Climate change

[Mugwump]

^ Skids, Kukla might be right .... but he might be wrong, because we cannot disprove his theory. We know that CO2 and CH4 trap heat in a thermal system, and we know that the ppm of these gases is rising fast.

I don't think we have to decide what is right and wrong here - but we should acknowledge that we are taking an unacceptable risk with our children's future by continuing to throw CO2 into the atmosphere, when there is a good probability that the mainstream hypothesis is correct, and we can see a path to a different energy mix.

[Skids]

[Skids]

[Mugwump]

[watt price tully]

[Skids]

[Skids]

The effects of long term oxygen deprivation on the brain, called cerebral hypoxia, are known and some sound reminiscent of the general rise of stupidity in the industrialized world.

And the belief that man can 'control' the climate is clear evidence of that!

Look, I'm all for renewable energy; recycling & all the other clean solutions. Fossil fuels will run out and we need an alternative.

We have as much ability to control the climate as we do to stop the next super volcanoe erupting or meteor hitting the planet... none!

The climate change furfy is a waste of trillions of dollars.... hey, they could use that money to feed and house as many refugees as you like..... but then, how many more people can this rock sustain?

[David]

I think this chart posted by Tannin a while back is a good representation of how humans can and have altered the climate:

http://magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=80918

[Skids]

[David]

Data from a billion or a million years ago wouldn't change anything. What the graph shows is that a 22,000-year system of long-term, slow fluctuations � where a few degrees is all the difference between a) the kind of climate that allowed agriculture and human civilisation to flourish and b) a full-on ice age � has suddenly taken a sharp left-hand turn, and the prevailing expert view is that this has been caused by a rapid increase in CO2 emissions, and that this trajectory will continue at the same rate if emissions aren't drastically reduced.

If 4 degrees was all it took to get an ice age, then the prospect of gaining a couple of degrees in under a century should be terrifying. We need to listen to what the science is telling us, not the conspiracy theorising of an often financially motivated minority.

[Skids]

And then there's this......

How Green Are Those Solar Panels, Really?
As the industry grows, so does concern over the environmental impact.

Fabricating the panels requires caustic chemicals such as sodium hydroxide and hydrofluoric acid, and the process uses water as well as electricity, the production of which emits greenhouse gases. It also creates waste. These problems could undercut solar's ability to fight climate change and reduce environmental toxics.

A new ranking of 37 solar manufacturers, the Solar Scorecard, shows that some companies are doing better than others. Chinese manufacturer Trina scored best, followed by California-

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2014/11/141111-solar-panel-manufacturing-sustainability-ranking/


And this ......


So what�s the carbon foot print of a wind turbine with 45 tons of rebar & 481m3 of concrete?
Andy�s Rant
4 August 2014

Its carbon footprint is massive � try 241.85 tons of CO2.

Here�s the breakdown of the CO2 numbers.

To create a 1,000 Kg of pig iron, you start with 1,800 Kg of iron ore, 900 Kg of coking coal 450 Kg of limestone. The blast furnace consumes 4,500 Kg of air. The temperature at the core of the blast furnace reaches nearly 1,600 degrees C (about 3,000 degrees F).

The pig iron is then transferred to the basic oxygen furnace to make steel.

1,350 Kg of CO2 is emitted per 1,000 Kg pig iron produced.

A further 1,460 Kg CO2 is emitted per 1,000 Kg of Steel produced so all up 2,810 Kg CO2 is emitted.

45 tons of rebar (steel) are required so that equals 126.45 tons of CO2 are emitted.

To create a 1,000 Kg of Portland cement, calcium carbonate (60%), silicon (20%), aluminium (10%), iron (10%) and very small amounts of other ingredients are heated in a large kiln to over 1,500 degrees C to convert the raw materials into clinker. The clinker is then interground with other ingredients to produce the final cement product. When cement is mixed with water, sand and gravel forms the rock-like mass know as concrete.

An average of 927 Kg of CO2 is emitted per 1,000 Kg of Portland cement. On average, concrete has 10% cement, with the balance being gravel (41%), sand (25%), water (18%) and air (6%). One cubic metre of concrete weighs approx. 2,400 Kg so approx. 240 Kg of CO2 is emitted for every cubic metre.

481m3 of concrete are required so that equals 115.4 tons of CO2 are emitted.

Now I have not included the emissions of the mining of the raw materials or the transportation of the fabricated materials to the turbine site so the emission calculation above would be on the low end at best.

[Skids]

Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth'

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36130346

Nic Lewis, an independent scientist often critical of the IPCC, told BBC News: "The magnitude of the increase in vegetation appears to be considerably larger than suggested by previous studies.

"This suggests that projected atmospheric CO2 levels in IPCC scenarios are significantly too high, which implies that global temperature rises projected by IPCC models are also too high, even if the climate is as sensitive to CO2 increases as the models imply."
And Prof Judith Curry, the former chair of Earth and atmospheric sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, added: "It is inappropriate to dismiss the arguments of the so-called contrarians, since their disagreement with the consensus reflects conflicts of values and a preference for the empirical (i.e. what has been observed) versus the hypothetical (i.e. what is projected from climate models).

"These disagreements are at the heart of the public debate on climate change, and these issues should be debated, not dismissed."





Judith A. Curry

Nationality American
Education B.S. (1974) in geography, Ph.D. in geophysical sciences (1982)
Alma mater Northern Illinois University, University of Chicago
Thesis The formation of continental polar air (1982)

Judith A. Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She is a member of the National Research Council's Climate Research Committee

[Pies4shaw]

^^^^ This is what we call an "externality effect". It might be useful, though, to have some more shade as the effects of climate change take hold.

[stui magpie]

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/155142928411/best-arguments-for-and-against-climate-model

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/155304094981/what-if-climate-change-causes-more-co2

Climate Change is yet another topic where there can be no rational debate, as to question it is to be labelled a denier and abused and insulted.

It's really hard to get a handle on it's impact in Australia because we have the prevailing competing El Nino and La Nina weather patterns.

Is it getting hotter in Melbourne? In the 80's we had a grandfinal played in 30+ degrees and a Melbourne Cup run in 40+.

I tend on the side that using more renewable energy rather than burning fossil fuel can only be a good thing, but the big picture needs to be looked at here, not just the rhetoric.

[Pies4shaw]

No, there can be no rational debate because it is not capable of rational dispute by people who aren't climate-scientists. They can debate it amongst themselves. Charles Darwin, eg, wasn't a professional journalist peddling an angle out of self-interest.