Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Climate Change thread, define, discussion, science, global warming?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • This was impossible... It cannot be done just a few years ago.
    https://www.sciencealert.com/the-uk-...fusion-reactor
    Now it is working.

    Jeez UK can you stop selling your private company tax payer funded intellectual rights to the Chinese

    Comment


    • Originally posted by commanding View Post
      Mord,

      The main questions, if one WAS to accept the theory of Climate Change / Global Warming theory, is .....so what can the average man in the street do about this? Right? So I google this: "proposed solutions to global warming" and the first seemingly reasonable website is http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming...s#.Wca4keRDEr0

      the first page at the bottom they ask for Money. Red Flag...ulterior motive, economic gain for someone.

      Now I start to look for solutions to problems they name..... by name.
      *************************************************

      Reduce emissions: they propose we reduce carbon emissions. Do they expect Ms. C to stop driving to work each workday? We live 21 miles from her office. No bus routes, no street cars or mass transit, too far to walk. Do they expect us to shut of all the electricity in case some is generated by coal? That is not going to happen. Do they want me to stop driving to the doctor?


      next issue on their page: Stop (tropical) deforestation. How? Are we to travel to South America, Asia and Africa and kill all those who cut down forest?

      next issue: Fight Misinformation......I had to laugh when I read their solution here:



      Okay I will give them "special interest groups funded by fossil fuel", only because it is true but every special interest group does that, from the Pro Gun lobby to National Defense contractors like Lockheed Martin, Bell Helicopter etc.
      the other two, media pundits and partisan think tanks.....I dismiss also because that falls under the banner of free speech in the US.

      Next issue: prepare for impacts?? they offer no solution other than to basically build bunkers, stockpile food etc. Dumb solution.

      etc etc. they go on but no good solutions to anything really.
      Well C, the global warming community has backed off demands that individuals must alter their lifestyles if they choose not to. The Leonardo DeCaprios and Al Gore monster carbon footprints are OK, it's really the big corporations and industries that need taken down. Like coal and oil as Hillary promised to do. So that drive that Mrs C must take in her SUV is apparently now OK to do. Secondly, the real astonishing thing for me is if the science IS correct, then this should be a slam dunk sell to the public. Just like the Montreal Protocols to reduce CFC pollutants. Why isn't it? No doubt there is lobbying from the oil,gas and coal industries but that really doesn't matter nearly as much to me as what the global climate change activists and their political allies have done to themselves. Their vehement and violent denunciation of those who question their often wrong assessments and predictions including consideration of legal prosecution for "climate deniers". The disturbing documented questionable and shoddy science. The profiteering from shysters and hucksters like Al Gore. And the questionable economic costs of solutions that may or may not work for something that may or may not be occurring.

      Global-warming activists have always faced a three-fold challenge in coaxing Americans into taking drastic action to “save the climate.” First, they need to prove that man-made activity has a material impact on global climate. Second, they need to prove that this impact is harmful to human life. And third, they need to prove that the cure isn’t worse than the disease — that the economic sacrifices will be worth it. Unfortunately, the debate focuses almost entirely on the first point, while environmentalists actively and energetically undermine their own case for the other two.
      Is the environmentalist Left really asking Americans to lose their jobs for no meaningful reason? Well, yes.
      http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ental-benefits
      https://newrepublic.com/article/1441...-doesnt-matter
      Last edited by riderboy; 23-09-2017, 02:59 PM. Reason: Posted wrong link

      Comment


      • Originally posted by commanding View Post
        Mord,

        The main questions, if one WAS to accept the theory of Climate Change / Global Warming theory, is .....so what can the average man in the street do about this? Right? So I google this: "proposed solutions to global warming" and the first seemingly reasonable website is http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming...s#.Wca4keRDEr0

        the first page at the bottom they ask for Money. Red Flag...ulterior motive, economic gain for someone.

        Now I start to look for solutions to problems they name..... by name.
        *************************************************

        Reduce emissions: they propose we reduce carbon emissions. Do they expect Ms. C to stop driving to work each workday? We live 21 miles from her office. No bus routes, no street cars or mass transit, too far to walk. Do they expect us to shut of all the electricity in case some is generated by coal? That is not going to happen. Do they want me to stop driving to the doctor?


        next issue on their page: Stop (tropical) deforestation. How? Are we to travel to South America, Asia and Africa and kill all those who cut down forest?

        next issue: Fight Misinformation......I had to laugh when I read their solution here:



        Okay I will give them "special interest groups funded by fossil fuel", only because it is true but every special interest group does that, from the Pro Gun lobby to National Defense contractors like Lockheed Martin, Bell Helicopter etc.
        the other two, media pundits and partisan think tanks.....I dismiss also because that falls under the banner of free speech in the US.

        Next issue: prepare for impacts?? they offer no solution other than to basically build bunkers, stockpile food etc. Dumb solution.

        etc etc. they go on but no good solutions to anything really.
        Good question, Com
        There are several ways of doing thing
        Both at individual and gov level
        And the results may be good for GW theory, they would in any case be good for your wallet

        At individual level :

        Turn off the A/C, heat, lights when leaving home
        Use low energy bulbs and a programation device for the A/C-heater to avoid over-heating/over-cooling
        Avoid to use your car to go to buy bread in a grocery 300 m away (this may be different in your corner of the wood with bigger distances but a lot of lazy people do that in Europe)
        Buy a less oil glutonous car. If your landscape doesn't need a 4x4 sucking 20l/100 km, you don't need it (Obviously for example in a City with narrow streets)
        Recycle plastic, aluminium
        Avoid over wrapped goods. That's just a marketing thing. Between a cookie wrapped in one plastic sheet and a cookie wrapped in one plastic sheet wrapped in another plastic sheet and all inside a plastic bag, well choose the first
        Give preference for short production circuits if they exist. You'll have localy produced vegetables. Good for you (not matured artificialy with chemicals) and for local economy/producer
        Avoid/lessen imported goods. Who needs strawberries in winter every day ?. I mean, OK it's not a sin to enjoy it from time to time. But a lot of people are used to buy things produced out of seasonal period and on the other side of the world just for the sake of it
        Limit your water consomption (with low water closets as you said)
        Reduce your overall meat consumption. We don't need 500g of red meat / day. I mean, as in the strawberry example, your want it by pleasure from time to time, it's OK for me, i do it also. But we have consumption habits that are clearly bad for the planet (too much farm animals...and it's not about them farting, i'll explain below) but mainly for health (coronary diseases and cancer)
        And i am certainly forgetting a few things

        The difficulty is to change habits /mentalities but all those things t's our wallet which is impacted, not only the Nature/planet

        Big car, strawberries in winter, water waste, over wrapped goods are costing more than they should. For once, thinking about yourself is also protecting Nature somehow

        Now
        Reduce emissions
        There are a lot of means to reduce emissions and a lot are in State/Agencies hands

        Filters on industry chimneys, renewal of energy distribution grid (like all old pipes, there are leaks), fiscal incentives to buy less poluting ars (good for car industry)

        Nobody expect you to stop to use your car especially if you need it. It's also up to the State to offer you alternate ways of transportations though like developping regular/efficient mass transit

        It's also up to the State to give fiscal incentives to buy better insulated houses if you can't afford them yourself. I mean, i don't know precisely the situation in your corner ot the wood, but here the park of housing (mostly 70s-80s building) are badly insulated so leaking heat in winter and uptaking too much heat in summer, leading to over use of A/C/heating.

        To avoid heat islands in cities, leave some green/blue areas (parks, lakes, ponds). Cities are betwenn +4 to +8°C warmer than their surrounding in summer heat peaks. A park vicinity gives a relief of 2-3°C in the near 300-500m

        Use heat/cold "neutral" materials. Concrete is a strong heat re-emitter. There are new concretes that don't reflect heat at night so much. Plasterboard is one of the worst material for heat exchange and breathing of a house. There are others more efficient


        Stop (tropical) deforestation

        Sure we won't do i at gunpoint
        But : A lot of deforestation is because Souther countries want to produce stuf for us. Soya fields in Brazil and Argentina (occupying now large pieces of former primal rain forest) are not for human consumption but for cattle i.e meat
        Because we are over consumming meat
        Same with palm oil fields
        Also logging : All people want to have their rose wood or teck sofas. May, instead, focusing on localy produced and controled wood (pine, maple) would be wiser

        prepare for impacts
        There are others that pure prepping
        Insulation of home, planting trees in the garden instead of water consuming grass gives you a few degrees that may be gold between an uncomfortable and a comfortable living situation
        Having a well if possible and your own garden
        Moving north (it's a trend that is already occuring ..... in my city that's several years that in mid summer temperatures reached 37-38-39°C. Those who can are beginning to buy houses 20-30 km away with a bit of elevation and close to forests rather than closer to the sea like it was during the 70s sea-beach rush

        That's just my two cents
        Something are easy to implement, some are easy but need to just change some habits (wich is the hardest part) some are dependant of State will
        And strangely a lot of individual solutions make you save bucks
        Energy and stuff ain't cheap anymore even if it is sold like that by marketing companies
        Your oil gallon may be cheap for example, nothing ensures that it will remain cheap in the future and in any case what uses oil to be produced/transported is not so cheap anymore (food, water)

        Comment


        • EXCLUSIVE: 60% Of Millennials Willing To Give Just $10 Or Less To Fight Climate Change
          A newDaily Wire/Whatsgoodly onlinesurveyasked 1,250 millennials from all over the country just how much money they'd be willing to personally give this year to fight what the Democratic Party and the left-leaning media consistently reminds us is the greatest threat facing mankind: climate change. The answer is not much, if any. The survey asked millennials, "How much would you be willing to personally give to the government this year to fight climate change?" A total of 60% of the respondents — which included more liberals and centrists than conservatives — either offered no money at all or were only willing to hand over ten bucks.
          A third (33%) said they'd give zero dollars; 27% said they would give only $10 a year; and 22% were willing to give $100. Altogether a total of 82% were unwilling to give more than $100 to combat "mankind's greatest threat."
          Of the final 18%, a total of 9% were willing to give $250, 4% were willing to hand over $1,000 and 5% said they'd give more than a grand.
          http://www.dailywire.com/news/17674/...-james-barrett

          Comment


          • That's nothing in the UK Green taxes cost everyone £149 per year and we really have not had a say on it

            Comment


            • Originally posted by blackcatnursery View Post

              That's nothing in the UK Green taxes cost everyone £149 per year and we really have not had a say on it
              Look to that to only increase I would think. I think the whole point of that survey is that despite being touted as the worst immediate threat to mankind's existence ever, there's a remarkable disconnect between that and an individuals willingness to donate even $10 to the cause. Quite astonishing.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by riderboy View Post

                Look to that to only increase I would think. I think the whole point of that survey is that despite being touted as the worst immediate threat to mankind's existence ever, there's a remarkable disconnect between that and an individuals willingness to donate even $10 to the cause. Quite astonishing.
                Its like paying for Bison control officers - when you have no bison

                Most people don't give a *uck about GW/CC all they are bothered about is paying their bills

                Comment


                • Originally posted by blackcatnursery View Post

                  Its like paying for Bison control officers - when you have no bison

                  Most people don't give a *uck about GW/CC all they are bothered about is paying their bills
                  The thing is that it will (be it Man made or not) utlimately affect their bills through insurance and healthcare bills

                  https://www.theguardian.com/environm...rs-manage-risk

                  https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/f...ntingcosts.pdf

                  That's it....

                  Comment


                  • Good hopefully they can absolve god from all of it and stop bumping the premiums after every disaster.

                    "Times reported that new offshore wind costs had fallen by nearly a third over four years, to an average of £97/MWh, meeting the government's £100/MWh target four years early.[20] Later in 2017 two offshore wind farm bids were made at a cost of £57.50/MWh for construction by 2022-23, nearly half the cost of a recent new nuclear power contract."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JakeScully View Post
                      [FONT=verdana]Distrust of science has increasingly become a tentpole for the conservative movement.
                      How many genders are there? Have pyramids or crystals ever cured anthing?

                      Comment


                      • Aussie politicians are still split over the Paris "accord" The only ones clapping are the liberals. They gave the developing countries Aussies manufacturing jobs. Hell even Holden to Thailand ,.the flagship and under the accord its th Aussies who have to mitigate their 1.6% carbon emissions by 2.8%? while Thailand et al can continue upwards in their emissions under the guise that they are developing and give them a break. At this point they are the ones fully developed and Aussie is in a deflationary process.
                        Donated entire industries including the last bolt already.
                        Perhaps they might also follow trumps lead after the next election and redress the obvious wrong.

                        NZ version decided to mitigate by saying they would plant trees.. a billion of them in some place. Clever idea but no place to plant them all. Its absolutely defective. But hey if it forestalls payments into another as equally stupid carbon sink then why not I suppose.
                        https://www.mpi.govt.nz/funding-and-...billion-trees/
                        MPI and our conservation people are some of the most happily delusional people in the world. Living in a suburban insular environment apparently is the perfect greenhouse for impractical think speak.

                        Comment


                        • So, now there is that, apparently. Recall all of the great weeping and gnashing of teeth from leftists and radical environmentalists when President Donald Trump announced in 2017 that he would withdraw the U.S. from the Paris agreement on climate his predecessor had signed the nation onto.
                          It was literally the end of the world as we know it, in their view, as unchecked air and water pollution would explode exponentially, humans would die horrible, climate change-related deaths and it was all the fault of an uncaring and climate change-denying Trump.
                          But a report from Investor's Business Daily suggests that all of the uproar about Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement was really just noise and much ado about nothing, as the international pact to address climate change and carbon emissions has been revealed to be essentially worthless.


                          Chart of the day: In 2017, US had largest decline in CO2 emissions in the world for 9th time this century
                          https://www.aei.org/publication/char...source=twitter

                          Not A Single G-20 Country Is Close To Hitting CO2 Emission Targets

                          Environmentalism: A new report calls the lie on the grand Paris climate change treaty. None of the promised cuts in CO2 emissions that 200-plus countries made will come close to preventing a climate "catastrophe." And many of the industrialized nations aren't even living up to the promises they did make.

                          Two years ago, when the Paris agreement took effect, then-President Obama declared that "history may well judge it as a turning point for our planet."
                          It was a turning point in the level of empty rhetoric, perhaps. But it won't make a bit of difference to the planet.
                          This farce was made abundantly clear in an annual report by Climate Transparency, an international group focused on the G-20 nations.
                          https://www.investors.com/politics/e...g20-emissions/


                          G20 Brown to Green Report 2018

                          The Brown to Green Report 2018 is the world’s most comprehensive review of G20 climate action. It provides concise and comparable information on G20 country mitigation action, finance and vulnerability.
                          Developed by experts from 14 research organisations and NGOs from the majority of the G20 countries, the report covers 80 indicators. It informs policy makers and stimulates national debates.

                          https://www.climate-transparency.org...-04b62b8d-e708


                          Comment


                          • That's a lot of report reading, let me know when an Pacific Island fisherman writes one.

                            Comment


                            • I realised that may come off as being racist/bias so I'll add Norwegian fishermen to the list to even it out.

                              Comment


                              • Spraying sun-dimming chemicals high above the Earth to slow global warming could be "remarkably inexpensive", costing about $2.25 billion a year over a 15-year period, according to a study by U.S. scientists.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X