| Pages:
1
..
104
105
106
107
108
..
111 |
JZ
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9341
Registered: 10-3-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
Electric Cars Emit More Particulate Pollution
They have greater tire wear, the source of most particulate matter. California is trying to conceal that fact.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/electric-cars-emit-more-soot-ca...
[Edited on 3-5-2024 by JZ]
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 17404
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
California leading the nation! As always!
Where Electric Vehicles Are (and Aren’t) Taking Off Across the U.S.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/03/06/climate/hybri...
[Edited on 3-7-2024 by mtgoat666]
Woke!
“...ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” “My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America
will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.”
Prefered gender pronoun: the royal we
|
|
|
Cliffy
Senior Nomad
Posts: 980
Registered: 12-19-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
How many coal fired power plants are being built by China as you pontificate?
How many are being built by India as you pontificate?
How many people are you willing to sacrifice in Africa and the less developed world that needs cheap electricity from coal?
Life expectancy is way lower in countries without power.
How are you going to raise the standard of living in these countries AND extend life expediency by only giving them HIGH COST power alternatives? Or
as what will probably happen- NO POWER
Are you really arguing that you are ready to sacrifice lives for a lofty feel good goal?
We can't operate without "Base Load" generation. You can't get that with renewables. You want to support hydrogen and nuke power then I'm all ears as
they are the only likely replacements for the base load generation that are cleaner than coal and gas right now.
Do something other than b-tch- solve the base load dilemma
The world ain't going to die any time soon
While I agree that the climate is changing- it has always changed throughout its 5 billion years.
To what extent the current changes are detrimental or even their eventual outcome is being debated by hundreds of climate scientists on both sides of
the argument. It is NOT settled science.
As I said before- Get China and India to go along and you might have a valid argument Until then realistically you are whistling in the wind.
You chose your position in life today by what YOU did yesterday
|
|
|
surabi
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3267
Registered: 5-6-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Lee  |  
But wait, there's more.
And the children will be ''looking after your medical needs?''
Human race doesn't need more kids.
|
How old is your doctor? People born in the 60s and 70s, believe it or not, are no longer children. How old do you think the IT personnel who designed
the device you are currently using, and the software that enables this site are?
Also you seem to lack basic information on how species survival works.
Of course it's debatable whether the planet would be better off without any humans.
However, I do personally agree that IVF isn't necessary, as there are plenty of children out there who need adoptive families, so it seems crazy to
spend so much money trying to conceive. But for couples who can't get pregnant, IVF isn't a particularly logical decision- it is more emotional and
ego-driven, as if one's own DNA is something that needs to be reproduced.
But it's not for me to judge, having had no problems
conceiving, how I would have felt and the choices I would have made, had I had problems getting
pregnant. I know several people who wanted to have kids, but for one reason or another were unable to, or never in a relationship which was conducive
to deciding to have children, whose attitude was "I guess parenthood just isn't in the cards for me", rather than going to any great lengths to make
it happen.
[Edited on 3-10-2024 by surabi]
[Edited on 3-10-2024 by surabi]
[Edited on 3-10-2024 by surabi]
[Edited on 3-10-2024 by surabi]
|
|
|
Cliffy
Senior Nomad
Posts: 980
Registered: 12-19-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
In the Carboniferous Period (350 million yrs ago) the CO2 level was
around 1500ppm and life on this planet flourished. Today 400ppm maybe? Hmmm Yes the planet will die in 10 years (NOT)!
IF and a BIG IF the sea levels rise do we really think people will drown? The Netherlands seems to have solved the "below sea level" problem quite
effectively.
As always the rule of nature is?----- Adapt or Die Out.
Always has been always will be.
You chose your position in life today by what YOU did yesterday
|
|
|
surabi
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3267
Registered: 5-6-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Lee |
Stop having kids -- at least give it a few generational break.
My GP is 62 and so is my cardiologist. |
So your GP and cardiologist were born in 1962. Seems like you just proved my point. Those born in the 60's and later are the workforce of today. Are
you suggesting your doctors should never have been born?
A "few generations" break in humans having children means the extinction of the human race. Maybe you have a hard time with math. A generation is
considered to be 20-30 years. So who would be having children after this several generation break? 90 year olds?
The root cause of human-made pollution is not overpopulation, it's the creation of products and manufacturing processes developed by those who profit
from them, without regard for how that impacts the planet, and humans' desire for all those products. And marketing companies by and large create many
of those desires.
Take little things like "air fresheners". Most of them emit toxic chemicals. Yet savvy marketers have convinced consumers that they will make your
home or car smell "fresh", when in fact, all they do is overlay one smell with another and the actual smell of "fresh" is acheived by keeping things
clean, with simple, non- perfumed products. Fresh air and sunshine is the smell of "fresh", not some product you buy.
If humans were willing to live simpler lives and stop the over-the-top consumption of things which are not necessary for a comfortable, happy life,
that would go a long way towards depollution.
[Edited on 3-11-2024 by surabi]
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2357
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
Lencho.
My bad I meant nonflammable water as opposed to hydrogen.
The DWP in LA pumped water from Castaic Lake uphill to Pyramid Lake using 2 - 10MW Hitachi turbine/pumps for decades. Overnight the DWP often gets
free electricity from the grid. They use it to pump water up hill. During the day the pumps turn into generators. The lakes store drinking water and
are used for recreation.
No expensive hydrogen conversion or storage facility required and about 5X the efficiency!
[Edited on 3-11-2024 by RFClark]
[Edited on 3-11-2024 by RFClark]
[Edited on 3-11-2024 by RFClark]
|
|
|
Cliffy
Senior Nomad
Posts: 980
Registered: 12-19-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
So where did the electricity come from to pump the water?
Have we built any hydro-electric dams in the last 3 decades?
Anyone think we could get one of those past the tree huggers today?
Hydrogen burns and leaves only water behind
There is a way using waste energy from dino-juice powerplants to make Hydrogen and then sequester the produced carbon back into the earth where it
came from and its being done today.
There is NO WAY to get to 100% renewables because we have to have "base load" capacity. That's either dino juice power plants or batteries and there
is NO WAY in HELL that we will ever see batteries able to carry the base load capacity- not only from the size and capacity stand point but from the
environmental stand point of making batteries that large (mining, electricity required to make them, long term storage and disposal, replacement,
etc).
We are decades away from doing anything like that.
If you don't understand base load you had better look it up
If you have a solution to that problem then lets hear it.
You chose your position in life today by what YOU did yesterday
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 17404
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Cliffy | So where did the electricity come from to pump the water?
Have we built any hydro-electric dams in the last 3 decades?
Anyone think we could get one of those past the tree huggers today?
Hydrogen burns and leaves only water behind
There is a way using waste energy from dino-juice powerplants to make Hydrogen and then sequester the produced carbon back into the earth where it
came from and its being done today.
There is NO WAY to get to 100% renewables because we have to have "base load" capacity. That's either dino juice power plants or batteries and there
is NO WAY in HELL that we will ever see batteries able to carry the base load capacity- not only from the size and capacity stand point but from the
environmental stand point of making batteries that large (mining, electricity required to make them, long term storage and disposal, replacement,
etc).
We are decades away from doing anything like that.
If you don't understand base load you had better look it up
If you have a solution to that problem then lets hear it. |
Old man yelling at the sky:
Yes, we remember your obsession with “base load.” Carry on, tilt at those windmills!
Woke!
“...ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” “My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America
will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.”
Prefered gender pronoun: the royal we
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2357
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
Cliffy,
The electricity comes from any available source that has unused capacity and is saved for future use. Think lakes used for storage here.
“The United States has 43 PSH plants with a combined generation capacity of 22 GW and an estimated energy
storage capacity of 553 GWh. 3 Despite very strong growth in battery installations in 2020–2022, the U.S. PSH
feet continued to provide most of the utility-scale power storage capacity (70%) and energy storage capacity
(96%) in 2022.“
https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-09/U.S.%20Hy...
Goat,
“Base Load” is what makes electrical grids work. When you’re out of “Base Load” you’re out of electricity!
[Edited on 3-11-2024 by RFClark]
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2357
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
Lee,
Thanks, but I’d rather watch you do the arguing! I also agree. Too many people is the problem!
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2357
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
👍
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2357
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
Mysterious, Rapid Surge in Legionnaires' Disease Linked to Cleaner Air
A mysterious and rapid rise in Legionnaires' disease, a severe bacterial lung infection, has been linked to cleaner air, in a US study of trends in
sulfur dioxide pollution.
Over the last two decades, the incidence of Legionnaires' disease in the US has increased nine-fold, from around 1,100 cases reported in 2000 to
nearly 10,000 in 2018. Europe and parts of Canada have reported similar increases, with cases up five- to seven-fold.
https://www.sciencealert.com/mysterious-rapid-surge-in-legio...
|
|
|
surabi
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3267
Registered: 5-6-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
"The researchers stress that reducing pollution is undoubtedly good for people and the environment; it's now a matter of using these findings to help
inform strategies to limit Legionella exposure while maintaining good air quality and its many benefits."
|
|
|
RFClark
Super Nomad
Posts: 2357
Registered: 8-27-2015
Member Is Offline
Mood: Looking forward to 2024
|
|
The Currently Known negative consequences of removing emission related SO2 from the air:
1) The increased rate of air and sea temperature increases.
2) The increased rates of sunlight induced cancers.
3) The increased rates of diseases.
4) The reduced rate of cloud formation
Since there are a lot of tradeoffs to be weighed when undertaking geo-engineering there should be a discussion of the cost/benefit ratio to any
proposed change(s) prior to undertaking the change(s).
Please note that no such reviews are known to have taken place in the case of SO2 removal. Please also note that the necessity of stopping the SO2
emissions from the Sudbury Ontario Super Stack are a entirely different issue as it was the world's largest single source SO2 emitter!
Also please note that while geo-engineering to remove SO2 is considered a “great benefit”. Geo-engineering to reduce the rate of the currently
increased temperature rise is considered Evil and dangerous by those driving the climate change agenda!
Not a judgment just an observation of group’s stated positions!
[Edited on 3-18-2024 by RFClark]
|
|
|
JDCanuck
Super Nomad
Posts: 1162
Registered: 2-22-2020
Member Is Offline
|
|
Is it really population growth that's pushing demand for energy beyond our ability to create renewable clean sources?
Crypto currency created a huge burst in energy demand, and now we have AI. Here's another viewpoint, one that utilities are already ramping up for:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-obscene-ene...
It gets even more interesting when you consider the major beneficiaries of these huge increases in global demand of both energy and water are the same
people who are forcing reductions in protein based foods, the cleanest fossil fuels(replacing the coal and other even more polluting solid fuels in
3rd world countries) and population increases upon the rest of the world. Think: Google, MSFT, Amazon, Netflix, and Facebook as some of the major
influencers of our day.
[Edited on 3-19-2024 by JDCanuck]
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 17404
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by JDCanuck | Is it really population growth that's pushing demand for energy beyond our ability to create renewable clean sources?
Crypto currency created a huge burst in energy demand, and now we have AI. Here's another viewpoint, one that utilities are already ramping up for:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-obscene-ene...
It gets even more interesting when you consider the major beneficiaries of these huge increases in global demand of both energy and water are the same
people who are forcing reductions in protein based foods, the cleanest fossil fuels(replacing the coal and other even more polluting solid fuels in
3rd world countries) and population increases upon the rest of the world. Think: Google, MSFT, Amazon, Netflix, and Facebook as some of the major
influencers of our day.
[Edited on 3-19-2024 by JDCanuck] |
Bitcoin and the like are useless ponzi schemes, sooner they die the better!
Re AI, the climate deniers like clarkie should try asking AI for advice, they would soon learn that their denials and protests are misguided and
incorrect!
Woke!
“...ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” “My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America
will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.”
Prefered gender pronoun: the royal we
|
|
|
surabi
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3267
Registered: 5-6-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
Good article, JD. While people seem to blindly accept that overpopulation is the cause of high energy consumption, just like dealing with plastic
pollution, individuals and businesses not being willing to change their habits or do things differently is the heart of the matter.
On an individual level, let's say a well-off person in a first world country, who cares more about their comfort level than their electricity bill,
likes to have the air conditioning on in their home 24/7, in every room. They don't even turn it down or off if they are out of the
house for 8 hours a day.
That energy used (or wasted if they aren't even at home) could be used to power essential needs of other homes.
It's the same with food. People aren't starving in many places in the world because there isn't enough food to feed everyone. The amount of edible
food that gets thrown away every day in affluent countries could feed millions of people. The problem is food distribution (including transportation
cost, blockades that don't allow food to get to where it's needed, politics, tarrifs, etc), not overpopulation and the planet not producing enough
food to feed everyone.
A friend of mine who was a middle school environmental studies teacher did a project with the kids where they collected all the garbage grom the
school for 1 day. They separated it into classifications- paper and cardboard, plastic and other recyclables, food, both food garbage, like apple
cores, and "edible food". Then they weighed it all. By far, the most amount of garbage was edible food- whole apples and oranges, untouched sandwiches
still in the baggie mom had packed it in, etc. Meanwhile, children in refugee camps across the world would be happy to eat the apple cores .
We almost all heard, "Eat- children in Europe (Africa, wherever) are starving. Of course, us eating our peas wasn't going to put food in the bellies
of starving children, so we'd roll our eyes.
But the basic idea was "don't waste" valuable things that other people want for.
[Edited on 3-19-2024 by surabi]
|
|
|
JDCanuck
Super Nomad
Posts: 1162
Registered: 2-22-2020
Member Is Offline
|
|
"We almost all heard, "Eat- children in Europe (Africa, wherever) are starving. Of course, us eating our peas wasn't going to put food in the bellies
of starving children, so we'd roll our eyes.
But the basic idea was "don't waste" valuable things that other people want for. "
Evidently, you and I were raised by the same standards, by parents who lived through, saw or knew people who lacked the very basics to live and were
forever impacted by it. Today it is far more common to watch people purposely (and boastfully) waste what they have while only blocks away from others
that are in severe poverty and desperation.
We drove through and stayed overnite in Las Vegas at a famous hotel on the strip, and made a bad turn to get on the freeway, going blocks out of our
way right past the camped homeless beneath the freeway. What an eye opener that was. I don't think I will ever forget that contrast in one of the
most privileged countries in the world.
|
|
|
surabi
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3267
Registered: 5-6-2016
Member Is Offline
|
|
You see that in so many places, especially cities. At one point my daughter lived in Vancouver on a lovely tree-lined street in a nice house with a
well-kept little neighborhood park across the street. It was only 2 blocks from Hastings and Main, where all the drug addicts, prostitutes, and
homeless people hang out. But those 2 blocks were worlds removed from each other.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
104
105
106
107
108
..
111 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
