1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Climate change, the facts, the theory

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Judgeneo, May 30, 2010.

  1. mid_gen

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Dec 20, 2004

    Posts: 7,939

    Location: Düsseldorf

    In absolute terms yes, but still masses of dirty coal.

    What I was really getting at is that China, free from oil interests and democratic short-termism are going to take the lead in technology as well as capacity.

    An energy independent and clean China will be a force to be reckoned with. Zero chance of the USA doing anything positive with regards to clean energy for the next 4 years. Not forgetting of course that China will probably own our energy infrastructure by then.
     
  2. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 15,598

    The main issue with Wind and Solar is crappy figures like Capacity, that ends up being completely disingenuous and misleading.

    When it comes to Watt hours, Nuclear leads both by like 60-70% efficiency.
     
  3. Amp34

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2005

    Posts: 28,386

    Location: Canada

    Agreed, and to do that we need sustainable development and the reduction in birth rate that development provides (as you say) - schools/education, healthcare, greater "industrialization" (less hand needed to farm) empowerment (especially of women). All that costs money and takes time unfortunately, money being the biggest issue for most developing nations.

    That said I'm thinking that, like landlines/mobile phone usership, many developing nations may leapfrog developed nations in renewables use in the near future. Without well established power grids it may well end up easier and cheaper to set up small local grids powered by renewables (solar, small scale hydro and wind) - it's already happening in some places (although many are using diesel backups, or local natural gas resources if they have it).

    Migration also causes a brain drain, with the youngest and most able leaving the countries. Reduced emigration is also important in many cases.

    Climate Chang is just a symptom of the main issue, along with a multitude of other symptoms (pollution, deforestation, extinction etc). Let's just hope the symptom doesn't get worse now the republicans are in power in the US.
     
  4. clv101

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 9,887

    Location: Bristol

    Alternately, we could find ways of reducing the consumption of the wealthiest billion. The fact that there are 7 going on 9 billion of us isn't really the problem, it's the behaviour and consumption of the wealthiest billion that's the main issue.
     
  5. Amp34

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2005

    Posts: 28,386

    Location: Canada

    Reducing consumption of the wealthiest billion is not going to help with our food issues.

    It may reduce things like CO2 emissions but most of the other issues related to humanity will not be solved just by reducing consumption of a small proportion of the worlds population.

    I guess it's that age old argument - is climate change the disease, or a symptom? For me it's the latter, and while it's important there are multiple other facets that are just as important for a healthy earth. Most of those other facets aren't important to many as they don't/won't affect them directly.

    The emptying of oceans and bulldozing of rainforests are not going to affect someone in London or New York directly, but rising sea levels and more powerful storms certainly will - hence climate change being seen as far more important than any of the other destructive forces humans are wreaking.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2016
  6. tracertong

    Hitman

    Joined: Oct 25, 2007

    Posts: 985

    Climate change is bollox , just do your research.

    People tax is the real name.
     
  7. Tunney

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 11, 2004

    Posts: 14,549

    Location: London

    This is SC, would you like to share your research with us?

    Why did you disagree with the scientific consensus?
     
  8. datalol-jack

    Soldato

    Joined: Mar 1, 2010

    Posts: 6,133

    Shooting in the dark here: the Daily Mail linked him to the Taxpayers Alliance? More likely just trolling. :p
     
  9. Tefal

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 30, 2007

    Posts: 66,440

    Location: Wales

    Dig a big trench from the nedwterainian and flood the sahara basin
     
  10. Amp34

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2005

    Posts: 28,386

    Location: Canada

    What is a new hypersaline sea going to do to help things?
     
  11. scorza

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 22, 2004

    Posts: 26,685

    Location: Deep England

    I'd be willing to look into ways of doing that once there's a commitment to reduce global populations. I don't see the point of cutting emissions a little bit in the west just for industrialisation and population growth in the east increase emissions overall.
     
  12. joeyjojo

    Soldato

    Joined: Dec 2, 2005

    Posts: 5,519

    Location: Herts

    Some very high temperatures in the Arctic at the moment. From the FT today (p.6):

     
  13. PlacidCasual

    Soldato

    Joined: May 13, 2003

    Posts: 5,534

    Isn't this an instance of the polar vortex playing silly buggers and allowing unusually hot air up into the arctic? It did something similar last year or the year before so we ended up with an incredibly mild winter and the US had a record breaking cold winter over most of the continent. I'm guessing that sea ice is very responsive to where these nodes of cold and warm air extend.
     
  14. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 15,598

    I think everyone is massively underestimating the time period we have to deal with this, i'm almost certain we'd lost the 2 degrees target years ago. The 4 degrees target from industry is looking to be more rational at this point, but we might even breach that come 2100.

    Sad really, but whats done is done and Paris is too late, im guessing the arctic issue is now permanent and likely the arctic ocean will present itself within the next decade at most.
     
  15. joeyjojo

    Soldato

    Joined: Dec 2, 2005

    Posts: 5,519

    Location: Herts

    Yep, that's probably one of the big factors. Was just watching this nice ted talk where he mentions the polar vortex as one of the top 7 'weird' things happening in the arctic in the last few years.

     
  16. joeyjojo

    Soldato

    Joined: Dec 2, 2005

    Posts: 5,519

    Location: Herts

    Speaking of misleading articles, here's one (debunked) by David Rose from the Mail on Sunday just this weekend gone.

    https://tamino.wordpress.com/2016/11/28/how-stupid-does-david-rose-think-you-are/

    Classic cherry picking. Rose has intentionally picked a short time period (ignoring the bits of data he doesn't like), from one set of satellite data, for one altitude (not the Earth's surface), for only land areas (not over oceans), and only then does he get a 'flat' trend.

    This kind of thing deserves legal action and fines.

    Edit: I put a complaint in with IPSO. Hasn't got me anywhere the other times but something has to be done.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2016
  17. PlacidCasual

    Soldato

    Joined: May 13, 2003

    Posts: 5,534

    I'm going to sound like a broken record here. So last night (and at 8am this morning) wind generation was producing less than 20% of it's rated capacity and solar was producing fluff all. For much of the last week wind has being producing less than 25% of it's rated capacity dropping as low as 10%. If we are going to rely on renewable energy to meet our 2050 commitment of 80% reduction on 1990 CO2 output we are going to need a phenomenal amount of storage to cover weeks like we are having just now. All the more so because transport and heating will almost certainly need to be electric in such a scenario.

    Why oh why aren't we undertaking a crash nuclear development programme to develop indigenous fast breeder designs? Because renewables are in my opinion a waste of time and will never be able to practically support the demand we have and are going to have.
     
  18. scorza

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 22, 2004

    Posts: 26,685

    Location: Deep England

  19. platypus

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2003

    Posts: 38,625

    Location: Rhône-Alpes+Cambridge

    Anyway. Until we get a government that actually cares about reducing the volume of cars (or combustion engines specifically I suppose) nothings going to change for the positive with regards to pollution.
     
  20. platypus

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jul 25, 2003

    Posts: 38,625

    Location: Rhône-Alpes+Cambridge

    How stupid does David Rose think you are? Well he knows exactly how stupid you are if you're reading a DM article.