Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations JAE on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Things are Starting to Heat Up Part VI 10
- Thread starter dik
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #281
- Thread starter
- #283
-
1
- #284
GregLocock
Automotive
The problem with posting every scare story is accurately defined by the boy who cried wolf, even if there is no wolf.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
- Thread starter
- #285
Greg... on the down side, the wrath of God may pale by comparison. We just don't know, but we will likely find out (not me, but my grandkids...). Chicken Little, only has to be right, once.
-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
TugboatEng
Marine/Ocean
What does God have to do with this?
Changing our ways because of stupid and unfounded fears is the best way to make sure your grand children return to the caveman lifestyle and a 35 year life expectancy.
The human life expectancy and quality of life has only been improving despite climate change. In fact, the only thing to out a dent in that is gain of function research on viruses. Why do gain of function? So we're ready for that scary future? See how your fear mongering causes a real negative impact? Anti-social kids are running amok in their facemask burglarizing stores and shooting at each other. You want climate change? What climate changed to cause gun violence to be the leading cause of death for minors? Don't worry about fossil fuels. You're grand children are going to have bigger issues to deal with.
Changing our ways because of stupid and unfounded fears is the best way to make sure your grand children return to the caveman lifestyle and a 35 year life expectancy.
The human life expectancy and quality of life has only been improving despite climate change. In fact, the only thing to out a dent in that is gain of function research on viruses. Why do gain of function? So we're ready for that scary future? See how your fear mongering causes a real negative impact? Anti-social kids are running amok in their facemask burglarizing stores and shooting at each other. You want climate change? What climate changed to cause gun violence to be the leading cause of death for minors? Don't worry about fossil fuels. You're grand children are going to have bigger issues to deal with.
- Thread starter
- #288
GregLocock
Automotive
I learnt a new phrase the other day. Climate bedwetter. It baffles me that bunch of engineers who claim that CO2 is the bad doggy can't actually propose an economically valid solution for A Simple Challenge. The cheapest seems to be all nuclear. I'm fine with that. Second cheapest is massive overbuild of renewables and transmission lines and some combination of storage and gas peakers to provide the last 10-20%, which for any rational analysis leans towards gas rather than batteries.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
enginesrus
Mechanical
Co2 was chosen as the bad doggy, because it is the most common thing released by everything. It is quite the racket and game forced upon the earths inhabitants. The latest I saw was that pets, dogs and cats should be banned do to their carbon paw print. Oil deep in the earth? There was never any sort of life in the depths of the earth, only pressure, heat, and some H2o, and minerals, hmmm and why it always was called mineral oil, until a certain bunch invented the "fossil fuel" term, to fit the agenda. A clean renewable resource that is carbon neutral because it comes from earth.
- Thread starter
- #292
Sorry enginesrus... but CO2 is bad... it's the stuff that's helping to heat the planet. Maybe someone is catching on... New York may be following California... ![[pipe]](/data/assets/smilies/pipe.gif "[pipe] [pipe]")
-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
GregLocock
Automotive
Yup New York is another posterboy for the Field of Dreams approach to energy system management. Set the targets, mandate closing down the existing infrastructure, explicitly or implicitly, and wait for solutions to turn up. Currently Australia has proposed a slightly less ludicrous version of the same approach, which failed to meet its first target, while also imposing price caps on fuels and windfall taxes. So I expect the entire energy industry will walk away from Australia's market due to sovereign risk.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
enginesrus
Mechanical
No dik it is not (Co2). Its just something to blame, and to be able to regulate. Mean while the weather extremes continue, pretty much started Jan 20, 2021, like everything else did.
So I guess we are now back to global "Cooling" ? Till summer time anyway.
The stuff that heats the planet is the sun dik. It is the High and Low pressure area's that determine the weather, the weather is the climate. The gases such as Co2 just blow away in the wind and get absorbed by plant life. Really
simple stuff and a good invention to boot.
So I guess we are now back to global "Cooling" ? Till summer time anyway.
The stuff that heats the planet is the sun dik. It is the High and Low pressure area's that determine the weather, the weather is the climate. The gases such as Co2 just blow away in the wind and get absorbed by plant life. Really
simple stuff and a good invention to boot.
GregLocock
Automotive
NY:
6,000 MW of Solar by 2025
70% Renewable Energy by 2030
3,000 MW of Energy Storage by 2030
9,000 MW of Offshore Wind by 2035
100% Carbon-free Electricity by 2040
85% Reduction in GHG Emissions from 1990 levels by 2050
2022 offshore wind: 30 MW
2022 storage: zero (not too sure they mean MW of storage, that's how technically illiterate this plan is)
Average demand in NY is 16000 MW, so they are planning to fail, judging by the numbers I got in A Simple Challenge (8 hours per day offshore, 4 hours per day solar, a week of calm dull days every couple of years). They are also going to make EVs preferred if not compulsory (keeps me in a job but ...).
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
6,000 MW of Solar by 2025
70% Renewable Energy by 2030
3,000 MW of Energy Storage by 2030
9,000 MW of Offshore Wind by 2035
100% Carbon-free Electricity by 2040
85% Reduction in GHG Emissions from 1990 levels by 2050
2022 offshore wind: 30 MW
2022 storage: zero (not too sure they mean MW of storage, that's how technically illiterate this plan is)
Average demand in NY is 16000 MW, so they are planning to fail, judging by the numbers I got in A Simple Challenge (8 hours per day offshore, 4 hours per day solar, a week of calm dull days every couple of years). They are also going to make EVs preferred if not compulsory (keeps me in a job but ...).
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
TugboatEng
Marine/Ocean
The really frustrating part is that the same mentality wants to cripple our energy infrastructure also wants high density everything. High density requires climate control where I could survive year round in my single family home without any energy towards climate control. It just makes no sense.
enginesrus
Mechanical
(TugboatEng (Marine/Ocean)
21 Dec 22 22:20
The really frustrating part is that the same mentality wants to cripple our energy infrastructure also wants high density everything. High density requires climate control where I could survive year round in my single family home without any energy towards climate control. It just makes no sense. )
Makes perfect sense. Proves its an agenda not a problem.
- Thread starter
- #298
...and a lot of that heat escapes back into space. The CO2 acts as an insulation layer that prevents it from leaving the earth's surface. The high and low pressure areas will increase and decrease respectively and will cause more intense weather condition. We have no idea of what extreme is possible... even the weather models are not able to represent the changes posssible.
-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
TugboatEng
Marine/Ocean
The weather models can't represent the change because the people making the models are incompetent. They don't know the difference between temperature and heat. The exclude enthalpy from their models.
-
2
- #300
JoshPlumSE
Structural
dik said:
As I understand it, it's related to heat radiation. Where the heat radiating off the surface hits the CO2 which then reflects SOME of the heat back towards earth as opposed to all of it radiating out into space. I supposed that's pretty close to what you said. I just though your statement came a little too close to "greenhouse effect" which was always a false term, because nothing is confined as it is in a greenhouse.
Tug, what you're getting wrong is that these climate modelers are not all idiots and I assure you they do understand these concepts pretty well. Where they fail is that the tend to look at CO2 as the only variable that changes (a huge exaggeration, I know). In a climate, atmosphere like ours, EVERY variable is constantly changing. Even the amount of sunlight that is received. My point, is really that it's an impossible task to get these climate models correct enough to be truly predictive. The point, however, is that we have a good idea where we're headed (increased temperatures) and why (excessive atmospheric CO2 due to carbon based fuel emissions).
The alarmist are both correct and wrong at the same time. We should be alarmed. There is a very real chance that there will be very dire consequences from the increased warming. The questions should be what can we do about it? Can we limit it? If so, at what cost? Then we compare that cost to the cost of mitigation measures?
If sea levels are expected to rise, is it more efficient to move people out of low lying regions and build sea walls. Or, is it a more efficient solution to completely change our economy and somewhat dictate to China, India and all other countries that they MUST change their economies as well.
I personally think our "efficient" solution has to be a little of both. Like, make clean energy changes to our economy as much as is possible for us. This means, among other things, teaching our population not to fear nuclear fission power anymore. It also means being willing to assign tariffs to any country's imports that don't take similar actions. Maybe a global "shipping tax" that can be used to encourage more local production of goods and less shipping them half way around the world.
But, it also means being better prepared for extreme weather events.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question