Quote:

Canada's politicians may be catching on pandering...

Fixed it for ya!

Carbon capture is projected to be 25% of global energy consumption by 2100.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/direct-co2-capture-mac...

What kind of expert would think this is a viable route?

You need to reduce the carbon, too... not just capture it.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

We aren't doing carbon capture now. If it becomes 25% of our energy consumption that will be entirely additional consumption. That's a lot of extra heating.

Quote (TugboatEng)

Carbon capture is projected to be 25% of global energy consumption by 2100.

You must have a doctorate in cherry picking. I am continually amazed at your ability to neglect everything in a document except for what you actually want the news to be.

For everyone else, here is what that study actually says, via direct quotes from the author of the study:

"Although DAC will use less resources such as water and land than other NETs [such as BECCS], a proper full life-cycle assessment needs to be carried out to understand all resource implications"

"Inappropriate interpretations [of our findings] would be that DAC is a panacea"

"Policymakers should not make the mistake to believe that carbon removals could ever neutralise all future emissions"

"Even under pessimistic assumptions about fossil fuel availability, carbon removal cannot and will not fix the problem."

Quote (TugboatEng)

What kind of expert would think this is a viable route?

Not even the author of the study thinks this solution is an 'instant' fix to the system. So, as usual, no one is saying the things you're arguing against.

Quote (The Article)

a proper full life-cycle assessment needs to be carried out to understand all resource implications

This is the part that will never be done.

None of those points address my comment.

Quote (dik)

You need to reduce the carbon, too... not just capture it.

Not sure that's true. If you can capture it at the production point and don't release it into the atmosphere, and find a way to store it long term (a lot of ifs). Then, by it's very nature, this carbon capture would be a reduction in emissions.

That being said, I'm not sure the technology is truly there yet. Maybe it is and I don't know about it.

For what it's worth, the CONCEPT of carbo swaps (where you can emit more carbon if you plant trees or such to offset it) is a valid one. That being said, I am highly skeptical. To me, the way it's been proposed is just a way for certain politically connected uber-environmentalists to profit off of the guilt / regulations that the illuminati are imposing on the rest of us.

I'm not onboard with the bio offsets. They turn the CO2 into CH4 which is 300x worse.

"Yet, previous hopes that CCUS was about to fulfil its potential have petered out. The past decade saw high-profile project cancellations and government funding programmes that failed to deliver. On average, capture capacity of less than 3 million tonnes of CO2 (MtCO2) has been added worldwide each year since 2010, with annual capture capacity now reaching over 40 MtCO2. This needs to increase to 1.6 billion tonnes (GtCO2) in 2030 to align with a pathway to net zero by 2050."

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/carbon-capture-in...

I hope more of them come on line soon... there's not much increase in those operating, it would seem.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

You hope more come online? Is there any real reduction in CO2 by running these units considering they are primarily fueled by fossil fuel? Will we even be able to build anymore with the refrigerant bans moving forward?

Breaking news:

"Scientists are predicting that global warming will pass 1.5C between now and 2027. This threshold, they suggest, will see more extreme temperatures and weather conditions around the world.

The unprecedented rise in relation to a long-term average is put down in part to human activity such as the burning of fossil fuel, but scientists say that if temperatures do breach the 1.5c threshold it is only likely to be temporary.

The rises are also partly due to changing global weather patterns but scientists have noticed a clear change between pre-and-post heavy fossil-fuel consumption."

https://euroweeklynews.com/2023/05/17/global-warmi...

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-65602...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/world-to-likely-surpa...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

I have a prediction.... We won't see any real "call to action" until valuable coastal regions start flooding frequently due to sea rise. At that point, there will be real money lost / at IMMEDIATE risk due to climate change.

The problem is that this is not an immediate crisis. Yeah, there are all sorts of theoretical "dangers" out there. But, none of those are really all that scary. At least not compared to the immediate dangers that face all of us every day.... Not being able to pay our bills, worry about our children's education, or their getting into drugs or such. Being able to afford our retirement and such. These are all more real and immediate compared to the dangers of global warming.

I concur... and by that time, who knows where this will go.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (dik)

Breaking news:

"Scientists are predicting that global warming will pass 1.5C between now and 2027.

That's not news, it's a prediction, the same kind we've been hearing for several decades, other than the time frame is shorter. Either they're desperate to get their agenda enacted quickly, or they think the public's collective attention span is getting shorter, and we'll forget about the prediction by then.

It's just a matter of hanging on, and see what happens, and hope it's for the best. No magic globe... we don't know what the future brings, but based on past information, we may be able to make an educated guess.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote:

... but based on past information, we may be able to make an educated guess.

You'd think so, but up to this point, the so-called 'educated' guesses made in the past about the present, by the same supposed experts, have all been way off, always on the high side (except for the few that have been around long enough to have made predictions warning about global cooling).

Yup, the media has gleefully repeated all kinds of wild predictions that have not even come close to being true. This has been going on for at least 50 years. Maybe closer to 100 years. These predictions are almost never correct. What's more is that many of them predict true doomsday scenarios that have never materialized.

Heck, the left has done this with nuclear apocalypse (that's when I was a kid in the 1980s). Before that it was in the 60s and 70s it was that the world economy would collapse because of the rapid increase in population and we wouldn't have sufficient food resources to avoid mass starvation. There was all the Y2k panic as well. Every one of these had a pretty big political aspect of it. Trying to influence global politics and change government policy. Heck, the company I worked for spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to update engineering software that were

The religious right is susceptible to these sorts of doomsdays as well. I'm thinking of a small group of religious folks who believe that 2nd coming of has arrived. Not sure that there is very much negative consequences from these predictions for anyone outside of the people who wasted their time believing.

However, you can argue that threat of fascism in the 1930s and communism in the 1950/60s were right-leaning doomsday scenarios as well. These, of course, were genuine existential crises. There were immediate threats that materialized in continuing and ongoing problems in the world.

The part about mass starvation is happening in some parts of the world. Not due to production, but due to distribution, and apathy.

Meanwhile https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/19/private-jet-use-is...

and of course https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverwilliams1/2021/...

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

Quote (Josh)

Heck, the left has done this with nuclear apocalypse (that's when I was a kid in the 1980s).

That was a legitimate risk though wasn’t it?

Or are you referring to nuclear winter?

Quote:

That was a legitimate risk though wasn’t it?

Maybe around the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crises (1961 / 1962).

However, by 1980 (when I started hearing about it) the risk had pretty much ended. I remember sitting in on a school wide presentation in high school (say 1988) where they brought in scare mongers that used scare tactics for 45 minutes to try to convince us to become anti nuclear activists.

On a positive note...it's still 90 seconds until midnight...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

The various nuclear apocalypse hypotheses all had a major flaw - they were based on propaganda that wildly exaggerated the strength of each bomb.

More recently, the govt's anti-smoking campaign had a similar flaw - it was based on wild exaggeration of the negative health effects of smoking.

I know someone that has real estate on Bikini Atoll... is anyone interested in buying some?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Things are cooling off, too...

https://e360.yale.edu/features/climate-change-uppe...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Todays's weather report is brought to you by the Indian weather bureau. The annual frequency of tropical cyclones is falling. Annual Frequency of Cyclonic Storm (CS) between 1891 and 2016. Linear trend lines are indicated by dashed lines—black (1891–2018), blue (1951–2018). 10-year running mean is shown by a solid-green line. Source: Extreme Storms, Indian Meteorological Department, Govt. of India. Published June 13, 2020.

Assuming that cyclones are caused by temperature differentials, perhaps the decreasing temperature differential between the Arctic and the equator tends to suppress formation of cyclones, as has also been observed in the USA.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

Yup... and things could be different, or the same elsewhere...

"Climate change is helping Atlantic hurricanes pack more of a punch, making them rainier, intensifying them faster and helping the storms linger longer even after landfall. But a new statistical analysis of historical records and satellite data suggests that there aren’t actually more Atlantic hurricanes now than there were roughly 150 years ago, researchers report July 13 in Nature Communications.

The record-breaking number of Atlantic hurricanes in 2020, a whopping 30 named storms, led to intense speculation over whether and how climate change was involved (SN: 12/21/20). It’s a question that scientists continue to grapple with, says Gabriel Vecchi, a climate scientist at Princeton University. “What is the impact of global warming — past impact and also our future impact — on the number and intensity of hurricanes and tropical storms?”

Satellite records over the last 30 years allow us to say “with little ambiguity how many hurricanes, and how many major hurricanes [Category 3 and above] there were each year,” Vecchi says. Those data clearly show that the number, intensity and speed of intensification of hurricanes has increased over that time span."

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/hurricanes-fre...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Did you read the rest of the article, or just the parts that support your viewpoint?

Quote (Science News article)

The team found no clear increase in the number of storms in the Atlantic over that 168-year time frame...More surprisingly — even to Vecchi, he says — the data also seem to show no significant increase in hurricane intensity over that time.

I read the whole thing... one of the reasons I posted it. There's a lot of uncertainty out there, and I have no idea of where it is really going. I suspect it could get really ugly. The problem is that the consequences are too great to 'just let it happen'. I also read the attached first reference... it gets 'really heavy'.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote:

Assuming that cyclones are caused by temperature differentials, perhaps the decreasing temperature differential between the Arctic and the equator tends to suppress formation of cyclones, as has also been observed in the USA.

Makes sense. Insulating your house evens out the temperatures inside. I've been saying this for years. Most of the climate change predictions seem to lack common sense.

concur... and reduces the amount of fossil fuel required to heat/cool it.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote:

I have no idea of where it is really going. I suspect it could get really ugly. The problem is that the consequences are too great to 'just let it happen'.

I think this is the crux of where we disagree. I think because we "have no idea of where it is really going", that we should just "let it happen", i.e. not expend resources, limit productivity, or reduce the standard of living for the 'little people' (it's been clearly demonstrated the elites will not have their standard of living reduced), in an attempt to prevent something that may or may not happen.

Also, even drastic action by the US and a few other countries will have a negligible effect, anyway. I've heard the argument, 'but we have to lead'. However, in case you haven't noticed, everyone who matters isn't following.

or, maybe we have to quit causing the problem?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

I don't usually post in this kind of thread, I don't much enjoy arguing to no purpose. But:

Quote (dik)

or, maybe we have to quit causing the problem?

Within 10 years or so, the whole of the developed world seems poised to convert wholesale to electric power with no apparent workable plan to provide said power. While the developing world seems poised to go its own way.

dik, what more would you have us do? Please, be specific.

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

Maybe start doing stuff... there doesn't seem to be much progress.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

That's not at all specific, dik. We'd like to know specifically what legislation, regulations, etc. you'd propose.

There is tons of progress. Every conventional powerplant that is replaced with combined cycle is huge progress. It never gets reported, though.

Quote (Science News article)
The team found no clear increase in the number of storms in the Atlantic over that 168-year time frame...More surprisingly — even to Vecchi, he says — the data also seem to show no significant increase in hurricane intensity over that time.

Trouble is dik, when you pull little tricks like that it just wastes our time.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

Yes, arguing with dik is a lot like wrestling with a pig in mud.

It's like arguing with an engineer, I suspect...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Engineer 1: This building has a structural deficiency.

Engineer 2: We must replace the building entirely.

Engineer 1: That is unreasonable, we can mitigate the deficiency.

Engineer 2: I guess we'll just have to wait and see

By denying there could be a very serious problem, that's exactly what you are doing... we'll just wait and find out. Another option might be to try and remedy the problem with the building... did you think of that option?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (GregLocock)

The team found no clear increase in the number of storms in the Atlantic over that 168-year time frame

What’s most disturbing is so many people (policy makers included) are completely sure they can see a clear major increase with their own eyes. They can SEE IT. It is NOT IN DISPUTE.

How did this mass hysteria occur where people are claiming to see first hand an effect that is so subtle that the majority of studies can’t even find it?

dik, you may not have recognized yourself in Tug's analogy. You are Engineer 2.

I am missing some details, though. Somewhere, management is trying to figure out how to get the government to subsidize the total replacement of the structure so they're going to side with Engineer 2.

Otherwise, the post was alluding to the problem of the all or nothing approach.

Sorry hokie, wrong again...as I noted, my solution would be "Another option might be to try and remedy the problem with the building... "

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

So your problem is that you're not really happy with how the building is being used so you want to use the mitigation process to simultaneously force a change of occupancy. "Remedy the problem with the building" doesn't mean fix the structural issues, It means to transform the building into one you like.

Remedying means making it fit of the purpose it was originally constructed for. I don't know where you come up with your definitions, or ideas sometimes.

A new really good article on climate change. It explains a lot:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHGt9l6U5fM

Quote (That's not at all specific, dik. We'd like to know specifically what legislation, regulations, etc. you'd propose.)

I missed Bridge's comment... in response, the problem is too difficult for me, and I don't have a solution. If I knew of a fix, I don't have the resources to implement it. You don't need a solution to recognise a possible problem. By putting out information, it allows that are more capable of possibly coming up with a solution. No matter how you look at it, it appears things are heating up, and it doesn't appear the anyone is seriously thinking that this could be a major problem.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

I didn't say remedy, I said mitigate.

Aegrescit Medendo

dik,

You persist in saying there is a problem coming, but you have no idea what to do about it, and will just have to wait and see. The title of this Forum is "Climate Change Engineering Solutions", yet you have started 9 threads so far, and have offered not one specific solution. Do you wonder why we are sceptical of your contributions?

I don't have a solution that does not entail some serious 'cutbacks' and changes. There could be some serious changes to transportation, manufacturing, societies, geopolitics, etc.

By posting the most recent information I find, I'm providing others with the information and hoping that others may have a solution, or that others may decide there is not a serious potential problem. If you do not think the information is correct, that's your prerogitive; provide material to the contrary. With the current activity, we'll just have to wait and see what the outcome will be.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Wind turbines:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/19/us/floating-offshor...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (Hokie)

Do you wonder why we are skeptical of your contributions?

Honestly, I'm not skeptical of dik's contribution. I think he is refreshingly honest about the issue. True, this forum is engineering solutions. But, a solution is rarely completely engineering in nature. Especially one which involves the entire world working together. Coming up with solutions that involve multiple nations is more political than engineering. Also, coming up with solutions that are affordable and cost efficient are economic as much as they are engineering.

In reality any "complete solution" for global warming is going to be multi-disciplinary and is so incredibly complex (politically and economically) that it's almost guaranteed to fail. That being said, there are smaller "partial solutions" that will help us. That's what I'm focused on. But, I tend to think that Dik's correct.... These are not complete solutions and eventually, less palatable solutions may very well be required. We just don't have the immediacy and clear necessity that demand those less palatable solutions. Maybe we will if things get worse. I believe that's a partial (but imperfect) summary of dik's position.

Where we are right now (IMO) is that we can afford and invoke these minor "solutions" without tremendous economic consequences. We're talking pushing the economy towards hybrid and electric cars (which the market is doing anyways), moving away from coal power as quickly as we can, encouraging nuclear power, hydro and other sources of power that don't emit CO2. Those are what I personally think we SHOULD be doing to set ourselves up what we fear may be coming.

But, Dik (and many, many other people in this world) don't believe this will be enough. That voice / contribution isn't trivial. He's much more honest and realistic about the chances of getting more dramatic changes implemented now than others with his beliefs are. I'm very happy to hear his contributions. It's better than living in a echo chamber where people only agree with me and never challenge me intellectually. Certainly we can be skeptical of him (just as he can be skeptical of you and me).

"I don't have a solution that does not entail some serious 'cutbacks' and changes." aye, and therein lies the rub, and part of my feeling that the CO2 thing has been oversold. The early strident calls for change, some 20 years ago, were backed up by threats of imminent doom and possibly "we're past the "legendry" tipping point" ... and there "legendry" works in both senses of the word !

And sure over that 20 years we've made some progress, clearly not enough for the "believers". And this on the back of much government subsidies (paid for by taxpayers and mortgaging our future). Some people are getting very rich, many are getting poorer, and not much is changing. T'was ever thus.

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.

Quote (Dik)

I don't have a solution that does not entail some serious 'cutbacks' and changes

That’s what it will take. We will have to largely revert to pre industrial quality of life. No more being carried around in 2 tonne metal cages to avoid the hassle of walking. No more large cushy air conditioned spaces.

As it is people want net zero with no significant reduction in quality of life, which is utter fantasy. It’s all the utter rubbish about “stopping big carbon polluters”, as though we’re not the ones fuelling it.

Maybe a start to a cleaner environment:

"The idea is that countries like China that burn a lot of coal to run their factories could be persuaded to cut emissions so their companies aren't boxed out of the EU market. Meanwhile, countries like the U.S., which already have fairly strict environmental regulations, might also begin taxing the emissions linked to imports in order to protect their own domestic industries."

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/17/1171238285/how-a-eu...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

That's the right way to do this. Tariff imports from low cost countries until they meet out equivalent environmental and humanitarian standards.

Sadly, our current administration in the USA has no interest.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-vetoes-legi...

The reason China makes everything is because they don’t bother with the environmental and labour constraints that the West follows. That’s why we pay them to make all our stuff.

Telling them to meet environmental and labour standards is a total nonsense when the reason we engaged them in the first place is because they don’t.

Most of the West's decarbonising to date is a mirage, we've just exported the dirty work elsewhere.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

Costs seem to be going up, too... I asked earlier if anyone knew how the insurance companies, or banks were accommodating climate change?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Fossil fuel power plants may become fossils:

"Coal and gas-fired power plants would have to eliminate nearly all their climate-warming carbon dioxide emissions in just a little over a decade, under proposed regulations issued today by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Owners of those plants have been allowed to spew climate-warming carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere for more than a century. If these proposed regulations are finalized, they would come close to putting a stop to that practice."

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/11/1169967646/an-epa-p...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Problems with CO₂ pipelines:

"Little did she know, her sons and nephew were just down the road in the Cadillac, unconscious, victims of a mass poisoning from a carbon dioxide pipeline rupture. As the carbon dioxide moved through the rural community, more than 200 people evacuated and at least 45 people were hospitalized. Cars stopped working, hobbling emergency response. People lay on the ground, shaking and unable to breathe. First responders didn't know what was going on. "It looked like you were going through the zombie apocalypse," says Jack Willingham, emergency director for Yazoo County.

Now, three years after the CO2 poisoning from the pipeline break, some in Satartia see the incident as a warning at a critical moment for U.S. climate policy. The country is looking at a dramatic expansion of its carbon dioxide pipeline network, thanks in part to billions of dollars of incentives in last year's climate legislation. Last week, the Biden administration announced $251 million for a dozen climate projects that focus on CO2 transport and storage."

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/21/1172679786/carbon-c...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (dik)

Coal and gas-fired power plants would have to eliminate nearly all their climate-warming carbon dioxide emissions in just a little over a decade

Uh huh.

I have no idea of how this will play out... likely spend the next 30 years going through the US court system... or a bigger picture:



cut off the units...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (dik)

I have no idea of how this will play out.

See the way gas has increased in lockstep with the increase in wind energy? It's no coincidence.

One of the most misunderstood concepts is supply and demand. Demand reduces price, not increase. Reducing demand for gas will increase its price. The fixed costs such as production and transportation don't change as demand goes down and must be distributed amongst a smaller volume causing price per unit to increase.

Quote (Tug)

Demand reduces price, not increase. Reducing demand for gas will increase its price.

?

and from New Zealand...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/22/new-...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

"Demand reduces price, not increase. Reducing demand for gas will increase its price."

not how I remember economics ... price elasticity of supply is +ve ... increasing the quantity increases the price, reducing the quantity demand reduces the price.

Equilibrium price
When a product exchange occurs, the agreed upon price is called an equilibrium price, or a market clearing price. Graphically, this price occurs at the intersection of demand and supply as presented in Image 1.

In Image 1, both buyers and sellers are willing to exchange the quantity Q at the price P. At this point, supply and demand are in balance. Price determination depends equally on demand and supply.

Image 1. Figure 1, Graph showing price equilibrium curves



"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.

Or maybe something like:



It's possible that the supply curve will be inelastic... I just don't know. Economics was the only course I failed in University... re-took the course... second time around it was based on linear dynamics... and scored over 80%... I understood the dynamics a tad better, it would seem.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Another interesting development... working from home. If it is necessary to reduce the carbon footprint, many 'dynamic' societies may have to change their use of private transport a tad, and working at home might be an option or even necessary. This in contrary to the Tesla guru thoughts... The above modified supply-demand curves may reflect this. I found an interesting article...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2023/05/19/...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (Demand reduces price, not increase.)

I'm not so sure...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

What increases the price is reduced supply, either natural, or artificial through regulation and prohibition on extraction, and taxes.

That said, Tug is right that there is also an economy of scale that factors into the production cost. It's not the only cost, and I don't believe the primary one with regard to energy prices, though.

concur... as the modified S-D curve shows...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (See the way gas has increased in lockstep with the increase in wind energy? It's no coincidence.)

That it's increasing, is not really a good sign... It's great to see the energy output due to coal has dropped dramatically, and hope it continues to do so.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

I believe the economy of scale factors in a lot more than we think. For example, gasoline prices in 1920 were $0.30 per gallon which is the equivalent of $10 today. Demand for gasoline is certainly higher today than it was in 1920.

Not a good example... I have no idea of what the supply, or the market, was back then. The price was likely determined by supply-demand... just like today, modified by big oil companies and/or government, just like today.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

The main reason for the drop in gasoline prices is supplies of light, sweet crude oil from readily available (shallow) supplies, and advancements in drilling and extraction that make those processes more efficient and economical. Economy of scale is only one factor among many.

Transparent solar cells...

https://www.thebrighterside.news/post/highly-trans...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

...maybe a sign of the future? Spain seems to be motivated. Their weather of late has been pretty terrible, too.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/companies/spain-ha...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (dik)

Transparent solar cells...

If the cell passes light, what is its source of energy?

Quote (TugBoatEng)

I believe the economy of scale factors in a lot more than we think. For example, gasoline prices in 1920 were $0.30 per gallon which is the equivalent of $10 today. Demand for gasoline is certainly higher today than it was in 1920.

Okay, I think I understand what you were saying now. Essentially, when the industry sees a strong and long term demand for an item, they do what they can to increase supply (because of the profit margins they're getting). They are able to reinvest these products into greater and more efficient means of producing their product.....

Th long term result is that the prices will go actually go down. Though this genuinely isn't a guarantee. It is dependent on the producers being able to operate in a relatively free market. This never really happened in communist countries. Did it? What happened the supply never really matched up with demand. You were always in a situation where the supply was inefficient. They might make a boatload of shoes of one particular type and size. But, they didn't make the boots that farmers needed. Or, they didn't make the sizes that women needed. There was no incentive for those supplies to get where they needed to go or be allocated the way they needed to be. No one had a profit incentive. Only in the black market was there an incentive to take risk to make a profit.

You see other cases where an 'in demand' product is completely replaced in the market with something less expensive to produce. See what's happening to coal now. See what happened to lamp oil, whale blubber, Block Buster Video, DVDs, CDs, et cetera.

Transparent solar cells...I just can't see it.

(LOL)

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

79% transparent...

"Solar panels have long been criticized for their appearance, with some people arguing that the large, opaque panels spoil the look of homes and businesses. But now, a group of researchers has developed a highly transparent solar cell using a 2D atomic sheet that could change the perception of solar energy. These near-invisible solar cells have an average visible transparency of 79%, which means that they can potentially be placed almost anywhere, including building windows, car front panels, and even human skin.

Scientists have been trying to develop transparent solar cells for years, but suitable materials have not existed until now. To create the solar cell, the researchers controlled the contact barriers between indium tin oxide (ITO), one of the most widely used transparent conducting oxides, and a monolayer tungsten disulfide. They coated various thin metals onto the ITO and inserted a thin layer of tungsten oxide between the coated ITO and the tungsten disulfide.

"The way in which we formed the solar cell resulted in a power conversion efficiency over 1000 times that of a device using a normal ITO electrode," said Toshiaki Kato, the corresponding author of the paper and associate professor at Tohoku University's Graduate School of Engineering."

We'll have to see... like so many other things... I thought it was useful information. I don't know the conversion from solar energy to electrical energy to know how efficient current solar cells are. Can anyone provide the data?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Good solar cells are in the 20% region for light to electricity energy conversion.

The 1000x efficiency listed in the article is likely starting from a baseline efficiency of nearly 0%.

I can imagine an application where this technology will be useful. It can replace window tint, maybe reduce heating load by converting some absorbed light into electricity. But, it's never going to be useful for generation as it passes too much light energy being transparent.

1000x 0% = 0% ... just sayin'.

what is the efficiency of a "solar cell using ... a normal ITO electrode" ?

But sure, solar cells are getting more efficient ... at the cost of more elaborate raw materials.

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.

One of the challenges in rooftop solar panels is that they're always "on". Meaning that they're producing electricity whenever the sun is out even a little bit. Therefore, there are lots of safety considerations related to getting electrocuted or such. I know fire fighters have a big concern about this.

I think this is reasonably controlled with rooftop solar as they are very visible and you have visible and distinct connections in certain locations that fire fighters can be cognizant of.

That being said, I wonder how this is handled with Elon Musk's solar shingle type of roofs. Anything that looks like a regular roof could be at least a little problematic.
https://www.forbes.com/home-improvement/solar/sola...

Now, if we start using any window surface as a solar panel, then this could certainly be an issue. What happens if the window gets broken? Say someone throws a rock through it. Could this produce an electrical short that could start a fire or such?

Not trying to crap on what is a truly interesting concept. Just pointing out that, as interesting as it is, there is a big gap between the early stages of a technology concept and when that concept becomes commercially viable. Just like with Fusion reactors. Excellent tech ideas..... But, years from being fully developed.

Quote:

there are lots of safety considerations related to getting electrocuted or such.

I thought most solar panels output low voltage electricity.

BridgeSmith -

I remember an article on this subject a number of years ago. Long before I ever considered having solar on my house. But, I don't remember much of the details. I know there were concerns and objections from firefighters in particular. I don't know if it was worry about an individual panel, or related to where the combiner box or transformers are located.

And, I don't know if the concern was "electrocution" (which was implied in my previous post) or the potential for it starting or feeding an existing fire. Or, even related to concerns about panels affecting the fire rating of a building.

Honestly, I should know more about this.... It's not like me to pay so little attention to the technology I've put on my house. I should probably have done some more homework before posting.

That being said, my desire was to demonstrate that the placement of an individual solar panel is actually a small part of the project. Having enough panels to generate a large amount of electricity is the goal. And, the process needed to invert that electricity from DC to AC and the ability to wire it through the house to the junction box or transformer or such is no small task. We've pretty much got that process down with roof top panels. But, we've got a lot of space up on the roof, and in the attic that isn't used for much else. It will be different when we start talking about doing that for windows and doors that move and can be more easily damaged / broken.

It's just another possible venue for 'green' power... I have no idea of where this will go. In the coming decades, there will likely be a couple of 'false starts'.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (dik)

I have no idea of where this will go. In the coming decades, there will likely be a couple of 'false starts'.

More than a couple.... But, that's innovation. We've got 350 million people in the US. And, I have no idea how many companies.... Any one of which can take a financial risk and get a gain or a loss from it. Sometimes it's a small risk, sometimes it's a big risk. Sometimes it's a small loss or gain, sometimes it's big.

But, this is why the US is so innovative. Because the market and the system is set up in a way that encourages these types of risks. Look at how MicroSoft, Apple, Xerox, Facebook, Google and such were formed. The founders took risks. They innovated in ways the big companies didn't want to do and they became huge. Same thing with virtually everything Elon Musk has ever done, Pay Pal, Space-X, Tesla, etc.

Quote (dik)

It's just another possible venue for 'green' power... I have no idea of where this will go. In the coming decades, there will likely be a couple of 'false starts'.

They're all trying to be the next Solyndra.

Honestly, if you look at where we are now compared to where we were in 1973 when I was born, we should all be incredible proud of the innovations we've made as a country. For Example:

a) Virtually, every lightbulb in my house is an LED. Using something like 1/10th the amount of electricity. And, not generating any heat.
b) Similar savings for the types of TV's we have now vs those we had back then.
c) Our energy efficient fridge, dishwasher, clothes washer and such use maybe 25% of the electricity that the same appliances would have used back then.
d) Our cars get better gas mileage and emit a lot less pollution.... Though this will get even better when the next care I buy for my family is a hybrid.
e) My house has energy efficient windows most everywhere keeping the heat in during the winter and the heat out during the summer.
f) I work from home and barely drive now. Granted, this isn't a net gain over my parents because my Dad worked and my Mom stayed home with the kids. Whereas I work from home and my wife probably has a similar commute to what my Dad had back then. But, being able to work from home with Zoom meetings or MS Team meetings and such is HUGE.

Isn't it insane how much advances in efficiency we've made in just 50 years?!

Great Josh... how much more there is to go... and what damage has been done in those 50 years might be considered, too.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (dik)

Great Josh... how much more there is to go... and what damage has been done in those 50 years might be considered, too.

One of the problems I have personally with Gen Z is that they have no perspective. They think communism / socialism will cure our problems for some insane reason. Really?! Have you studied history even a little. Do you have any idea the way the poor people lived in ANY of those countries that tried it?!

They think the disparity between rich and poor in the US is the worst in history. They call our society "end stage capitalism". Really? All the homeless people I know have cell phones, full stomachs and they live this way by CHOICE. The poor people in this country, for the most part have it better than rich people did 500 years ago.

They think race relations are as bad as they've ever been. Yeah, right? They think that having to show an ID to vote is genuinely racist and a huge civil rights violation.... like "Jim Crown on steroids" (though that comment was fed to them by an octogenarian).

They have no perspective. Pretending that society is headed in the wrong direction is comical if you have perspective.... unless you talk about how INDIVIDUAL rights are being trampled on for the preservation of "collective" rights.

"I thought most solar panels output low voltage electricity."

Each solar cell produces the gap voltage for its chemistry, about 0.6V for Si. To get usable voltage from them they are assembled in series, so for example my off grid solar runs strings of 140 cells, to give 80 V open circuit. When producing max power the controller drags this down to about 80% of OCV ie 64V, so the panel can hold my 48V battery at 60V for conditioning. I can assure you that 80V is enough to give you a fair old bang if you are clumsy, even on a cloudy day.

However for on-grid installations you need to comfortable exceed the AC voltage you want to generate, and for a given power the wiring gets smaller the higher you go. So my on grid house has 300V panels, ie about 500 cells in series. 300V will end all your worries about climate change.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

Quote (JoshPlumSE)

The poor people in this country, for the most part have it better than rich people did 500 years ago.

Our adoption facilitator, a man with 30 years of splitting time between the US and Haiti, told me that the poorest people in the US have a standard of living that would be considered upper middle class, bordering on rich, in Haiti. We were only there for a week, but that seemed about right to me. Granted, that was 15 years ago, but AFAIK, not much has changed.

Human suffering...

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-023-01132-6

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Humans have been suffering for numerous reasons, including the climate, ever since Adam and Eve got booted from the garden. "Climate change" is just the current boogieman used as an excuse for people to pretend they care. The greatest source of human suffering is other humans - by far more direct means than the changing climate.

Quote (...by far more direct means than the changing climate.)

Let's hope that is not surpassed.

https://grist.org/drought/famine-somalia-kenya-eth...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (BridgeSmith)

The greatest source of human suffering is other humans - by far more direct means than the changing climate.

Yup, that is unquestionably the case.

Maybe we should be warming the planet instead of trying to cool it? 10x mortality from cold climates vs hot.

Quote:

It has been estimated that about 5.1 million excess deaths per year are associated with non-optimal temperatures. Of those, 4.6 million are associated with colder than optimum temperatures, and 0.5 million are associated with hotter than optimum temperatures.

https://thebreakthrough.org/issues/energy/human-de....

Ya tug, even in Texas... when the wetbulb hits 35, watch the poeple drop like flies... it's not more heat we need!

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

The other side of the picture is that because of humans allegedly causing the climate change, we need less humans.

I think you've hit on the ultimate goal for some of the elites at the forefront of the movement, hokie.

Quote (Tug)

It has been estimated that about 5.1 million excess deaths per year are associated with non-optimal temperatures. Of those, 4.6 million are associated with colder than optimum temperatures, and 0.5 million are associated with hotter than optimum temperatures.

According to climate experts the benefits of climate change don’t count.

I don't understand your comment, dik. People can be harmed by temperature extremes but overall, warmer temperature extremes are less harmful.

Quote:

Deaths associated with non-optimal temperatures have been decreasing over time as it has gotten warmer partly due to a reduction in cold deaths. It has been estimated that warming from 2000 to 2019 has resulted in a net decline in excess deaths globally (a larger decrease in cold deaths than an increase in heat deaths).

Take a gander at climate change... some people are predicting 35C wetbulb in the not too distant future.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

We have that every summer here in Brisbane. And most people have no air conditioning. It's a matter of adaptation.

Yup. In the Middle East I worked all day in the sun at 140F+, you drink plenty of water but your body adapts nicely otherwise.

Quote:

The other side of the picture is that because of humans allegedly causing the climate change, we need less humans.

I'm waiting to see if politicians or AI pursue population control first. Its more than pollution, its the root cause of resource/energy scarcity and has a big impact on standard of living. It may be abhorrent to folks' morals but seems to be an inevitability.

...maybe drybulb temperatures.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

35C wetbulb at 70% relative humidity is about 40C drybulb, 104F. Not often experienced close to the coast in Australia, but common inland. Folks do adapt. Sure, their activities are restricted, but life goes on. The worst hot weather I have experienced was in the summer of 1966, when I was in officer basic training at Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania. 115F for about 6 days in a row, and we were undergoing a lot of PT.

Catch...

"A wet-bulb temperature of 35C has been theorized to be the limit to human adaptability to extreme heat, a growing concern in the face of continued and predicted accelerated climate change. Although this theorized threshold is based in physiological principles, it has not been tested using empirical data. This study examined the critical wet-bulb temperature (Twb, crit) at which heat stress becomes un-compensable in young, healthy adults performing tasks at modest metabolic rates mimicking basic activities of daily life. Across six experimentally determined environmental limits, no subject’s Twb, crit reached the 35C limit and all means were significantly lower than the theoretical 35C threshold. Mean Twb, crit values were relatively constant across 36C–40C humid environments and averaged 30.55 ± 0.98C but progressively decreased (higher deviation from 35C) in hotter, dry ambient environments. Twb, critwas significantly associated with mean skin temperature (and a faster warming rate of the skin) due to larger increases in dry heat gain in the hot-dry environments. As sweat rates did not significantly differ among experimental environments, evaporative cooling was outpaced by dry heat gain in hot-dry conditions, causing larger deviations from the theoretical 35C adaptability threshold. In summary, a wet-bulb temperature threshold cannot be applied to human adaptability across all climatic conditions and where appropriate (high humidity), that threshold is well below 35C."

https://journals.physiology.org/doi/epdf/10.1152/j...

and from

"A wet-bulb temperature of 35 °C, or around 95 °F, is pretty much the absolute limit of human tolerance, says Zach Schlader, a physiologist at Indiana University Bloomington. Above that, your body won’t be able to lose heat to the environment efficiently enough to maintain its core temperature. That doesn’t mean the heat will kill you right away, but if you can’t cool down quickly, brain and organ damage will start."

https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/07/10/102817...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

More of the earth is inhospitable due to cold than due to heat. An increase of several degrees will in total increase the habitable zone.

I agree, Tom... Winnipeg will likely benefit (subject to drought conditions), but at the expense of other areas.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Those physiologists know not of what they speak. May be difficult for a Canadian to understand, but it just ain't so.

Wet bulb is not the only criteria for inhospitable conditions. At 100% humidity, wet bulb and dry bulb coincide.

Quote (dik)

I agree, Tom... Winnipeg will likely benefit (subject to drought conditions), but at the expense of other areas.

Why drought conditions? Drought stricken California just experienced its wettest year in very recent history (climatologists don't like to look at that year before 1863). Less biased climate studies have indicated more precipitation with warming.

Remember that Earth supported the creation of life under much higher temperatures. Creatures with much less evolution were able to adapt and thrive. Dinosaurs likely went extinct due to cooling, not warming. Perhaps we should embrace this next stage of life.

Missed that tug, subject to drought 'or maybe storms', Winnipeg will likely have nicer weather. With climate change either is a possibility. There will also be places on earth that remain the same as they were. In addition to it being warmer it could also be wetter and/or drier. We don't know what, if anything, will change.

Prior to 1863, and even later, the data may be a little sketchy... but they have charted the CO₂ back a lot earlier and their data is pretty conclusive... CO₂ is going up and is higher than it has been for a couple of million years. They also have a pretty good idea of the effect of CO₂.

Earlier life was cold blooded, too, not warm blooded, and changes occurred over millennia, not decades. Things may be a little different, this time.

Hokie... being warm blooded creatures, we have to regulate our body temperatures. If your organs slowly break down due to overheating there could be serious long term issues. Sustained temperature may be 'for a long time' and not just a few days or a couple of weeks. With temperatures of 40C, and air that is not water saturated, there is evaporation, ie. cooling.

The Middle East and Africa (and occasionally Australia) experience high temperatures, but not with extreme humidity for extended periods of time. Even Siberia experienced it's first +30C temperatures lately (humidity was likely low). Things might be heating up a tad. The physiologists should prepare an LD₃₅ curve that shows lethal dry and wetbulb temperatures.

Maybe something to look forward to, and another issue to deal with.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (TugBoatEng)

Why drought conditions? Drought stricken California just experienced its wettest year in very recent history (climatologists don't like to look at that year before 1863). Less biased climate studies have indicated more precipitation with warming.

dik's right (and wrong) at the same time. The models (and common sense) suggest that higher temperatures will result in more humidity, more moisture in the air, more rain overall. However, with changes in global climate means that SOME places will be drier as well.

BTW, this is the reason why the left change the terms on us. We're not calling it "global warming" any more. It's now called "climate change". So, if it's colder somewhere it's still "climate change". It allows them to cry that the sky is falling when virtually ANYTHING happens. Big storm.... It's climate change. A lack of storms, also climate change. A very hot summer, climate change. A very cold winter, climate change. Higher acidity in the ocean, climate change. Lower acidity in lakes or rivers, climate change.

Quote (Missed that tug, subject to drought 'or maybe storms', Winnipeg will likely have nicer weather. With climate change either is a possibility. There will also be places on earth that remain the same as they were.)

and the error, sir?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Only that in the "overall sense" it shouldn't be drought. In an overall sense, it will be more humidity, more rain.

If I said, that human caused climate change is expected to lead to colder temperatures. That would be an "erroneous" statement. Right?

That's why I corrected my note to tug... It will likely be both, in the same locations (at different times), even. There could be significant, extreme, and erratic conditions. We just don't know. Different areas will be affected in different manners. Some places my remain, largely unchanged as far as weather goes.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (dik)

It will likely be both, in the same locations (at different times), even. There could be significant, extreme, and erratic conditions.

So what you're saying is we're all likely to experience changes in the weather. Good to know.

Quote (dik)

We just don't know.

Despite that, and everything else you'll admit that we don't know, you're still completely convinced about the course of action you think we should take?

We have no idea of what the end result will be. There will likely be significant changes, many of them quite extreme. There can also be significant lifestyle changes. We don't know, but things are pointing to more extreme weather... droughts and storms, and the concern is that they could get a lot worse. Storms are becoming much worse, and faster, not more frequent. We will reach a point where we likely will not be able to correct the problem. The next couple of decades could get pretty interesting.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote:

Storms are becoming much worse, and faster.

They are? Where's your evidence? The contention that hurricanes have gotten worse, is based on assumptions and estimates of how many and how bad they were before we had satellites. It's the same with other types of storms. We don't know what kind of weather events occurred in places and times where there was no one there that reported or recorded that it happened.

Quote:

We will reach a point where we likely will not be able to correct the problem.

We've never been able to "correct the problem" of changing climate, and we never will. We have to adapt, as we always have, very successfully, I might add.

Quote:

The next couple of decades could get pretty interesting.

Of course they will be "interesting". Weather extremes and climate shifts will continue to happen; nothing new. Our modern technology allows us to track the changes much better than ever before, and climate alarmists keep every one of the changes right in front of us 24/7. However, more awareness of the weather extremes does not equate to more extreme weather events.

For a start...

“Due to global warming, global climate models predict hurricanes will likely cause more intense rainfall and have an increased coastal flood risk due to higher storm surge caused by rising seas. Additionally, the global frequency of storms may decrease or remain unchanged, but hurricanes that form are more likely to become intense.”

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3184/a-force-of-natu...

https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/09/1098662

https://climate.nasa.gov/explore/ask-nasa-climate/...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate...

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/05/8-climate-c...

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-chang...

https://unfccc.int/news/climate-change-leads-to-mo...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

“models predict...likely...may...more likely...”

I said evidence, not predictions and guesses.

Quote (Josh)

It allows them to cry that the sky is falling when virtually ANYTHING happens. Big storm.... It's climate change. A lack of storms, also climate change. A very hot summer, climate change

Most people don’t question it. They get told it’s a cold winter due to climate change, and they buy it. The automatic regurgitating of talking points is really sad. I heard someone recite this one the other day in response to Sydney’s recent cold weather - “climate change is increasing temperature extremes both hot and cold”. They hear an “expert” say it, and they copy it.

None of this is to say the earth isn’t warming, but what it shows is the appalling level of confirmation bias occurring regarding climate change, where people are prepared to interpret cooling as further proof of overall warming. As you say, everything is climate change. Anything that happens is taken as more proof.

Quote (I said evidence, not predictions and guesses.)

No definitive proof... the evidence is in the increase and severity of current events and records being broken due to increased CO₂. CO₂ is increasing and the records are being broken. I cannot imagine 30C in Siberia. There is a good potential for more severe stuff to follow. You can just 'hunker down' and see what happens. With the current [lack of] activity, there is likely nothing to reduce what might happen.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (BridgeSmith)

I said evidence, not predictions and guesses.

Some of it is just common sense. If you accept that the climate is warming then you accept the following:
a) You will have less artic ice because some will melt due to higher temperatures. Which should lead to higher sea levels. Simple logic.
b) You will have more moisture in the air because water evaporates faster at higher temperatures. Also, because the air is capable of holding more water when it is warmer. Again, it's simple logic.
c) More humidity SHOULD lead to more hurricanes (or a longer hurricane season) which are largely caused by the Coriolis effect in combination with warm waters and humid conditions.
d) More humidity in general means more precipitation in general.

Now, none of these things mean that there are "catastrophic" effects from global warming. Just common sense predictions based on what happens when temperatures increase.

You might also add some beneficial effects of global warming:
e) You should have longer growing seasons due to warming weather and more precipitation.
f) Longer growing season + more available water = larger food supply from farming. Where we'd be less likely to experience mass starvation in places like Africa and such which have had food supply issues in the past.
g) On the flip side, you will likely have more malaria and such diseases that spread better in warmer climates.

One man's good equals another man's bad. And ever it will be.

You're assuming these changes are in moderation. Current weather events might indicate something else...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Well, do they or do they not?

As usual, he has no idea.

Hang on dik, a few days ago you presented a paper that said both the intensity and frequency of cyclonic events in the USA were reducing. The reduced frequency is a trend that the Indian weather bureau found, and there's a similar chart for Australia.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

Quote (a few days ago you presented a paper that said both the intensity and frequency of cyclonic events in the USA)

They are changing all over... some less intense, some more intense. Some more frequent and some less frequent. It depends on where you live in the world (or USA).

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

That statement completely cancels itself out.

“Less intense” weather presumably counts as proof of global warming too, in the same way that cold does.

The total summation is greater... but parts of it can be less, but other parts will be much warmer so the net result is an increase in temperature. It climate change... ie, it's changing, but with a net increase. People froze to death in Texas, and Siberia hit +30C... doesn't that seem at least a little odd?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote:

People froze to death in Texas, and Siberia hit +30C... doesn't that seem at least a little odd?

Not at all. It's called weather, and it's been happening since long before the industrial revolution.

Somebody made a post saying that the Grand Canyon would have taken over a trillion years to form with the Colorado river flowing as it does today. Earth is 4.8 billion years old. 14000 years ago much of North America was covered in ice up to 2 miles thick (reference pending, I may have misread this). Maybe the Grand Canyon formed in those short years as the ice melted. Maybe our assumption of such a stable climate on Earth is wrong.

It's a start, and a lot further to go, I suspect...

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/24/france-ba...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

So they will have more private flights. More CO2 is likely. Can you please provide some quantification of reduction when you post these articles?

...maybe private flights are next?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

🤣🤣🤣

That would have to start with the experts. You know: John Kerry, Bill Gates, Al Gore, everybody involved in the IPCC or WEF, etc...

Dik,

I hope you realise that Texas is quite large, and Siberia is many times that. Siberia is much larger than, you guessed it, Canada. Siberia does get hot and cold, like Canada

Also, private jet flights grew during the COVID manufactured crisis.

A regular headline:

https://businesstravelerusa.com/news/flying-privat...

A sensational headline:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/2...

but 30C set an all time record... The coldest I've been is -55C and Siberia gets a lot colder...

As far a size, Texas is about half the area of Manitoba. About 30 years back, I was joking with a Texas engineer, "Is there any truth in the matter that Clinton (pres at the time) was going to cut Alaska in half and make Texas the third largest state?" He replied, "There is nothing that 'expletive' would do that would surprise me."

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Possibly helping to mitigate the carbon footprint of concrete...

https://www.on-sitemag.com/construction-materials/...({{*JobID}})

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

No point in arguing, but 30C is not an “all time record” high in Siberia.

Sad news for the people haters, global food production set a new record last year.

https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-es...

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

I’m confused. I thought global warming was expected to decimate global food production?

Must be just a temporary anomaly…

Apparently this is with less fertilizer, too!

https://www.ifpri.org/blog/russia-ukraine-war-afte...

Quote (No point in arguing, but 30C is not an “all time record” high in Siberia.)

Sorry hokie... even worse, the temperature was 38C. Not anywhere near Death Valley, though... but it's working on it.

"The UN weather agency said Tuesday it has certified a 38 C (100.4 F) reading in the Russian town of Verkhoyansk last year as the highest temperature ever recorded in the Arctic, the latest in a string of "alarm bells about our changing climate."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/wmo-heat-record-1....

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Quote (I’m confused. I thought global warming was expected to decimate global food production?)

Not decimate, but may change it a bit. We don't know what the end result will be. Parts of the world be affected and others will not. It also depends a bit on how hot things get..

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Cutting flights seems to be catching... wait until the EU steps up...

https://euroweeklynews.com/2023/05/26/spain-plans-...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Good for France. Without short haul flights maybe the climate evangelists will stop holding their meetings there.

Are there maps of CO2 concentrations over the globe (other than the records in Hawaii), and how they change over the course of a year ?

I remember seeing, from the Hawaii data, that there is a huge seasonal variation.

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.

Heatwaves and definition...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTNrtArLJJw

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Who determines the definition? ISO? NIST?

@rb1957 yes indeed https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/earthday/gall_co...

They've turned the gain up to 11 on that one, the range is +/- 10 in 380

And here's an animation for a whole year. Now I'm confused, NH summer has the highest CO2!

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/87146/a-y...

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

fewer deaths as a result of climate change.

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-65673...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

There is potentially a new battery in the works...

https://thedriven.io/2023/05/24/breakthrough-ev-ba...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

This may be another possible tool; the chemical conversion of CO₂.

https://scitechdaily.com/from-forgotten-formula-to...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Here's somebody who claims to have the solution to climate change.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jane-fonda-blames-wh...

At least Jane is honest about the moral sentiments driving so much climate activism - a pathological hatred of “white men”, and an undying allegiance to the “global south”.

With things heating up, some things may be slowing down:

"Antarctic alarm bells: Observations reveal deep ocean currents are slowing earlier than predicted."

"But there are signs this circulation is slowing down and it's happening decades earlier than predicted. This slowdown has the potential to disrupt the connection between the Antarctic coasts and the deep ocean, with profound consequences for Earth's climate, sea level and marine life.

Our new research, published today in the journal Nature Climate Change, uses real-world observations to decipher how and why the deep ocean around Antarctica has changed over the past three decades. Our measurements show the overturning circulation has slowed by almost a third (30%) and deep ocean oxygen levels are declining. This is happening even earlier than climate models predicted.

We found melting of Antarctic ice is disrupting the formation of Antarctic bottom water. The meltwater makes Antarctic surface waters fresher, less dense, and therefore less likely to sink. This puts the brakes on the overturning circulation."

https://phys.org/news/2023-05-antarctic-alarm-bell...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Canadian nuclear energy may be an issue.

"In 2021, nine US nonproliferation experts sent an open letter to Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. In their letter, the experts expressed their concern that the Canadian government was actually increasing the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation by funding reactors that are fueled with plutonium. Earlier that year, the Federal Government had provided 50.5 million Canadian dollars to Moltex Energy, a company exploring a nuclear reactor design fueled with plutonium. The linkage to nuclear weapons proliferation has also led several civil society groups to urge the Canadian government to ban plutonium reprocessing."

https://thebulletin.org/2023/05/canadian-reactors-...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

As a solution to carbon proliferation, how about using CO2 as a fuel component?
Aluminum will burn in an atmosphere of CO2.
Rather than sequestering CO@, can we use CO2 along with aluminum to fire boilers?
The aluminum oxide may be reclaimed with hydro energy.
There may have to be many tons of aluminum transported long distances from smelter locations to CO2 boiler locations but fortunately aluminum is quite light. grin

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!

First step, I think, is we have to cut down on our production of it.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

Some of "we" are, some of "we" are not. What to do?

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

The 'are' group is pitifully small... and will likely have to improve.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik