cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Future Unity smh
Climate in the 21st Century
- Thread starter Jimdamick
- Start date
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
so abandon the whole idea because it's not perfect?
a fair amount of solar power being used instead of coal and oil isn't preferable?
i know my premise was that they could run the entire world on solar...so they can't, they can still run a big ass chunk of it.
more than enough to justify the expense, since the expense conveniently needs to be taken, as the existing grid is starting to decay badly.
thinks like hydro and geothermal can take up a fair amount of the night time slack, they wouldn't necessarilly have to default back to fossil fuels..
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
it snowed...
climate change is real. it needs to be addressed...on an international level.
in the mean time, do us all a favor, and quit watching youtube and tiktok....
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Your idea was premised on TOTAL carbon-energy replacement. I was speaking to the technical challenges of that.
Doing it piecemeal will happen anyway. But I remind you that you said EVERY, so why the moving of goalposts?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Search on my phone is somehow fukt. But if you look at Future Unity, it’s sensationalist crap that makes flat-earthers look sober.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
because this wasn't a neener argument till you made it one...i asked a question based on information in an article i had looked at...the math seemed valid, but they didn't go into the distribution problems...once they became apparent, i started to offer other suggestions, not to move goal posts.
you did not seem to be offering any suggestions...
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
why am i not surprised, even slightly?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Sure I did. Getting total coverage under the terms you set requires transmission across large stretches of salt water.
(edit) my answers are associated with the wrong quotes. Please swap’em.
injinji
Well-Known Member
Maybe the wind blows at night in the midwest? I still think Geothermal is going to part of the solution if we look far enough down the road.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Because the initial premise specified solar. Me, I think fusion might make some welcome cavalry-type sounds soon.
injinji
Well-Known Member
It's just like it's been for a while, 25 years in the future.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
for at least fifty years. But there has been steady and real technical progress. I think improving computer models of the plasma are the biggest advances, even more than the material science end of things. Our exponential computational power gives me real hope here.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
i'm not holding out a lot of hope, there have been too many miraculous breakthroughs that weren't actually that miraculous for me to get excited about fusion anymore. tell me when you're actually producing power with it, and then i'll get excited.
i'd rather pursue a combination of solar, hydro, wind, and geothermal, using each one in the areas they're best suited for.
we should be able to do away with every oil and coal powered energy plant in north America in the immediate future, with not too much effort.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
(giggling, ducking) but we can keep natural gas, right?
Fusion may be a long time coming. In the meantime, wind and solar have some catching-up to do.
Frankly, I think hydro has had its day. Reservoirs are filling with silt and harming downstream ecologies, with salmon as a salient (at a cataract, literally) example.
Geothermal will be fine for low-grade energy, like the Europeans are using for home heat etc.
But geothermal for electricity requires a big temperature gradient, and you’ve seen me lock horns with DIY over deep geothermal, which I believe is a nonstarter for a mix of reasons.
I live in an area dominated by huge solar ranches and thousands of windmills. It’s rare for both to be idled, except this past summer we had a lot of sweltering becalmed nights.
But spreading generation around (it could be calm here but blowing a gale in Wyoming) … I agree with you that the combo could meet many of our residential and urban/industrial needs.
Currently we make an awful lot of electricity by burning petroleum, and stinkers like Manchin think coal is money. Gas can keep enough of those plants going while we build greener infrastructure. And air travel will need petroleum. It currently uses like eight percent of total production. Shipping will maybe go to computerized airfoil sails supplemented by a bit of solar-electric to get through bands of calm.
StonedGardener
Well-Known Member
Well, boys & girls or whatever, the End of Humankind seems to be approaching relatively rapidly & it seems we/they can't/won't do fucking anything substantial to stop it.
In other words we're fucked as a species/organism & it appears that it's inevitable.
A new United Nations report shows the world is on a “catastrophic pathway” toward a hotter future unless governments make more ambitious pledges to cut greenhouse gas emissions, the head of the UN said last week.
That’s the latest blunt assessment by the United Nations in its 42 page report. The report says that most countries have failed to uphold promises to make deep cuts to greenhouse gas pollution, in order to avoid the most catastrophic effects of climate change.
According to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, meeting the more ambitious target of a 2.7 degree Fahrenheit temperature rise would require eliminating fossil fuels almost entirely by 2050.
A review of all the national commitments submitted by signatories of the Paris climate accord until July 30, found that based on detailed information from signatories, this would result in emissions rising nearly 16 percent by 2030, compared with 2010 levels.
“The 16 percent increase is a huge cause for concern,” according to Patricia Espinosa, the UN’s chief climate negotiator, reports the BBC.
“It is in sharp contrast with the calls by science for rapid, sustained and large-scale emission reductions to prevent the most severe climate consequences and suffering, especially of the most vulnerable, throughout the world.”
This shows the world is heading in the wrong direction. Scientists recently confirmed that to avoid the worst impacts of hotter conditions, global carbon emissions needed to be cut by 45 percent by 2030.
That is only 14 years away folks, to curtail at the minimum & reduce simultaneously carbon emissions, or it's fucking game over.
Hah, Ha & Ha
What are the odds of that occuring?
None?
The COP26 climate conference is scheduled to take place in Glasgow in just over six weeks’ time. The main focus of the event is to keep alive hopes of limiting the rise in global temperatures by persuading nations to cut their emissions.
Yet, out of the 191 countries taking part in the agreement, only 113 have so far come up with improved pledges. Alok Sharma, the British minister who will chair the COP26 conference, said nations that had ambitious climate plans were “already bending the curve of emissions downwards.”
“But without action from all countries, especially the biggest economies, these efforts risk being in vain,” Sharma added. A recent study by Climate Action Tracker found that of the G20 group of leading industrial nations, only a handful including the UK and the US have strengthened their targets to cut emissions.
View attachment 4991901
Based on the data from the Climate Action Tracker, it is apparent that many countries are trying to fall in line with their targets, but the UN is still waiting for updated plans from many asshole countries. “There are some real laggard nations that we hope to hear from,” says the policy director for the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. They include China, which is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, as well as Japan, Australia, South Korea, and Brazil.
Another analysis shows that China, India, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey – together responsible for 33 percent of greenhouse gases – have yet to submit updated plans, like not even a fucking word
None/nada/zip
Additionally, the study finds that Brazil, Mexico, and Russia all expect their emissions to grow rather than shrink.
Yup, we're on the right track alright.
G
Excellent!!!
Humankind will abandon all tribal instincts & greed & come together and save the Planet!!!
I doubt it
This ain't fucking Hollywood, you dumb fucks, & I don't see a happy ending here.
None whatsoever.
Very well said ! We must be on a precipice before big change !We can move away from those things, but it is also why many will die. Like a covid denier having to get sick to accept that it's a real disease, shits gotta get bad before anyone
Reality is a bitch, ain't it.
Wear a mask/get a jab
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
we should really be already doing this stuff, and those that are standing in the way need to move, or be moved.
it's way past time to put up with any stupid horseshit, we need to start setting some shit right. things are already going to get bad, we could limit how bad, and how long, but it's time to quit playing, and do something.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
shit’s gonna herm
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
just give it extra calamg, it'll be good for about a Lb.
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
It was basically mid-late spring here yesterday. I think it might have been too short of a dormancy to wake up the apple/cherry trees, but it is getting really sketchy for those blossoms to pop at the right time with these late snows/false springs.
Seeing mosquitoes in January in Michigan is a bummer.
Seeing mosquitoes in January in Michigan is a bummer.