Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
Everything Else Forum - View Post
Previous section Next section Previous page Next page Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Page 1 of 12
Topic:
Global Warming
This thread has 178 replies. Displaying posts 1 through 15.
Post 1 made on Sunday August 11, 2019 at 11:27
BizarroTerl
Active Member
Joined:
Posts:
October 2002
519
In another forum I entered a discussion on global warming. I monitor several news sources and understand the critical urgency of this issue

It seems the deniers cannot converse logically about it, can only quote/link known zero reputation sites, and then stoop to the same old "liberal plot" attacks when pressed.

Why is this?
Post 2 made on Sunday August 11, 2019 at 11:58
Mac Burks (39)
Elite Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2007
17,349
Some people watch those late night get rich quick scheme shows and call up and hand over their credit card information. Other people have properly working brains. Nothing we can do about it i guess. This is fine...

Avid Stamp Collector - I really love 39 Cent Stamps
OP | Post 3 made on Sunday August 11, 2019 at 16:29
BizarroTerl
Active Member
Joined:
Posts:
October 2002
519
I really wish they were/are right. Because if they are right and the science is wrong the future isn't as dire as it seems.
Post 4 made on Sunday August 11, 2019 at 18:41
davidcasemore
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2003
3,094
Look what was happening in in Galveston over the weekend. Over 100 degrees for 40 straight hours.

Thank god the National Weather Service uses those fake thermometers from China! It was really only about 60 degrees. Fake News! Chinese Hoax!

If it really was that hot, I'd want to build a wall between Texas and the other states to keep that climate change vermin from invading New York.
Fins: Still Slamming' - One Trunk at a Time
Post 5 made on Sunday August 11, 2019 at 21:30
Mac Burks (39)
Elite Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2007
17,349
Even if climate change is not a real thing...what's the worst that could happen? We clean up the planet? We stop funding middle eastern terrorism? We lower everyone's energy costs?
Avid Stamp Collector - I really love 39 Cent Stamps
Post 6 made on Tuesday August 13, 2019 at 03:25
djy
RC Moderator
Joined:
Posts:
August 2001
33,581
On August 11, 2019 at 21:30, Mac Burks (39) said...
Even if climate change is not a real thing...what's the worst that could happen? We clean up the planet? We stop funding middle eastern terrorism? We lower everyone's energy costs?

Oh, climate change is a very real phenomenon, even though 'climate change denier' remains the favoured derogatory term aimed at those of us sceptical of IPCC alarmist cant. More of a concern to me, though, is the financial, social, political and environmental cost of 'combatting' something which is, almost certainly, overwhelmingly natural.

With the recent passing of Christopher Booker, there is now, in the UK, little relief from the almost constant barrage of 'we're all gonna fry Ďn' die' claims; particularly from the outrageously partisan BBC. In response to those ridiculous Extinction Rebellion protests, politicians of all ilk and level are now falling over themselves to promote their virtue signalling credentials. Good lord, even my local council has seen fit to declare a 'climate emergency'. What they haven't done, though, is any research or analysis into whether it is necessary or the financial implications thereof.

Energy costs, certainly in the UK, will not fall, they will spiral out of control. Energy poverty (the ability to pay for food or heating) is already a major issue for low-income families; thus, with the shutting off of natural gas (the cheapest form of heating), this can only get worse. And we only have to look across the channel, to see the popular response to a mere fuel surcharge, to get a flavour of things to come when the effects of May's ridiculous net-zero pledge begins to bite.

Last edited by djy on August 13, 2019 04:50.
To get Brexit through Teresa May fell on her sword - and missed.
Post 7 made on Tuesday August 13, 2019 at 11:55
Mac Burks (39)
Elite Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2007
17,349
Yes we do have "we're all gonna die" alarmists on one side of the topic. We also have the "how on earth will we pay for it" alarmists on the other side.

It seems...in the US anyway...that we ALWAYS have the money for some things but NEVER have the money for others. A few extra billion (with a B) for the military...ABSOLUTELY! A few extra million (with an M) for education...DO YOU THINK MONEY GROWS ON TREES?!?

Replacing old windows with new windows has an expensive out of pocket up front cost but the energy savings will eventually eclipse that up front cost. Natural gas is cheap? Were there no up front costs? Those pipes magically appeared? Wind and Solar will have upfront costs like everything else but the energy they produce will eventually be the same or less expensive than any fossil fuel based energy available today. Carbon emissions will be reduced and in 10-20 years no one will care or even remember what it cost to make the switch just like no one cares or remembers what it cost to get natural gas piped in.

Had the world not allowed itself to be bribed and held hostage by the fossil fuel industry we could have started our path towards renewable energy decades earlier and those upfront costs would have been paid for long ago. And its quite possible the world would have never heard of "Middle Eastern Terrorists" because the west wouldn't have spent the last 50 years indirectly and directly funding terror networks.
Avid Stamp Collector - I really love 39 Cent Stamps
OP | Post 8 made on Tuesday August 13, 2019 at 16:23
BizarroTerl
Active Member
Joined:
Posts:
October 2002
519
Sadly, at least for the US, climate change has become a political debate when it really should be a debate about man's impact on the planet and its future. We have two ensconced groups both more interested in their view winning than dealing with a very apparent and increasingly urgent problem.
OP | Post 9 made on Tuesday August 13, 2019 at 16:24
BizarroTerl
Active Member
Joined:
Posts:
October 2002
519
I fear we've become the frog. By the time we realize the stove is on it'll be too late.
Post 10 made on Tuesday August 13, 2019 at 18:04
djy
RC Moderator
Joined:
Posts:
August 2001
33,581
On August 13, 2019 at 11:55, Mac Burks (39) said...
Yes we do have "we're all gonna die" alarmists on one side of the topic. We also have the "how on earth will we pay for it" alarmists on the other side.

It seems...in the US anyway...that we ALWAYS have the money for some things but NEVER have the money for others. A few extra billion (with a B) for the military...ABSOLUTELY! A few extra million (with an M) for education...DO YOU THINK MONEY GROWS ON TREES?!?

Replacing old windows with new windows has an expensive out of pocket up front cost but the energy savings will eventually eclipse that up front cost. Natural gas is cheap? Were there no up front costs? Those pipes magically appeared? Wind and Solar will have upfront costs like everything else but the energy they produce will eventually be the same or less expensive than any fossil fuel based energy available today. Carbon emissions will be reduced and in 10-20 years no one will care or even remember what it cost to make the switch just like no one cares or remembers what it cost to get natural gas piped in.

Had the world not allowed itself to be bribed and held hostage by the fossil fuel industry we could have started our path towards renewable energy decades earlier and those upfront costs would have been paid for long ago. And its quite possible the world would have never heard of "Middle Eastern Terrorists" because the west wouldn't have spent the last 50 years indirectly and directly funding terror networks.

I admire the optimism, but belief in the prospect of CO2 reduction sooner rather than later (assuming thatís a good thing) is misplaced while the likes of China and India continue to build fossil-fuelled power stations with impunity. Similarly (certainly as far as the UK is concerned) your belief renewables can ever compete with dispatchable generation is also wide of the mark, by quite some considerable margin. You talk of millions and billions, but the reality will, in fact, be counted in the trillions.

Firstly, one has to appreciate that since the 2008 crash, successive UK Governments have been striving to get borrowing back under control. Itís working (albeit at a slower pace than expected), but the net result is a massive increase in national debt - from circa £500b to £1,806b. Money is indeed tight. (NB It may be of interest to note that UK debt interest payments are now the governmentís fourth-largest annual outlay. They even outstrip defence spending.)

2008 also saw the introduction of the infamous Climate Change Act; a cobbled-together litany of wishful thinking with no explanation of how its aim of an 80% reduction in (1990 level) CO2 output was to be achieved. To date, the UK remains the only country in the world with a legally binding CO2 reduction goal. Of course, muppet May has since committed us to a net-zero target, but again there is no explanation of how itís to be achieved or, indeed, its cost. Back of the envelope calculations, though, makes the future look grim.

For example, the UK National (electricity) Grid peak capacity is, at present, circa 60GW. This is supplied by a variety of fuels (plus several load balancing interconnectors from mainland Europe and Ireland) of which the UK wind power component comprises 9,929 turbines (of various output level) with a nameplate capacity of 21.5GW. However, due to their inherent inefficiency, this output is never achieved. Indeed, at the time of writing, present UK wind generation stands at a mere 2.446GW, representing just 8% of present demand. And even if we were to use their generally recognised efficiency of circa 35%, a further 19,000 enormous 8MW turbines would, in theory, be required to supply 60GW. But it gets worse.

You appear somewhat bemused as to why Natural Gas is relatively cheap when compared to electricity prices. In answer, the UK has long had a countrywide gas grid and connection to it is regularly made when new housing projects are undertaken. Thus, more often than not, there are no upfront costs as its supply is already Ďbuilt-iní. This is set to change, however, with new legislation banning gas supplies in new homes by 2025 being the likely precursor to a complete ban further down the line. The issue here is that from an energy supply standpoint the UK domestic gas supply, alone, is easily a match for the electricity grid, and with the inevitable increase in demand for the latter (plus the increased demand for electric transport recharging), the number of required turbines could easily top a mind-boggling 50,000. And the cost? Of course, this is highly speculative, but if taking the Burbo Bank Extension as an example, which is an offshore array comprising 32 Vestas 8MW turbines, cost £800m and took 2-3 years to build. At this cost and rate of installation, a further 50,000 of them would be valued at around £1.25t and take almost 4,000 years to build. Think Iíll be dead by then.

Of course, no one is expecting investment in just one energy source, but with the shelving of two new nuclear plants through lack of investment (Hinkley C is still ongoing but at ridiculous cost for a mere 3GW) the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) is now looking towards hydrogen. The problem here, however (other than its predilection towards going bang when mixed with air Ė of which Iíve had personal experience), is that the most cost-effective method of producing hydrogen, in the vast quantities required, would be the steam reformation of Natural Gas, and the CO2 has to go somewhere. Thus, its use is predicated on a functionally efficient carbon capture and storage process, which has yet to be developed. (Consider also that if they are successful in producing such a process, why would we need inefficient renewables to produce electricity?)

Then there's the cost of upgrading the grid, to carry the additional load, and the upgrading of housing insulation, which alone has been costed at up to £2t. Consider also the social aspect, where the phasing out of fossil-fuelled transport coincides with the worryingly very real possibility of a cobalt cliff limiting the availability of electric vehicles; assuming, of course, one can afford to charge the thing. Furthermore, with a rail network, only half electrified, long-distance travel (by UK standards) will also be affected. Here, some believe hydrogen could be utilised to power the present diesel-electric routes, but its low energy density likely means only lightweight trains could be used. And so it goes on.

I could add the tale of the Kafkaesque/Orwellian smart-meter fiasco. The closing down of UK industry (the car sector is already being affected). Concerns over where the Government is going to recoup the annual £40b+ duty it presently makes from fuel sales. Concerns for the environment and avian wildlife, following the likely prospect of increased on-shore wind farms. Concerns over large deposits of man-made CO2 which could pose a major threat if things go wrong. And, of course, from where the hell is the money going to come?

Comrade Corbyn believes Modern Monetary Theory, which is neither modern nor a monetary theory (it's merely a license to print money), is the answer. However, as Antony Mueller puts it, Modern Monetary Theory qualifies as the financial equivalent to weapons of mass destruction. Those gullible youngsters protesting with Extinct Rebellion (itís easy to be idealistic and passionate when one doesnít have to pay the bills) really have no idea whatís on the horizon Ė and by that, I donít mean climate change.

As Iíve mentioned elsewhere, sometimes I'm rather glad Iím the age I am.


Update: As an adjunct to my concern over our increasing dependence on intermittent renewables, this story, in relation to the recent UK power outage, highlights not only the mess recent governments have made of our energy supply network, but also the need for dependable dispatchable power generation.

Last edited by djy on August 15, 2019 08:07.
To get Brexit through Teresa May fell on her sword - and missed.
Post 11 made on Tuesday August 13, 2019 at 18:25
djy
RC Moderator
Joined:
Posts:
August 2001
33,581
On August 13, 2019 at 16:23, BizarroTerl said...
Sadly, at least for the US, climate change has become a political debate when it really should be a debate about man's impact on the planet and its future. We have two ensconced groups both more interested in their view winning than dealing with a very apparent and increasingly urgent problem.

From my perspective, it's not a question of winning, it's a question of defending the scientific method. This requires maintaining a healthy scepticism, particularly of unverified climate models which bear little relation to the real world.

As mentioned above, I quite agree that climate change is a very apparent phenomenon, but increasingly urgent?

Last edited by djy on August 14, 2019 01:56.
To get Brexit through Teresa May fell on her sword - and missed.
Post 12 made on Tuesday August 13, 2019 at 19:29
davidcasemore
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2003
3,094
On August 13, 2019 at 16:24, BizarroTerl said...
I fear we've become the frog. By the time we realize the stove is on it'll be too late.

It's already too late. We've long passed the tipping point with feedback loops in full force. It's not so much the actual change in climate which will get us first, it's all of the side problems this causes:

- Famine and water shortages

- War because of famine and water shortages (see Syria)

- Disease outbreaks because of war

- Plagues because of disease outbreaks and overuse of antibiotics (see anti-vaccine idiots and industrial farming)

- Plus, flooding, severe weather and forest fires etc. (see Russian permafrost)

If I can time it right, I'll die along with the rest of civilization!
Fins: Still Slamming' - One Trunk at a Time
Post 13 made on Saturday August 17, 2019 at 11:43
Anthony
Ultimate Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2001
28,438
On August 11, 2019 at 11:27, BizarroTerl said...
In another forum I entered a discussion on global warming. I monitor several news sources and understand the critical urgency of this issue

It seems the deniers cannot converse logically about it, can only quote/link known zero reputation sites, and then stoop to the same old "liberal plot" attacks when pressed.

Why is this?

I think it is too easy to look at it as two monoliths. (i.e is there global warming? yes/no)

someone could go with no for many reasons.

-- selfish denier --- I will be dead before it becomes a problem, so I don't care
-- economic denier --- my life is expensive enough if accepting we need to do something about it makes life more expensive then I would rather we wait to do something.
-- benefit denier --- for example [Link: business.financialpost.com]
Ö

even on the yes side things are not that simple. Are we too late, can we do it painlessly, how Much should we spend....

---------
For me it is a big issue and one we need to try and address and spend a bit of cash fixing it. On the other hand I think some crazy ass schemes could have even wort effects then doing nothing. I think we need to decrease our reliance on burning fossil fuels, I think we need more stringent rules for burning fossil fuels.
...
Post 14 made on Saturday August 17, 2019 at 20:37
davidcasemore
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2003
3,094
On August 17, 2019 at 11:43, Anthony said...
 I think we need to decrease our reliance on burning fossil fuels, I think we need more stringent rules for burning fossil fuels.

If only the man-child-baby who calls other people fat without seeing the irony wasn't in the White House. He's doing everything he can to move us backwards.
Fins: Still Slamming' - One Trunk at a Time
Post 15 made on Sunday August 18, 2019 at 13:30
Anthony
Ultimate Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2001
28,438
On August 17, 2019 at 20:37, davidcasemore said...
He's doing everything he can to move us backwards.

I won't disagree with that. But you do live in a democracy,

1) every democracy gets the leader it deserve since they voted the person in (even if as an individual the person voted differently)
2) if you are not happy vote him out.
...
Find in this thread:
Page 1 of 12


Jump to


Protected Feature Before you can reply to a message...
You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now.

Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.

Hosting Services by ipHouse