| Pages:
1
..
12
13
14
15
16
..
25 |
SFandH
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7060
Registered: 8-5-2011
Member Is Online
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Cliffy  |
So as I surmise from this paragraph from the Ozone Depletion article, CFCs were banned on bad or false information. Why then do we want to depend on
extrapolations today?
|
That doesn't really follow cliffy. Just because the early estimates were higher than subsequent measurements does not mean that CFCs were not
damaging the atmosphere and the ban was unwarranted.
Also, inaccurate estimates about issue "A" does not mean estimates about issue "B" are also inaccurate.
|
|
|
Mexitron
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3397
Registered: 9-21-2003
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Member Is Offline
Mood: Happy!
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Barry A. | What's the theory for the cause of the 5 spikes in CO2 which seem pretty cyclic during the past 650K years, do you know?
Barry |
Well we know those cycles are ultimately caused by the earth's long term wobble (the procession of the equinoxes, Milankovich
cycles----http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles) ---- and some mechanism or buffer is being shifted as the climate warms. Not sure what
the relationship of methane to CO2 is but methane is the worst greenhouse gas pound for pound and we may have recently seen a smoking gun as we do
know the arctic climate is changing more so than our temperate regions (and also the Antarctic ice cap is getting larger as the Arctic warms) ---- http://www.nature.com/news/mysterious-siberian-crater-attrib... -----
|
|
|
KurtG
Super Nomad
Posts: 1205
Registered: 1-27-2004
Location: California Central Coast
Member Is Offline
Mood: Press On Regardless!!
|
|
This article seems relevant to this discussion.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/science-doubters/a...
|
|
|
SFandH
Elite Nomad
Posts: 7060
Registered: 8-5-2011
Member Is Online
|
|
Good article, thanks KurtG.
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
Not merely a "good article"------I think a SUPURB article.
Explains a lot!!!!
Thanks Kurtg for digging this one up, and then a huge kudo for posting it for us all to read.
Barry
|
|
|
Cliffy
Senior Nomad
Posts: 983
Registered: 12-19-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
Because CFCs were banned on early estimates (and the estimates were bad) it has just as much viability to say that not enough is known to make
extrapolations from short term observations when we are talking about an earth lifespan so far of 5 billion years.
No one can say with certainty that the ozone layer wasn't different than it is now 300 million years ago. We could be seeing just a natural
evolutionary change rather than a cause and effect.
As I said, man MAY have an effect on the environment as a whole but the earth over eons has more. We're calling for Chicken Little with very little
info to support the falling of the sky. It's a knee jerk reaction.
Man is just another NATURAL evolutionary process on the face of the earth as has been seen throughout its history.
I live where we find dinosaurs. I drive over 1000s of acres of fossilized oysters from hundreds of millions of years ago.
They died out just like man will eventually.
To think that we can change the evolutionary process in the short term again is folly
The Chicken Little mentality is driven as much by politics and special interest groups as science IF NOT MORE SO. Again- follow the money!
Any good statistician can prove any position.
My postulation remains- Why is man considered an anomaly to the natural evolution of the planet?
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64704
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
Refreshing to hear others with some common sense and not driven by drama and hysteria. The world is a lot bigger than people think and Nature is not
given credit for the power it/ she has, which is far, far greater than anything man does. Humans occupy such a tiny % of the planter's surface. You
don't have to go far out to sea to not see land, and that is what most of the earth is, oceans!
Of course don't trash the planet, but man isn't destroying the earth. CO2 is also a NATURAL gas, and NOT a pollutant. It is what all plants need to
live!!!
Climate Change fear is a tool used by those who want your money and to run your lives. Green technology is great, but let's have it without the
hypocrisy! If it is better, than people will choose it. The free market is how it will succeed, not by government mandates.
|
|
|
bezzell
Nomad
Posts: 444
Registered: 11-30-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by David K |
Of course don't trash the planet, but man isn't destroying the earth. CO2 is also a NATURAL gas, and NOT a pollutant. It is what all plants need to
live!!!
. |
 Thanks, Einstein!!
|
|
|
monoloco
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6667
Registered: 7-13-2009
Location: Pescadero BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by David K | Refreshing to hear others with some common sense and not driven by drama and hysteria. The world is a lot bigger than people think and Nature is not
given credit for the power it/ she has, which is far, far greater than anything man does. Humans occupy such a tiny % of the planter's surface. You
don't have to go far out to sea to not see land, and that is what most of the earth is, oceans!
Of course don't trash the planet, but man isn't destroying the earth. CO2 is also a NATURAL gas, and NOT a pollutant. It is what all plants need to
live!!!
Climate Change fear is a tool used by those who want your money and to run your lives. Green technology is great, but let's have it without the
hypocrisy! If it is better, than people will choose it. The free market is how it will succeed, not by government mandates. |
If we let the "free market" decide, we'd be getting all our power from coal because it's by far the cheapest form of energy.
"The future ain't what it used to be"
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64704
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
So you don't trust people to want to buy cleaner energy? Don't you want to?
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64704
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
Hydro Electric is a lot cheaper than coal. Environmentalist have stopped dam building, however.
|
|
|
LancairDriver
Super Nomad
Posts: 1589
Registered: 2-22-2008
Location: On the Road
Member Is Offline
|
|
Now there is a truly brilliant contribution to the topic.
|
|
|
bezzell
Nomad
Posts: 444
Registered: 11-30-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
Fair enough, and obviously over your head (no offense)
In an actual greenhouse, where you're able to control ALL variables (light / temp / nutrients etc), you ARE able to increase plant growth with
increased C02. BUT, in the real world ... with a myriad of variables that are not controlled ... the analogy is nothing short of ridiburrous! And
excess C02 ends up being no bueno.
Stay tuned.
It's the ultimate Ni Modo.
edit ps: you're not going to start yelling 'volcanos' are ya !?
[Edited on 3-9-2015 by bezzell]
|
|
|
LancairDriver
Super Nomad
Posts: 1589
Registered: 2-22-2008
Location: On the Road
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by bezzell |
Fair enough, and obviously over your head (no offense)
In an actual greenhouse, where you're able to control ALL variables (light / temp / nutrients etc), you ARE able to increase plant growth with
increased C02. BUT, in the real world ... with a myriad of variables that are not controlled ... the analogy is nothing short of ridiburrous! And
excess C02 ends up being no bueno.
Stay tuned.
It's the ultimate Ni Modo.
edit ps: you're not going to start yelling 'volcanos' are ya !?
[Edited on 3-9-2015 by bezzell] |
Thanks to the Internet and Google we can all now appear as experts on any topic that comes up, and can cherry pick our favorite from hundreds of
sources. Pick your topic expert du jour and quote verbatim, and viola! we have instant credibility. If we want to spend even more time, we can
probably find something that will discredit the original quoted expert. As this thread demonstrates this can go on endlessly.
|
|
|
bezzell
Nomad
Posts: 444
Registered: 11-30-2014
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by LancairDriver | | Thanks to the Internet and Google we can all now appear as experts on any topic that comes up, and can cherry pick our favorite from hundreds of
sources. Pick your topic expert du jour and quote verbatim, and viola! we have instant credibility.. |
Hence, stick to the SCIENCE from the referee journal.
Very simple.
(or, there's always Michael Savage !!)
[Edited on 3-9-2015 by bezzell]
|
|
|
Cliffy
Senior Nomad
Posts: 983
Registered: 12-19-2013
Member Is Offline
|
|
Here's another of my postulations-
Why is the fate of the world (and cost) laid upon the shoulders of the most progressive countries and the others get a walk (China, India, 3rd
world)? Last I checked China and India had vibrant economies.
Why do I have to pay for their "contribution to pollution" ?
Green power may be a fine goal but again at what cost and to who?
Here's one I have been researching and haven't found any info on-
Who's making money on wind farms?
Is anyone investing in them and making a return? Show me where! I'll listen to valid facts and figures.
Or is it only the ones getting Federal subsidies to manufacture and set up wind farms?
If it's so good why can't it compete on a dollar for dollar basis with traditional energy?
What are the economics of a wind farm? Hours available to generate compared to actual generating time?
How much down time due to no wind and maintenance/year?
Can't find any of these issues published
How about cost per megawatt compared to other sources? With and without subsidies factored in? Can't find that either.
If it's so good make the utilities buy wind power first over other sources.
Come on- someone show me where they are economically viable and I'll listen.
Let's talk solar panels?
Life span of panels? 10 to 15 years.
Cost recap rate vs other sources- 10 to 15 years. Net- 0 sum game.
Let's get back to coal.
I live near a coal fired power plant. Yes I can see "some" vent issues in the correct light conditions. Not much. They are now installing the newest
tech stack scrubbers there to clean it even more. It can be done. We have centuries of coal available for power if we use it. And the public would
benefit on a dollar basis.
The days of acid rain are over.
Its so political that there has been an on going fight to close the one near me and the problem cited by the NGOs (there we go again, biased parties)
is the pollution that reduces visibility in the Grand Canyon. BUT you know what? The pollution from the power plant never gets into the Grand Canyon
area as it sits 50 miles NE of the canyon and the prevailing winds always blow from the SW across the canyon and to the power plant. All the reduced
viability is natural sources. Remember, the LA basin was called "the valley of the smokes" by Indians 300 years ago. We have natural pollution that
obscures the visibility.
It's all driven by money, special interest groups and most notably- politics!
Years ago in LA a push was made to add pollution controls to lawn mowers no less.
|
|
|
monoloco
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6667
Registered: 7-13-2009
Location: Pescadero BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
Thank God,
otherwise we'd have no wild rivers or salmon.
"The future ain't what it used to be"
|
|
|
monoloco
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6667
Registered: 7-13-2009
Location: Pescadero BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Cliffy | Here's another of my postulations-
Let's talk solar panels?
Life span of panels? 10 to 15 years.
Cost recap rate vs other sources- 10 to 15 years. Net- 0 sum game.
|
I have solar panels that have been in service for almost 20 years old and are still producing over 95% of
their original capacity. Those are 75 watt panels that cost around $500 a piece when new, now the cost of solar panels is less than a dollar a watt.
"The future ain't what it used to be"
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
------and in the grand scheme of things, "salmon" and "wild rivers" fit in where????
I love to fish, and ran wild and non-wild rivers professionally for years, but really?!?!?!?
Barry
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by monoloco | | Quote: Originally posted by Cliffy | Here's another of my postulations-
Let's talk solar panels?
Life span of panels? 10 to 15 years.
Cost recap rate vs other sources- 10 to 15 years. Net- 0 sum game.
|
I have solar panels that have been in service for almost 20 years old and are still producing over 95% of
their original capacity. Those are 75 watt panels that cost around $500 a piece when new, now the cost of solar panels is less than a dollar a watt.
|
My sister and Bro-in-law installed solar on their new house in San Diego, and also in their second home in Borrego Springs, both about 20 years
ago------------neither ever worked well at all, and both systems were abandoned after having thousands in supposed repairs made----------?!?!?!?!?!
Very discouraging!!! Presumably the "new" systems are improved???
Barry
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
12
13
14
15
16
..
25 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
