Global Warming - Discussion-Rant

Want to pledge allegiance to the Drumpf? Clash with Caspian? Scared of the stickers on your mailbox? Let's hear it.
User avatar
Tar
Chief Master Sirloin
Chief Master Sirloin
Posts: 14126
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:06 pm
Drives: Beige Family Sedan sans Dent
Location: Canuckistan

Big Brain Bradley wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2019 6:50 am
Tarspin wrote: Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:09 pm

Extraction and disposal doe. How many plants will be required to run everything that moves on electricity?

Would love to see a viable plan for sure. If the numbers support it then count me in!
3rd and 4th gen plants use the waste from current plants as fuel.
:nice: :themoreyouknow:
User avatar
goIftdibrad
Chief Master Soft Brain
Chief Master Soft Brain
Posts: 16746
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
Drives: straight past the apex

https://nypost.com/2020/01/08/celebriti ... evine/amp/

shifting funds from proven fire prevention stratigies to global warming research will cause super fires you can then blame on global warming! brilliant.
brain go brrrrrr
dubshow
Senior Master Sirloin
Senior Master Sirloin
Posts: 11074
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:18 am
Drives: All of them

Big Brain Bradley wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 11:50 am https://nypost.com/2020/01/08/celebriti ... evine/amp/

shifting funds from proven fire prevention stratigies to global warming research will cause super fires you can then blame on global warming! brilliant.
:wtf:

Same thing in cali with lack of controlled burns. Yet here we are.
One of my guides was Australia’s foremost bushfire researcher, Dr. Phil Cheney, who has spent 30 years trying to convince authorities that if ground fuel is reduced in a scientific, systematic fashion every year, fire intensity is reduced to a manageable level, no matter what the weather conditions. A quadrupling of ground fuel means a 13-fold increase in the heat generated by a fire. Hazard reduction won’t prevent fire but it will reduce its intensity so that it can be controlled.
dubshow
Senior Master Sirloin
Senior Master Sirloin
Posts: 11074
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:18 am
Drives: All of them

coming back in here. Too much hot AIR in the other :bread:
Weißbach calculates that this minimum viable EROI is about 7 for the United States and the European Union. Lower EROIs cannot sustain our society at our level of complexity or our standard of living. So I ask – is a lower EROI fair for a developing country?

It is critical to understand these EROI values when making difficult decisions on energy policy. The many claims that renewables alone, or in the majority, can fuel our future are not consistent with their EROI. America’s present EROI averages about 40. A mix of 50% renewables, 30% fossil and 20% nuclear gives an average EROI of about 25.

I am not sure our economy can survive such a drop in surplus energy.

Economies with access to higher EROI energy sources have greater potential for economic expansion and diversification. Thus, the rush to coal by developing countries like China and India.
Because of this, coal is now the fastest growing energy source in the world. This is why serious environmentalists, and the United Nations IPCC, strongly urge the world to adopt some mix of nuclear, hydro and renewables as the best mix to can replace fossil fuels.

Dr. Judith Wright and I previously suggested a global energy mix by mid-century of a third fossil, a third renewable and a third nuclear, which has an average EROI of about 36. This mix would cut carbon emissions in half over the present mix and is achievable by 2040 with existing technologies.
this is a good goal to work towards. Not putting ourselves in the dark ages while china and india steam roll the environment.

Also, Bangladesh gonna be the first place wiped off map.
dubshow
Senior Master Sirloin
Senior Master Sirloin
Posts: 11074
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:18 am
Drives: All of them

[user not found] wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:43 pm I'm not advocating a pollution tax, I think those are terrible. I'm advocating companies being required to price pollution in, and then be responsible to clean it up.

So let's say that every $1 of coal energy creates pollution that costs $.50 to clean up. That shouldn't cost the consumer $1, it should cost the consumer $1.50 and that should be directly to them on their bill monthly.

Two things would happen, 1) it would lower consumption because my personal impact is now literally mine. 2) it would drive innovation as now there is money to be made in cleaning shit up.

If we DON'T do that, I see global nationalization of all power systems (to take the fact that clean energy isn't profitable off the table) in our lifetimes.
:bravo: I figured we'd come to an agreeable understanding with discussion.

It still stands that we will take on the "white man's burden" in regard to cleaning up a small segment of pollution. Let's face it, we are wildly cleaner than china+india, but of course can do better.

China (30%) ...
United States (15%) ...
India (7%) ...
Russia (5%) ...
Japan (4%)

So I pose, How do we go about China, India and russia that simply DGAF? How do we get them on bored so we dont commit financial/market suicide?
User avatar
goIftdibrad
Chief Master Soft Brain
Chief Master Soft Brain
Posts: 16746
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
Drives: straight past the apex

[user not found] wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:43 pm I'm not advocating a pollution tax, I think those are terrible. I'm advocating companies being required to price pollution in, and then be responsible to clean it up.

So let's say that every $1 of coal energy creates pollution that costs $.50 to clean up. That shouldn't cost the consumer $1, it should cost the consumer $1.50 and that should be directly to them on their bill monthly.

Two things would happen, 1) it would lower consumption because my personal impact is now literally mine. 2) it would drive innovation as now there is money to be made in cleaning shit up.

If we DON'T do that, I see global nationalization of all power systems (to take the fact that clean energy isn't profitable off the table) in our lifetimes.
I don't fundamentally disagree with this logic, but I don't trust the government to manage it.

they squandered social security.
they squandered the nuclear storage and decommissioning tax.
they will squander this if they are allowed to manage it
brain go brrrrrr
User avatar
goIftdibrad
Chief Master Soft Brain
Chief Master Soft Brain
Posts: 16746
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
Drives: straight past the apex

[user not found] wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 3:29 pm
Big Brain Bradley wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 3:19 pm

I don't fundamentally disagree with this logic, but I don't trust the government to manage it.

they squandered social security.
they squandered the nuclear storage and decommissioning tax.
they will squander this if they are allowed to manage it
Certainly no one in this discussion trusts the government to manage it. The government getting involved is the RISK if the market doesn't act. The longer the market and market oriented folks deny the issue exists the more likely we make it that the government gets involved. See: Health Care.
:notwrong:
brain go brrrrrr
dubshow
Senior Master Sirloin
Senior Master Sirloin
Posts: 11074
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:18 am
Drives: All of them

[user not found] wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 3:29 pm
Big Brain Bradley wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2020 3:19 pm

I don't fundamentally disagree with this logic, but I don't trust the government to manage it.

they squandered social security.
they squandered the nuclear storage and decommissioning tax.
they will squander this if they are allowed to manage it
Certainly no one in this discussion trusts the government to manage it. The government getting involved is the RISK if the market doesn't act. The longer the market and market oriented folks deny the issue exists the more likely we make it that the government gets involved. See: Health Care.
Nail? Meet head.
User avatar
max225
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 42432
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 12:49 am
Drives: Taco+ Bavarian lemon

There is only one solution. Population control. off every single kid in the family one above 2. Or easier yet, woman had 2, yank her tubes. Done. "oh what about the poors" do it there as well. Have it be mandatory for doctors to complete 2 tours abroad before graduation in all developed nations. They'll perform the surgeries for free as part of their training.

In 50 years pollution levels will be just fine. Earth population needs to be at/under 1B current levels are just atrocious.

Nice and easy and no one has to die a terrible death or we can go on like this and die in floods/fires/famines because :thisisfine:
User avatar
troyguitar
Command Chief Master Sirloin
Command Chief Master Sirloin
Posts: 20088
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:15 pm
Drives: Trek Domane
Location: Swamp

max225 wrote:There is only one solution. Population control. off every single kid in the family one above 2. Or easier yet, woman had 2, yank her tubes. Done. "oh what about the poors" do it there as well. Have it be mandatory for doctors to complete 2 tours abroad before graduation in all developed nations. They'll perform the surgeries for free as part of their training.

In 50 years pollution levels will be just fine. Earth population needs to be at/under 1B current levels are just atrocious.

Nice and easy and no one has to die a terrible death or we can go on like this and die in floods/fires/famines because :thisisfine:
Most (all?) world economies are pyramid schemes which only function with constant growth :doe:
User avatar
max225
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 42432
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 12:49 am
Drives: Taco+ Bavarian lemon

troyguitar wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:23 pm
max225 wrote:There is only one solution. Population control. off every single kid in the family one above 2. Or easier yet, woman had 2, yank her tubes. Done. "oh what about the poors" do it there as well. Have it be mandatory for doctors to complete 2 tours abroad before graduation in all developed nations. They'll perform the surgeries for free as part of their training.

In 50 years pollution levels will be just fine. Earth population needs to be at/under 1B current levels are just atrocious.

Nice and easy and no one has to die a terrible death or we can go on like this and die in floods/fires/famines because :thisisfine:
Most (all?) world economies are pyramid schemes which only function with constant growth :doe:
Nothing will function with no earth.
User avatar
troyguitar
Command Chief Master Sirloin
Command Chief Master Sirloin
Posts: 20088
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:15 pm
Drives: Trek Domane
Location: Swamp

max225 wrote:
troyguitar wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:23 pm Most (all?) world economies are pyramid schemes which only function with constant growth :doe:
Nothing will function with no earth.
Not gonna be an issue while I'm alive. :whocares:
User avatar
Tar
Chief Master Sirloin
Chief Master Sirloin
Posts: 14126
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:06 pm
Drives: Beige Family Sedan sans Dent
Location: Canuckistan

Some decent points being made here. :like:
User avatar
max225
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 42432
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 12:49 am
Drives: Taco+ Bavarian lemon

troyguitar wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:35 pm
max225 wrote:
Nothing will function with no earth.
Not gonna be an issue while I'm alive. :whocares:
I guess you haven’t noticed all the shit already happening ... only a matter until you’re a affected too. I was all high and mighty and then fires the last 4 years... now I have air purifiers and can’t do shit outside in 3/4 falls.

Only going to get worse from here if we keep breeding at this pace. But yea :thisisfine:
User avatar
troyguitar
Command Chief Master Sirloin
Command Chief Master Sirloin
Posts: 20088
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:15 pm
Drives: Trek Domane
Location: Swamp

max225 wrote:
troyguitar wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:35 pm Not gonna be an issue while I'm alive. :whocares:
I guess you haven’t noticed all the shit already happening ... only a matter until you’re a affected too. I was all high and mighty and then fires the last 4 years... now I have air purifiers and can’t do shit outside in 3/4 falls.

Only going to get worse from here if we keep breeding at this pace. But yea :thisisfine:
I've never lived anywhere with pleasant weather for more than maybe 30 days a year, so living 90+% indoors is pretty normal to me.
User avatar
Tar
Chief Master Sirloin
Chief Master Sirloin
Posts: 14126
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:06 pm
Drives: Beige Family Sedan sans Dent
Location: Canuckistan

In typical holier then though fashion we get this attitude over and over again. Whether a politician or aspiring politician actually offers hard facts they continue to spew propaganda for the sake of personal gain.

In this case my very own and highly respected fellow Canadian readies himself for his new role:

https://business.financialpost.com/opin ... ssil-fuels
User avatar
Tar
Chief Master Sirloin
Chief Master Sirloin
Posts: 14126
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:06 pm
Drives: Beige Family Sedan sans Dent
Location: Canuckistan

Not to say that I dont wish for a renewable energy source that works but let's be real here.
User avatar
goIftdibrad
Chief Master Soft Brain
Chief Master Soft Brain
Posts: 16746
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
Drives: straight past the apex

Tarspin wrote: Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:48 pm The risks are pretty big too. People will be checking off viable sources of energy and productivity in the name of saving the planet and at a time where economic missteps can have a major impact on the wellness of many people on all levels.

A strategic alternative to polluting culprits should be presented and accurately assessed prior to the pitch fork and flaming torches coming out, at least for the sake of the wellness of modern society.
I missed this post, but it bears quoting because it's 100% true. if we don't replace carbon-based power generation with nuclear power, people will die. The science says that too, but what's more important, global warming or actual people's lives?
brain go brrrrrr
User avatar
Tar
Chief Master Sirloin
Chief Master Sirloin
Posts: 14126
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:06 pm
Drives: Beige Family Sedan sans Dent
Location: Canuckistan

Big Brain Bradley wrote: Sat Jan 18, 2020 10:32 am
Tarspin wrote: Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:48 pm The risks are pretty big too. People will be checking off viable sources of energy and productivity in the name of saving the planet and at a time where economic missteps can have a major impact on the wellness of many people on all levels.

A strategic alternative to polluting culprits should be presented and accurately assessed prior to the pitch fork and flaming torches coming out, at least for the sake of the wellness of modern society.
I missed this post, but it bears quoting because it's 100% true. if we don't replace carbon-based power generation with nuclear power, people will die. The science says that too, but what's more important, global warming or actual people's lives?
The planet was much warmer during the era of dinosaurs, long before humans existed. It was also much colder during the ice age then it was in the early 1900s prior to industrialization. Do we know what is making the planet warmer for sure? Some scientists say it is carbon pollution, others say that the earth's temps are influenced by the sun and the earth's orbit around it.

Will carbon reduction lower the earth's ascent? Probably but to think that it will eliminate it completely is a best guess. Why not put our best foot forward anyways right! However, before we try to remove fossil fuels or any other fuel source a viability study needs to be done by an unbiased trustable and capable group to ensure that it is being replaced with something that WORKS! The replacement power source also needs to be assessed for possible future environmental impact before being deployed.

Essentially stop spinning our wheels without a plan that works.
User avatar
goIftdibrad
Chief Master Soft Brain
Chief Master Soft Brain
Posts: 16746
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
Drives: straight past the apex

brain go brrrrrr
User avatar
goIftdibrad
Chief Master Soft Brain
Chief Master Soft Brain
Posts: 16746
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
Drives: straight past the apex

https://www.yahoo.com/news/letter-fossi ... 48847.html
As a 35-year geologist, listening to climate alarmists is very troubling.

We know carbon dioxide has increased somewhat during the last century, but it is not all due to fossil fuels and certainly not at alarming levels.

We know that weather related deaths are down substantially over the past century (mostly due to efficient fossil fuels that have provided the amazing machinery and technology that protect us).

We know that there is some warming and some impact, but not catastrophic as we are led to believe. We know Earth’s climate is cyclical in nature and has repeatedly warmed and cooled long before humans had any influence.

Climate is not a pristine entity that humans make dangerous, rather climate is a naturally dangerous entity from which humans must be protected.

The United Nations and IPPC have been claiming crisis for at least four decades yet have been wrong on every count.

These organizations have misrepresented the work of many good scientists to tout a political and quasi-religious message. This distortion is derived from biased selection of worst-case scenarios from over 40 climate models which have proven consistently inaccurate. They entirely ignore the immense, positive benefits of low-cost, reliable, global scale energy from fossil fuels.

To completely disregard how natural resources have lifted billions of people out of poverty and provided humans the ability to prosper is senseless.

I am not opposed to utilizing alternate energy sources as supplements, but to promote whole scale transition to unreliable, less efficient energy completely ignores the detrimental impact on human flourishing.

The high energy density of the physical chemistry of hydrocarbons is unique and well understood, as is the science underlying the low energy density inherent in surface sunlight, wind volumes and velocity.

Scientists have yet to discover, and entrepreneurs have yet to invent, anything as remarkable as hydrocarbons in terms of the combination of low-cost, high-energy density, stability, safety, and portability.

We are not in crisis, and we must be able to factor in negative AND positive impacts of energy consumption.

Steven P. Zody, Wooster
emphasis mine.

I hea NYC is banning new NG connections for both new construction and remodeling. And with Indian Point closed, well I hope yall like cold food. And cold feet for that matter.
brain go brrrrrr
User avatar
goIftdibrad
Chief Master Soft Brain
Chief Master Soft Brain
Posts: 16746
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
Drives: straight past the apex

max225 wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 5:22 pm There is only one solution. Population control. off every single kid in the family one above 2. Or easier yet, woman had 2, yank her tubes. Done. "oh what about the poors" do it there as well. Have it be mandatory for doctors to complete 2 tours abroad before graduation in all developed nations. They'll perform the surgeries for free as part of their training.

In 50 years pollution levels will be just fine. Earth population needs to be at/under 1B current levels are just atrocious.

Nice and easy and no one has to die a terrible death or we can go on like this and die in floods/fires/famines because :thisisfine:
This hasn't aged well at all. Are you enjoying the population control measures? :lol:
brain go brrrrrr
User avatar
max225
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 42432
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 12:49 am
Drives: Taco+ Bavarian lemon

Big Brain Bradley wrote: Fri Dec 17, 2021 8:01 am
max225 wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 5:22 pm There is only one solution. Population control. off every single kid in the family one above 2. Or easier yet, woman had 2, yank her tubes. Done. "oh what about the poors" do it there as well. Have it be mandatory for doctors to complete 2 tours abroad before graduation in all developed nations. They'll perform the surgeries for free as part of their training.

In 50 years pollution levels will be just fine. Earth population needs to be at/under 1B current levels are just atrocious.

Nice and easy and no one has to die a terrible death or we can go on like this and die in floods/fires/famines because :thisisfine:
This hasn't aged well at all. Are you enjoying the population control measures? :lol:
No because people are still breeding like cockroaches
User avatar
goIftdibrad
Chief Master Soft Brain
Chief Master Soft Brain
Posts: 16746
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
Drives: straight past the apex

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-we ... owered?s=r

Guest writer Michael Shellenberger

a clip:
How has Vladimir Putin—a man ruling a country with an economy smaller than that of Texas, with an average life expectancy 10 years lower than that of France—managed to launch an unprovoked full-scale assault on Ukraine?

There is a deep psychological, political and almost civilizational answer to that question: He wants Ukraine to be part of Russia more than the West wants it to be free. He is willing to risk tremendous loss of life and treasure to get it.

snip

That’s how Russia ends up supplying about 20 percent of Europe’s oil, 40 percent of its gas, and 20 percent of its coal.

The math is simple. A child could do it.

The reason Europe didn’t have a muscular deterrent threat to prevent Russian aggression—and in fact prevented the U.S. from getting allies to do more—is that it needs Putin’s oil and gas.
brain go brrrrrr
User avatar
goIftdibrad
Chief Master Soft Brain
Chief Master Soft Brain
Posts: 16746
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
Drives: straight past the apex



i like how all the peaks on the NG curve are mirrors of the wind. BuT iTs LoW cArBoN
brain go brrrrrr
Post Reply