Here We Go: New York Lawmakers Pass Aggressive Law To Fight Climate Change

[markslawson + 1,057]

On 6/23/2019 at 11:54 AM, Meredith Poor said:

The highest wind power output Texas has ever generated is about 19Mw, which at the time was about 54% of total ERCOT demand. Texas has never 'exported a surplus of power'.

I think you've messed up your units - 19 MW is nothing but you say its 54 per cent of total demand. If it is 54 per cent of total demand then sorry, they are, in effect, exporting. I take your point that it may not be officially from the wind farms, but simply redirecting various power plants on the outskirts to other grids.. 54 per cent is an enormous load at any one point and potentially a major problem for the network.. just think what happens when the wind dies and remember that conventional plants can take a long time to start up (exception is hydro).

Incidentally, you say, never exported. I tried looking at the ERCOT site just now but can't get on.. do you have a source?

[CanadianCrude1 + 6]

On 6/20/2019 at 2:36 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

Ah yes, Carbon Taxes cure Climate Change.

A shocking scientific discovery: Winds affect ocean temperatures!

I am shocked to learn that winds affect ocean temperatures.  I am also surprised to learn from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that ocean currents, temperatures around the Earth, and carbon dioxide levels are all related to the Earth's rotation and the sun and that the ocean currents are on a 1,000-year cycle.

 

... The indoctrination, supported by almost all the media, is dangerous to our freedom.  People must be completely ignorant or naïve to believe that politicians, bureaucrats, and scientists can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity forever if we just hand over trillions of our hard-earned dollars to them.  The only thing that does is make the very wealthy D.C. area richer than it already is.

Do we believe that the government can control the temperature on the sun, the rotation of the Earth, the ocean currents, and the winds in Antarctica?  Please explain how.  The politicians who promise they can control the climate couldn't even keep their promise that we could keep our doctors and our health plans and that our premiums would go down if we just let them pass Obamacare. 

Can the government control the climate? It's not really that simple. The government can control the major aspects that affect the carbon cycles which then drive the climate. If you look at the carbon PPM history of the planet the current trend does not end well. 

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

On 6/20/2019 at 11:45 AM, Stephenk said:

Well I'm not going to say that their not Climate change, But I do believe that theirs a lot of money riding on it if they can't prove it to the people. I keep hearing about the sea raising and towns going to be under water and I'm still fishing in the same place I have been for over 50 years, I do believe we need to be more careful with what we do with the world but at the same time I believe that a lot of this is over blown just to make more money and to control what people do. if you really do some digging the main people who say this is happening are the one's who have the most to gain and the one's who stand against them are trying to show why most of it is wrong that being put out there. In my life time I've seem them say it was warming and then we were going to have a ice age and then back to warming again and now it just Climate change and I think it because they are just guessing and people are seeing it. I have grandkids and I have done a lot of research on this so before anyone come at me and say I need to read more about it I have from all sides not just the one's who have the most to gain from it. Like I said I do believe we do need to take care of the planet and their a lot that could be done to be sure our kids and grandkids have a future, But lets look at it from all sides not just one!

 

Talk to people living in Miami Florida. Flooding at high tide is becoming a regular thing because of sea level rise due to global warming.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

On 6/20/2019 at 3:36 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

Ah yes, Carbon Taxes cure Climate Change.

A shocking scientific discovery: Winds affect ocean temperatures!

I am shocked to learn that winds affect ocean temperatures.  I am also surprised to learn from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that ocean currents, temperatures around the Earth, and carbon dioxide levels are all related to the Earth's rotation and the sun and that the ocean currents are on a 1,000-year cycle.

 

... The indoctrination, supported by almost all the media, is dangerous to our freedom.  People must be completely ignorant or naïve to believe that politicians, bureaucrats, and scientists can control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity forever if we just hand over trillions of our hard-earned dollars to them.  The only thing that does is make the very wealthy D.C. area richer than it already is.

Do we believe that the government can control the temperature on the sun, the rotation of the Earth, the ocean currents, and the winds in Antarctica?  Please explain how.  The politicians who promise they can control the climate couldn't even keep their promise that we could keep our doctors and our health plans and that our premiums would go down if we just let them pass Obamacare. 

The fact that those same points can be made about your arguments without changing them shows that you are perpetuating indoctrination from what you see as your side.

You make no attempt to argue the reality of global warming.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

On 6/20/2019 at 5:03 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

Is this even legal?  The Oregon governor authorizing state police to arrest senators outside Oregon state lines and return them to Oregon, to force them to vote on Climate Change?  Seriously bonkers.

 

Oregon governor authorizes state police to bring GOP lawmakers back to capital for climate vote

Oregon Gov. Kate Brown (D) authorized the state police to bring Republican lawmakers back to Salem after several left the state to avoid a vote on a climate bill. 

GOP state senators walked out this week after voicing concerns over the bill’s impacts on a number of “energy intensive, trade-exposed” businesses in rural communities. Though the bill has already passed the House and Democrats hold a supermajority in the state Senate, Republicans have the numbers to deny a quorum in the upper chamber. 

“The Senate Republicans have decided to abandon their duty to serve their constituents and walk out. The Senate Democrats have requested the assistance of the Oregon State Police to bring back their colleagues to finish the work they committed to push forward for Oregonians. As the executive of the agency, I am authorizing the State Police to fulfill the Senate Democrats’ request,” Brown said in a press release. 

“It is absolutely unacceptable that the Senate Republicans would turn their back on their constituents who they are honor-bound to represent here in this building. They need to return and do the jobs they were elected to do.” 

The climate bill seeks to create a cap-and-trade system to regulate greenhouse gas emissions in several public sectors. It would be the second state to enact such legislation, after California.   ...

Nope not legal. That is why they are being arrested.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

On 6/20/2019 at 9:11 PM, markslawson said:

I was intrigued enough by the estimate to look at the actual report. It doesn't pass the laugh test. What level of increase is being projected that would require such substantial barriers in 21 years? Amazingly the report doesn't actually say directly - at least not that I could see. It refers to other reports. Oooookkkaayyy, what can we say about current increases in sea levels? Here is a graph of sea level increases since the early 1990s. This amounts to about 100 mm or 10 cms for the whole period or about half the height of a smallish paper back book with no acceleration apparent to any layman observer. By matching the satellite records to measurements by stuff like tidal gauges, scientists have managed to find an acceleration (I have my doubts, but never mind) but that still doesn't add up to any increases that would require these coastal communities to lift a finger. These guys are obviously expecting some sort of dramatic surge but it would help if they spelled that out rather than burbled about projections.. When can we expect this surge? What would the warning signs be? Also, cutting emissions now ain't t going to do anything about sea level increases in just 20 years or so.. waste of time..    

Even just a few inches change in average ocean level can create a difference of feet in storm surge. That is why a few inches matter.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

On 6/21/2019 at 2:35 AM, Arjun said:

SHHHH! Look at you, with your observations and data. This sort of stuff is kryptonite to climate changers. also notice that they conveniently changed anthropomorphic global warming to just climate change. When someone says, look I dont think humans have the ability to change something like this. They say look, he's a science denier. The grand solar minimum is incoming, that is why they are so desperate to pass these measures as quickly as possible. Once we enter the minimum, cooling shall start so it will get very difficult to pass legislation based on AGW.

We are already far enough in that we should have seen cooling. 

That we are still warming despite this should scare everyone.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

On 6/22/2019 at 5:15 AM, Arjun said:

What would Bill "the mechanical engineering guy" Nye say about this?

He would say we tried reason science and data for 30 years.

Now it’s time to get mad.

[markslawson + 1,057]

3 minutes ago, Bill the Science Nerd said:

Even just a few inches change in average ocean level can create a difference of feet in storm surge. That is why a few inches matter.

I'm well aware of storm surges. You'll find that all the coastal communities already have allowances for those built into foreshore regulations, so the few additional inches/centimetres should not make much difference. In any case, the report could actually say this but it doesn't seem to - in fact it lacks any coherent explanation of why the barriers are needed. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

17 minutes ago, Bill the Science Nerd said:

Talk to people living in Miami Florida. Flooding at high tide is becoming a regular thing because of sea level rise due to global warming.

Not really, Bill.  What is happening is that the land itself is subsiding.  It looks like the water is rising but instead the soil is sinking. 

What causes that?  In a word, pumping of groundwater.  Florida is flat, and has no major rivers.  The water source is pumped from underground.  Keep on pumping, and eventually you get these huge sinkholes - for which Florida is rapidly becoming famous  (infamous?).  Florida is sinking away due to profligate groundwater pumping, to support all those people moving in to South Florida (especially). 

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

On 6/22/2019 at 8:18 PM, markslawson said:

Meredith - what'll you find on closer inspection is that this means very little and sort-of amounts to a scam. Overall EIA data points to about 5.6 per cent of power in USA being generated by wind, another 2.6 per cent is listed as "other" which would include solar (plus diesel and some odds and ends). When the Texas renewable assets are generating full tilt to the point of exceeding the state's demand, the excess power is  exported while Texas claims that the part it takes is renewable. Texas more or less has its own grid, so the question becomes how big are the grids around it (not states, grids which may include several states), and how much intermittent capacity they have, and how good are the interconnectors. Price barely matters in this context (it regularly goes down to zero in Europe). At present wind's overall share of generation is manageable, and never mind the press releases issued by individual states, but if states like NY start building serious renewable capacity without proper back-up then there will be serious trouble.  

Renewable generation has not been an issue anywhere yet.

Last year the U.K. got 1/3 of its electricity from renewable sources.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

On 6/22/2019 at 8:30 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

^ important point, usually overlooked by most media and most politicians.

So, where has that actually been a problem?

[Meredith Poor + 894]

17 hours ago, markslawson said:

I think you've messed up your units - 19 MW is nothing but you say its 54 per cent of total demand. If it is 54 per cent of total demand then sorry, they are, in effect, exporting. I take your point that it may not be officially from the wind farms, but simply redirecting various power plants on the outskirts to other grids.. 54 per cent is an enormous load at any one point and potentially a major problem for the network.. just think what happens when the wind dies and remember that conventional plants can take a long time to start up (exception is hydro).

Incidentally, you say, never exported. I tried looking at the ERCOT site just now but can't get on.. do you have a source?

Sorry. Gigawatts (GW).

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

6 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Not really, Bill.  What is happening is that the land itself is subsiding.  It looks like the water is rising but instead the soil is sinking. 

What causes that?  In a word, pumping of groundwater.  Florida is flat, and has no major rivers.  The water source is pumped from underground.  Keep on pumping, and eventually you get these huge sinkholes - for which Florida is rapidly becoming famous  (infamous?).  Florida is sinking away due to profligate groundwater pumping, to support all those people moving in to South Florida (especially). 

That is simply false. There is no recorded subsidence in or around Miami Beach, which is where most fair weather flooding occurs.

Some areas like Key Biscayne Bay are sinking because of the loss of mangrove trees and drying of peat.

Florida is known for sinkholes and those are not a new phenomenon but are located inland and have nothing to do with flooding of coastal areas. Read about Land-o-Lakes for more about sinkholes.

[WCS + 13]

So politicians would spend billions on sea walls and not a cent on carbon capture units that are available today. Makes you wonder.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

4 minutes ago, WCS said:

So politicians would spend billions on sea walls and not a cent on carbon capture units that are available today. Makes you wonder.

That is because sea walls are orders of magnitude cheaper.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

28 minutes ago, markslawson said:

I'm well aware of storm surges. You'll find that all the coastal communities already have allowances for those built into foreshore regulations, so the few additional inches/centimetres should not make much difference. In any case, the report could actually say this but it doesn't seem to - in fact it lacks any coherent explanation of why the barriers are needed. 

You didn’t read what I said.

those additional inches add feet to the storm surge.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Jeez, I really wish the "Ignore User" spam filter worked for moderators.

I do get tired of climate alarmists invading forums dedicated to oil professionals, and preaching their climate religion.

While climate alarmists are free to preach their beliefs (amusingly crouched in the misleading term of "science") I wish I had the option to filter their endless spam here, so I didn't have to be bombarded with their religious beliefs.

Lately it seems like having a Jehovah's Witness blathering in my face at my front door, but I can't close the door to ignore their preaching.  I've heard it all before, for years.

 

[WCS + 13]

9 minutes ago, Bill the Science Nerd said:

That is because sea walls are orders of magnitude cheaper.

You seriously think sea walls are cheaper ? Cheaper than planting a tree? If that were the case then no one would be wasting their time trying to capture carbon . Even Bill Gates is funding  this carbon capture technology. The cost to have everyone drive electric together with cost of infrastructure your total will come to over 30 trillion dollars extra now that could fund a lot of carbon capture units.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

10 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Jeez, I really wish the "Ignore User" spam filter worked for moderators.

I do get tired of climate alarmists invading forums dedicated to oil professionals, and preaching their climate religion.

While climate alarmists are free to preach their beliefs (amusingly crouched in the misleading term of "science") I wish I had the option to filter their endless spam here, so I didn't have to be bombarded with their religious beliefs.

Lately it seems like having a Jehovah's Witness blathering in my face at my front door, but I can't close the door to ignore their preaching.  I've heard it all before, for years.

 

You could easily silence yourself. That would be one shill down.

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

3 minutes ago, WCS said:

You seriously think sea walls are cheaper ? Cheaper than planting a tree? If that were the case then no one would be wasting their time trying to capture carbon . Even Bill Gates is funding  this carbon capture technology. The cost to have everyone drive electric together with cost of infrastructure your total will come to over 30 trillion dollars extra now that could fund a lot of carbon capture units.

A tree won’t cut it.

replanting every forest cut down over the last century will not put much of a dent in the CO2 humans have added.

No one is wasting their time on current carbon capture tech except as greenwashing from oil companies.

Even Bill Gates knows that is a long shot for undeveloped technologies.

No, everyone driving BEVs would actually be slightly cheaper as BEVs have a lower Total Cost of Ownership for comparable cars and that infrastructure has been talked about for the last couple of decades so you can’t blame EVs for that.

[Boat + 1,323]

By far the states that produce the most wind are red Republican states. The anti renewable rhetoric is just a typical media stunt by Republicans. Kinda like meeting at a bar to discuss proabition.

[WCS + 13]

48 minutes ago, Bill the Science Nerd said:

A tree won’t cut it.

replanting every forest cut down over the last century will not put much of a dent in the CO2 humans have added.

No one is wasting their time on current carbon capture tech except as greenwashing from oil companies.

Even Bill Gates knows that is a long shot for undeveloped technologies.

No, everyone driving BEVs would actually be slightly cheaper as BEVs have a lower Total Cost of Ownership for comparable cars and that infrastructure has been talked about for the last couple of decades so you can’t blame EVs for that.

Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Feb 20/ 2019

” There is enough room in the worlds existing parks forests and abandoned land to plant 1.2 trillion additional trees which would have the CO2 storage capacity to cancel out a decade of carbon dioxide emissions.”

” Tree planting is becoming an increasingly popular tool to combat climate change”

 

[Bill the Science Nerd + 73]

1 minute ago, WCS said:

Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Feb 20/ 2019

” There is enough room in the worlds existing parks forests and abandoned land to plant 1.2 trillion additional trees which would have the CO2 storage capacity to cancel out a decade of carbon dioxide emissions.”

” Tree planting is becoming an increasingly popular tool to combat climate change”

 

One decade of CO2 is what I call not much of a dent.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,187]

On 6/22/2019 at 2:15 AM, Arjun said:

What would Bill "the mechanical engineering guy" Nye say about this?

And Bill Nye, the piss poor mechanical engineer was effectively fired from Sundstrand(bought by Allied Signal, bought by Honeywell).  My father had the misfortune of "working" with him... or in this case, NOT working as he was inept and never moved an inch without 3 directives.