That's rational.