Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, JRPJR said:

 

Since you asked, I’ll tell you something you don’t know. Climate change is about a lot more than CO2 accumulation. That’s so 90s. Methane gas emissions from cows is now considered by many to be a major problem as are NO containing compounds. If you think it’s all about CO2 you are badly under informed. Perhaps more time researching and less time posting would help. Get the ring out of your nose and stick in a research journal.     

Here, let me respond with recent post...

"It would seem that presumption knows no bounds on this board. Why do so many people ascribe to others that which they only just recently recognized in themselves? What a perplexing world." 

Ask, always ask, what others may or may not know. You'll make of yourself a much smaller target.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, of course, silly me, Pangloss being a fictional character means that "climate change" is also from the fictional world - now it makes perfect sense, thanks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, giltner68 said:

Ok Angus, my question is the same, who determines that this "climate" is exactly perfect at this moment in time and it shouldn't be changed?

I am sure that question makes sense to you, but... It is not a "who", just a mathematical point in statistics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, giltner68 said:

Ok Angus, my question is the same, who determines that this "climate" is exactly perfect at this moment in time and it shouldn't be changed?

When the arctic ice packs are starting to melt and more and more land mass is under water, (especially beaches in Florida <snark>) it is getting too warm. When the temperature of ocean water is getting too hot to sustain certain marine life, it is getting too warm. When hurricane and tornado seasons are longer and more intense, it is getting too warm. When excessive heat is causing drought which is causing fewer crops and starvation and desperate immigrants fleeing to other countries seeking asylum, it is getting too warm...  Got the picture?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost all speculation and a number of factual errors.  Not more hurricanes or tornadoes, actually fewer hurricanes and average tornadoes.  More damage because more people living in hurricane zones and more people and their stuff in general around to get blown away.  Migrants fleeing awful governments and killing and quite a number of them just looking for a better job (economic refugees). 

There is one thing, though, if we create our own awful government and make everyone poor there will be less migration.  No one jumping the fence to get into Venezuela these days.  :D 

Over geologic time seas have risen and fallen and will continue to do so.  The huge deserts in many parts of the earth are the product of a cooler earth, not a warmer one.  Mass starvation did occur during the middle ages during the little ice age when cold killed many people and crops.  There are not fewer crops, there are more than ever world wide.  There are too many mouths to feed.  Instead of wrecking the economies that have and continue to develop the technologies that can address these issues, maybe we should be focused on that.

We are now able to witness and measure climate change and we do affect atmospheric composition with still undetermined results since we really have only a short period of reasonably accurate measurement to project from and we are trying to do so with two dimensional modeling of a three dimensional system.  Now there's a new variable being introduced, solar cooling, and there is a whole bunch of speculation as to how long and severe that will be and what the impact will be.  Maunder minimum or just short quiet period?  Whatever it is, the effects are a lagging indicator and will take years, if not decades, to manifest.

What I do know is the hysteria and religious fervor expressed by some of the true believers does not support either learned investigation or rational discussion.  There was a reason everyone ignored Chicken Little--he was so over the top he wasn't believable.  Neither are some of you.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are all wrong. I was in Seattle in February. We had a record setting low temperature month. It is just more evidence of global cooling. The fact that it is warmer here this year than average is accidental.

 

WE ARE going through a period of GLOBAL COOLING.  Just look at the facts they will show you what is really happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're making the same mistake, trying to project local short term conditions to the longer term mega trend.  Ice decline is a lagging indicator of global change.  If the current trend line doesn't change then it is a good bet things are still warming up.  Short term, arctic ice is below average (only as determined over a few hundred years) but is above the measured recent lows.

Ocean temps are also a good lagging indicator.  Of course the problem with both is the data base we have to project and predict from is short and thin.  Outside of a few hundred years we have mainly geologic data.

When all is said and done, though, I feel pretty confident that signing treaties that allow the world's worst polluters to go right on polluting is probably not going to solve the problem.  Particularly since not a single one of the G20 nations has achieved targets and most are putting out more carbon. :D

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mainecoons said:

When all is said and done, though, I feel pretty confident that signing treaties that allow the world's worst polluters to go right on polluting is probably not going to solve the problem.  Particularly since not a single one of the G20 nations has achieved targets and most are putting out more carbon.

So why are you wasting your time and breathe talking about it.

My Daddy said "if you can't do anything about something, why talk about it.".

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mainecoons said:

Same reason rhe rest of you are, I guess.  Small town nothing to do.  :D

 

Joe just got his barn painted. Let's go and watch the paint dry.  HAHAHA

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or we can chat over the back fence as the laundry dries on the clothesline. "Look like rain coming."

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or be like municipal workers all over North America. "yep, that's a mighty big hole", "yep, but i have seen bigger, let me tell you" basically 4 men standing around a hole, with shovels staring at it forever.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 11:01 AM, CHILLIN said:

You have a lively mind Sr. Mark. Too many older people are fixed in their ways, it is the young people, as young as 8, who are the activists now. They seem have to have enough instinct to recognise the need for survival. For them to become seniors and grandparents in a healthier world.

And before you get too smug about solar panels and buying more efficient new cars, do some research and find some surprising results. For example it takes/wastes more energy to manufacture, sell, company support, and install a solar panel than the lifetime energy it produces. Automobiles are even worse offenders. This what people have to know. It is not as simple as it looks to get the world back in shape, much like the human body. Hard work, sacrifice and perseverance.

MYTH #1: Solar panels require more energy to manufacture than they produce in their lifetime.

FACT: A study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory conclusively demonstrates that the manufacturing energy cost versus the energy production payback for solar modules is generally less than 4 years.

cumulative net clean energy payoff chartA study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory conclusively demonstrates that energy payback for photovoltaics (PV) is generally less than 4 years. You may download a free copy of the study here. It states:

“Reaping the environmental benefits of solar energy requires spending energy to make the PV system. But as this graphic shows, the investment is small. Assuming 30-year system life, PV-systems will provide a net gain of 26 to 29 years of pollution-free and greenhouse-gas-free electrical generation … So, for an investment of from 1 to 4 years worth of their energy output, PV systems can provide as much as 30 years or more of clean energy.”

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

But, but.... What about all those batteries and future disposal? 

Where do they go to die? Don't they pollute the groundwater eventually? Just think of all the batteries for solar, cars etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In relation to solar panels, the CdTe is safe while encapsulated in the module, but if the panel is damaged and exposed to water, the cadmium telluride could leach into the water. Aside from this contaminated water entering the wider environment through stormwater runoff, this issue raises concerns particularly where rainwater is harvested from a rooftop for use within the building.

In an interview on CleanEnergyAuthority, Vice President of Technology for solar panel manufacturer REC, Trond Westgaard, said since cadmium telluride based panels are not officially considered a dangerous product, there is also a risk of them being mixed with other waste after being damaged or at the end of their serviceable life.

While even silicon based solar panels have their own problematic element – lead – Mr. Westgaard says tests have shown lead leaching potential of approximately 4 grams of lead per kilowatt installed compared to approximately 23 grams of cadmium per kilowatt installed for CdTe panels. Additionally, he said cadmium is considered 10 times more hazardous than lead.

Mr. Westgaard acknowledges the handling of CdTe panels in large solar farms may be closely monitored and recycling programs in place, but states REC is concerned with home solar power and medium scale solar installations that may not be subject to such controls. REC does not use cadmium telluride in any of its solar panels.

Earlier this year, Australian solar power solutions provider Energy Matters expressed similar concerns about cadmium panels, stating that while the company is open to the idea of offering CdTe based thin film solar panels at some point and have discussed their concerns with manufacturers, the issues of safety have not yet been addressed to their satisfaction."

https://www.energymatters.com.au/renewable-news/em1469/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small comment on Go Solar's and Chillin's posts.  If I read them both correctly Chillin is referring to the total cost starting with fabricating the materials, fabricating the panels, shipping and installing them.  Go Solar is referring to the manufacturing energy cost only.

Still, I am skeptical these panels don't return far more clean energy than their total energy cost, particularly when installed in high solar radiation areas like this one.

What we need now are batteries that last as long as these panels and are capable of high energy density so we can go off grid completely.  I would question the energy efficiency of current off grid systems that require battery replacement every 5-6 years.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Batteries also require large quantities of assorted metals and minerals in their manufacturing process. These materials are often mined, produced, and transported at great expenditures of money and energy, leaving behind a significant environmental footprint. Use and consumption of these resources also produce waste, contributing to the environmental impact.

Graphite (anodes) mining often generates toxic  dust and requires corrosive chemicals like hydrochloric acid to process it into a usable form. Graphite is mainly sourced from China.

Future technological innovations may (or may not)  lead to cleaner battery production. We are not quite there yet.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of R&D and practical work is being done on thermal energy storage systems, for the environmental reasons mentioned and many others including economic and efficiency.     Thermal / molten salts, among others, can safely and efficiently store massive amounts of solar energy to later convert into usable power when needed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...