Some Good News on Climate Change Maybe

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 2/15/2019 at 2:00 AM, Guillaume Albasini said:

May I remind you all that the article at the start of this thread is labeled by CNN as "opinion >> political Op-Ed - Social Commentary" and includes the following warning " The opinions expressed in this commentary are the author's ".

So it's just Pr. Geoffrey Heal expressing his own opinion. We can agree or not with him (I personally mainly agree) , share our own opinions and present the facts on which our opinions are based.

But just throwing in tons of anti-MSM memes because the Op-Ed was published on the CNN website is not really helping the debate.

It is totally justified to decry left wing "opinion pieces" when mainstream media allows them 90% of the ink or broadcasters allow them 90% of the airwaves. 

Meanwhile, the left is doing everything it can to shut down right wing expression on the internet. China and Russia are going full speed ahead on stopping all free expression. The Democrat party would do the same if it was allowed to. Something to worry about if Trump loses reelection. Don't forget how Bill Clinton and Obama tried to shut down Rush Limbaugh and Fox News.

Edited February 16, 2019 by ronwagn

[Red + 252]

24 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

It is totally justified to decry left wing "opinion pieces" when mainstream media allows them 90% of the ink or broadcasters allow them 90% of the airwaves. 

Meanwhile, the left is doing everything it can to shut down right wing expression on the internet. China and Russia are going full speed ahead on stopping all free expression. The Democrat party would do the same if it was allowed to. Something to worry about if Trump loses reelection. Don't forget how Bill Clinton and Obama tried to shut down Rush Limbaugh and Fox News.

None of that has any relevance to being able to independently check the information being relied upon.

[markslawson + 1,057]

5 hours ago, specinho said:

quoting Bill Gates in his facebook post:" .....the world will build an entire New York City every month for the next 40 years.

The story now is that the world's population is expected to reach its peak by 2050 and then decline, according to a Deutsche Bank report. That's still a problem, of course, but building infrastructure of marginal or even negative utility - renewables - doesn't seem like a good answer. 

Link to news story https://www.cnbc.com/id/101018722

So maybe thirty years is closer.. 

[JoMack + 549]

Hmmmm, how do you store wind energy?  How big must the batteries be to store solar?  How much can you store on a battery?  California    is closing its gas fired power plants so what do they do?  Windmills in the Hollywood Hills, Malibu, out in the ocean blocking the view, noise from the turbines - can't wait to watch this fiasco - the bullet train was killed by the new Governor and now no utilities or pipelines, no exploration and development - This will be a bullet train on steroids!   The utility company in Westchester County told NY that there was no way they could expand any additional electricity to Yonkers.  The Mayor of Yonkers is flipping out since she was told no new development.  Massachusetts is bringing in LNG from the Caribbean and Algeria.  If the NE wasn't so insane with their policies it would be funny, but their residents will be packing up and going to states with no green agenda, but they will bring their same CNN thinking with them and they will again vote for the idiocy they left.  

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,243]

2 hours ago, Red said:

None of that has any relevance to being able to independently check the information being relied upon.

Dude, are you really that naïve? Maybe you're a real libtard in a room full of right-wing and conservatives trying to make an ignorant argument that CNN and MSN and several others are ultra-left. I could be wrong in my assumption about you but I think you like to argue just for arguments sake. Take your toys and go home.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

2 hours ago, markslawson said:

The story now is that the world's population is expected to reach its peak by 2050 and then decline, according to a Deutsche Bank report. That's still a problem, of course, but building infrastructure of marginal or even negative utility - renewables - doesn't seem like a good answer. 

Link to news story https://www.cnbc.com/id/101018722

So maybe thirty years is closer.. 

Link added to my Population Problems topic. I hope it pans out!

[Red + 252]

15 minutes ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Dude, are you really that naïve? Maybe you're a real libtard in a room full of right-wing and conservatives trying to make an ignorant argument that CNN and MSN and several others are ultra-left. I could be wrong in my assumption about you but I think you like to argue just for arguments sake. Take your toys and go home.

I never made the "links" you are claiming.

If you do not want to check the bona fides of what you read, then that is a matter for you alone.

It seems people at this site are good at posting utter nonsense, and then hiding behind their ignorance.

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,243]

4 minutes ago, Red said:

I never made the "links" you are claiming.

If you do not want to check the bona fides of what you read, then that is a matter for you alone.

It seems people at this site are good at posting utter nonsense, and then hiding behind their ignorance.

Well, if you really feel that way about this site, don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

[Red + 252]

55 minutes ago, JoMack said:

Hmmmm, how do you store wind energy?  How big must the batteries be to store solar?  How much can you store on a battery?  California    is closing its gas fired power plants so what do they do?  Windmills in the Hollywood Hills, Malibu, out in the ocean blocking the view, noise from the turbines - can't wait to watch this fiasco - the bullet train was killed by the new Governor and now no utilities or pipelines, no exploration and development - This will be a bullet train on steroids!   The utility company in Westchester County told NY that there was no way they could expand any additional electricity to Yonkers.  The Mayor of Yonkers is flipping out since she was told no new development.  Massachusetts is bringing in LNG from the Caribbean and Algeria.  If the NE wasn't so insane with their policies it would be funny, but their residents will be packing up and going to states with no green agenda, but they will bring their same CNN thinking with them and they will again vote for the idiocy they left.  

Presently it does not make economic sense to add battery storage to renewable generation.  It is being done in a limited fashion in Australia to solve mostly intermittency issues.

Over time, and as renewables get progressively cheaper than FF alternatives, it may be more expedient to store the energy via a hydrogen production facility.  However, this is an unlikely option for the foreseeable future as it requires the grid to have significant additional daily capacity over present requirements.  The reason this scenario makes sense is because the differential cost of a huge amount of additional hydrogen energy storage becomes significantly cheaper than a battery bank.

Edited February 17, 2019 by Red
added "hydrogen" to a sentence

[Red + 252]

4 minutes ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Well, if you really feel that way about this site, don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

I will post information that informs others as and when I choose, providing those rights are not withdrawn by the site owners.

 

[Arjun + 39]

On 2/13/2019 at 5:36 PM, Marina Schwarz said:

https://us.cnn.com/2019/02/12/opinions/climate-change-opinion-heal/index.html

Might be easier than we've been told. Repeatedly.

 

You should also check out the Great Leap forward. That was also a new green deal at the time.

[UsedCamelSales + 6]

This CNN article is so full of incorrect and misleading facts.  The article fails to mention that every power producing company that utilized Green Wind and Solar had significant higher utility bills.  The more wind and solar investment the higher the bill.  The most extreme is Hawaii where it is not a green thing to get off the grid but a means of survival as the electric bill is obscene. California is a an example of the residential homeowners paying the bill for incompetent mismanaged liberal political green and activist run legislature.  Making the largest national power producer liable for the California wildfires is the equivalent of suing the average utility rate payer in California.  The female CEO  of PG& E was smart and resigned to not get involved in this foo foo fight and saw bankruptcy as its only option.  Climate Change so called scientists continue to ignore the impact of the SUN and our Galaxy system and how this effects climate change.  The Sun goes thru cycles that create our long term climate changes of 12,000 years of warm climate followed by 100,000 years of ice age.  We are at the end of the 12,000 year cycle where the SUN will go into a big belch or NOVA into an intense release of dust, cloud and radiation that will pulverize the earth and stop its rotation and reverse its polls and create another NOAH like great flood.  The cylcle will continue, species will be lost and new ones created. The current global warming scene is a dis-information campaign created to keep the people from the truth of the pending destruction of the earth as we know it. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

2 hours ago, UsedCamelSales said:

Climate Change so called scientists continue to ignore the impact of the SUN and our Galaxy system and how this effects climate change.  The Sun goes thru cycles that create our long term climate changes of 12,000 years of warm climate followed by 100,000 years of ice age.  We are at the end of the 12,000 year cycle where the SUN will go into a big belch or NOVA into an intense release of dust, cloud and radiation that will pulverize the earth and stop its rotation and reverse its polls and create another NOAH like great flood.  The cylcle will continue, species will be lost and new ones created. The current global warming scene is a dis-information campaign created to keep the people from the truth of the pending destruction of the earth as we know it. 

It's also incredible arrogance, if what you say is true (and I don't know either way).  These people "knowing" that they can change the universe.  Oh, they'll say, so you don't want to try because it's a big task then?  No, I don't want to live in bankruptcy and worse because you don't even know if your predictions are going to come true.

[Red + 252]

2 hours ago, UsedCamelSales said:

comments in red

This CNN article is so full of incorrect and misleading facts.  The article fails to mention that every power producing company that utilized Green Wind and Solar had significant higher utility bills.  The cost of generating electricity is not the same as one's electricity bill.  Wind and solar are proven to be lower cost than most FF sources.

The more wind and solar investment the higher the bill.  The most extreme is Hawaii where it is not a green thing to get off the grid but a means of survival as the electric bill is obscene. California is a an example of the residential homeowners paying the bill for incompetent mismanaged liberal political green and activist run legislature.  Making the largest national power producer liable for the California wildfires is the equivalent of suing the average utility rate payer in California.  The female CEO  of PG& E was smart and resigned to not get involved in this foo foo fight and saw bankruptcy as its only option. 

Climate Change so called scientists continue to ignore the impact of the SUN and our Galaxy system and how this effects climate change. This is proven FALSE - there is no science to that claim.

The Sun goes thru cycles that create our long term climate changes of 12,000 years of warm climate followed by 100,000 years of ice age.  Really?  We are at the end of the 12,000 year cycle where the SUN will go into a big belch or NOVA into an intense release of dust, cloud and radiation that will pulverize the earth and stop its rotation and reverse its polls and create another NOAH like great flood.  And your science to back up this claim is where? The cylcle will continue, species will be lost and new ones created. Tell us about the number of new species now being "created".  And then compare that to those disappearing.  The current global warming scene is a dis-information campaign created to keep the people from the truth of the pending destruction of the earth as we know it.  Actually it's proven science.  But what would you know given the rubbish you keep posting.

[markslawson + 1,057]

23 minutes ago, Red said:

Climate Change so called scientists continue to ignore the impact of the SUN and our Galaxy system and how this effects climate change. This is proven FALSE - there is no science to that claim.

Actually no, there is overwhelming proof of a link in pre-industrial times. What is true is that pro-climate change scientists claim the link has broken down in recent decades. See this paper in the Proceedings of the Royal Academy. I think its free, and fairly accessible. The two physicists were debunking the documentary The Great Global Warming Conspiracy but had to admit to the vast evidence that the sun controlled climate. However, they say the link breaks down in recent decade. A lot more work has been done since and its not at all clear that the link has broken but, as you can see, there is plenty of science to back the claim that the sun controls climate.  

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

On 2/16/2019 at 3:01 PM, Red said:

None of that has any relevance to being able to independently check the information being relied upon.

It has 100% relevance.  When you censor, genius's like you claim there is no other rational voice.... well yea, you POS just censored the opposition.  You are living up to your name.  Red.... communist socialist... the biggest censoring murderers the planet has ever produced. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

22 hours ago, Red said:

I will post information that informs others as and when I choose, providing those rights are not withdrawn by the site owners.

 

This site is a right wing echo chamber for sure.  Try to find the amusement and not take it personally. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

Let's look at a (2x2) risk assessment of climate change, there are 4 possibilities: it's real and we don't do anything; it's fake and we don't do anything; it's real and we do something; it's fake and we do something.

It's real and we don't do anything

Short term riches but the world is ruined for future generations.

It's fake and we don't do anything

A favorite on this board.  Sure nothing changed but we are still dependent on a non-renewable resource and all the other pollution it creates (not CO2, the other stuff like PM 2.5, etc.).

It's real and we do something

Massive short term pain but long term we saved the world!

It's fake and we do something

Crap... it sucked switching to renewable energy and the climate change predictions were wrong!  All we got was cleaner air, cleaner water, and limitless energy.

 

 

      

 

Edited February 18, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Guillaume Albasini + 851]

4 hours ago, UsedCamelSales said:

We are at the end of the 12,000 year cycle where the SUN will go into a big belch or NOVA into an intense release of dust, cloud and radiation that will pulverize the earth and stop its rotation and reverse its polls and create another NOAH like great flood. 

Our sun will run out of fuel and grow in a red giant star but this will happen in 5 billions years from now... not tomorrow.

 

 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

3 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

It's real and we don't do anything

Short term riches but the world is ruined for future generations.

It's fake and we don't do anything

A favorite on this board.  Sure nothing changed but we are still dependent on a non-renewable resource and all the other pollution it creates (not CO2, the other stuff like PM 2.5, etc.).    

Or reality: All we have to do is suck up the methane hydrates off the ocean floor which were created by the ocean sucking up the CO2 to begin with...  There is no shortage and never will be.  Will it be more expensive?  Yes.  When oil was $100barrel and headed to $150, Japan was almost set to start sucking them up. 

[Red + 252]

5 hours ago, markslawson said:

Actually no, there is overwhelming proof of a link in pre-industrial times. What is true is that pro-climate change scientists claim the link has broken down in recent decades. See this paper in the Proceedings of the Royal Academy. I think its free, and fairly accessible. The two physicists were debunking the documentary The Great Global Warming Conspiracy but had to admit to the vast evidence that the sun controlled climate. However, they say the link breaks down in recent decade. A lot more work has been done since and its not at all clear that the link has broken but, as you can see, there is plenty of science to back the claim that the sun controls climate.  

Your link decisively proved my point. 

Climate science is really easy at the global level.  The earth receives energy.  The earth loses energy.  It's a basic energy balance equation.

If less energy is lost then the planet will warm.  To lose less energy - on average - than has been the historical trend requires that the amount of IR dissipating into space has a cause.  Greenhouse gases prevent IR leaving the planet at former rates, so the planet can only warm.  No science has shown a different cause that would have such a measurable impact.

Unsurprisingly the SUN is the initial source of our planet's energy.

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

5 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

This site is a right wing echo chamber for sure.  Try to find the amusement and not take it personally. 

Thank you...😍  Although I do wish you would take it seriously AND personally.

Wow, this is a special day for me: I finally got called a right-winger!

[specinho + 467]

On 2/17/2019 at 7:23 AM, markslawson said:

The story now is that the world's population is expected to reach its peak by 2050 and then decline, according to a Deutsche Bank report. That's still a problem, of course, but building infrastructure of marginal or even negative utility - renewables - doesn't seem like a good answer. 

Link to news story https://www.cnbc.com/id/101018722

So maybe thirty years is closer.. 

For many people who have foresight............ they have prepared the buildings 10 -20 years ago............. and still building them everywhere in the world.............. So...uuhhhh............. we are facing something unprecedented i.e. we have many (if not most) high rises that have merely 10-20% occupancy rate for each building......... we have heat trapped in the city because of the concrete forests until mosquitoes fail to go to sleep sensing the temperature is their usual feeding time...............

For your info... dear commies..... mosquitoes have no fat..... hence...... they used to sleep when the temperature drops to prevent shivering and other unwanted or unpleasant physilogical responses including sudden drop and die flying amidst cold temperature or at high altitude. They active only within a time frame i.e ~ 5 - 7a.m. and 6 - 7.30p.m. at low ground ................ Now...... they are still biting after 10p.m........... get on my nerves............ :-S....... (a few toads have since propagated here and have been a really great help).

Pardon me.... but the point is.......... do we have to transform every place into cities of buildings with low occupancy rates and headaching traffic jam? The jam makes people unable to pee or do anything else while stucked most of the days if not everyday on the road?? Do we really have to make people suffer from incontinence; constipation and related colon cancer; stress and related illnesses etc etc due to jam and get them kill slowly this way.....??? Plus the heat; the flood; the fire and many more disaster that kill a few now and then........ Are we about to have newer and easier solutions to reduce the size of populations soon please.........?? ☹️

[Bobby P + 88]

11 hours ago, Red said:

Your link decisively proved my point. 

Climate science is really easy at the global level.  The earth receives energy.  The earth loses energy.  It's a basic energy balance equation.

If less energy is lost then the planet will warm.  To lose less energy - on average - than has been the historical trend requires that the amount of IR dissipating into space has a cause.  Greenhouse gases prevent IR leaving the planet at former rates, so the planet can only warm.  No science has shown a different cause that would have such a measurable impact.

Unsurprisingly the SUN is the initial source of our planet's energy.

 

Are you a paid troll by Greenpeace or one of the so called "non-profit" tree hugging scam groups? Serious question. How do you have so much time to respond to each comment with your own self-bloated BS!? 

Edited February 18, 2019 by Bobby P

[Red + 252]

5 hours ago, Bobby P said:

Are you a paid troll by Greenpeace or one of the so called "non-profit" tree hugging scam groups? Serious question. How do you have so much time to respond to each comment with your own self-bloated BS!? 

You and many others posting here make claims which are absurd.  We have Illurion choosing to believe the science up to 1980, but not afterwards, as if that is a rational approach to "belief".  We have claims about climate which have been confused with headlines about weather events.  Worse, occasionally the linked articles do not even include the accompanying claims - so a double whammy of stupid ensues.

We have Tom who tosses in memes like confetti at a wedding and has never been able to substantiate any commentary on the climate science he offers.  As evidence I use his upvotes (in equivalence to your downvotes of my posts) for folk line ronwagen who claims to know a lot about climate science yet has never been able to answer the most basic of all questions.

I often have to re-read posts here because the lack of science in them makes them no more than gibberish - as noted earlier today by CMOP, elsewhere, when he awarded it a trophy to a particularly esoteric post (likely for wanting to know what drugs the writer was taking so as to be in on it).

The internet of things gives folk here the means to check that the claims they make have standing.  A few take the time, and as many again do not, yet continue to repeat baseless claims.

What you call my "own self-bloated BS" is not, in fact, mine.  I do what others in science do and borrow from the best available information.  

Edited February 18, 2019 by Red
remove a sentence