• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Cont: Global warming discussion V

Here's a slightly different take on a big way to help address climate change.

Energy efficiency guru Amory Lovins: ‘It’s the largest, cheapest, safest, cleanest way to address the crisis’

Really short version that sorta sums up the premise by focusing on one example?

Lovins fears that design has been chopped into little bits and we are losing the bigger energy picture that the Victorians had. In a recent podcast with the UK energy adviser Micheal Liebreich, he explains how savings of 80% and more can be made in the least expected areas. As an example he shows that far less energy is needed to pump heat or cold through fat, straight pipes than skinny, long and crooked ones, because there is less friction.

“In our house we save 97% of the pumping energy by properly laying out some pipes. Well, if everyone in the world did that to their pipes and ducts, you would save about a fifth of the world’s electricity, or half the coal-fired electricity. And you get your money back instantly in new-build or in under a year typically in retrofits in buildings and industry.”

And yet, he says, this sort of energy efficiency is not taught, and it’s certainly not in any government study or climate model. Why not? “Because it’s not a technology. It’s a bloody design,” he says.

Highlighting mine.
 
Last edited:
Here's a slightly different take on a big way to help address climate change.

Energy efficiency guru Amory Lovins: ‘It’s the largest, cheapest, safest, cleanest way to address the crisis’

Really short version that sorta sums up the premise by focusing on one example?



Highlighting mine.


The energy required to circulate air is much less than the energy required to heat or cool the air in the first place. Furthermore the wast energy takes the form of heat, so when the objective is heating none of that energy is wasted as it's still producing the desired effect.
 
The energy required to circulate air is much less than the energy required to heat or cool the air in the first place. Furthermore the wast energy takes the form of heat, so when the objective is heating none of that energy is wasted as it's still producing the desired effect.

When it is, perhaps. To poke at the beginning of the article, though...

Temperatures dropped far below freezing this week in Snowmass, Colorado. But Amory Lovins, who lives high up in the mountains at 7,200ft above sea level, did not even turn on the heating.

That’s because he has no heating to turn on. His home, a great adobe and glass mountainside eyrie that he designed in the 1980s, collects solar energy and is so well insulated that he grows and harvests bananas and many other tropical fruits there without burning gas, oil or wood.

He seems to get by just fine with less waste heat under below freezing conditions.
 
Last edited:
Good news, everyone! Well, except for people in the coal mining industry, I guess.

Australia’s coal export boom forecast to end abruptly amid big drop in demand from China

Study finds Chinese consumption will fall within two to three years as Australian coalmining communities warned to reduce dependence on industry


Australia’s coal export boom will come to an abrupt end because of an “imminent and substantial” drop in purchases by China, and local coalmining communities should brace for the change, the lead author of a new study says.

The peer-reviewed paper, published on Thursday in the journal Joule, forecasts China’s thermal coal imports will contract at least a quarter from 2019 levels of 210m tonnes by 2025, mostly as improved transport links will give local suppliers an edge.

If China pursues more ambitious efforts to cut carbon emissions, the decline will be almost twice as fast, with imports sinking to 115m tonnes by 2025. Shipments of coking coal used in steelmaking face a similar downward trajectory, the researchers found.

The study used satellite and other data sources to compile a more detailed picture of individual power and steel plant coal demand. It also analysed how new transport links have expanded supplies from inland Chinese provinces and Mongolia to coastal users, supplanting Australian and Indonesian exporters.

“This was actually somewhat of a surprising outcome for us,” said Jorrit Gosens, a researcher at the Australian National University’s Crawford School of Public Policy and the report’s lead author.

“China reducing imports of thermal coal and coking coal by roughly a quarter over the next five years, that’s a major drop and not something that is far off into the future.”
 
Just listening to BBC
India is importing coal to run air conditioners to combat a heat wave caused by global warming caused by burning coal.
What could go wrong?
 
Just listening to BBC
India is importing coal to run air conditioners to combat a heat wave caused by global warming caused by burning coal.
What could go wrong?

Yet, having 17% of the world's population, India only contributes 8% of global GHG emissions yearly, adding up in two centuries to a 3% of the whole problem. How much did and do contribute the US and the UK?

Anyway, everybody knows that coal shouldn't be burnt for air conditioner to work but for bitcoins to be mined.
 
BHP announces plans to close NSW's largest coal mine at Mt Arthur by 2030

Mining giant BHP has failed to find a buyer for New South Wales' largest coal mine, and will close the operation in 2030.

The company spent two years trying to sell its Mt Arthur operation in the state's Hunter Valley, which employs 2,000 people.

The mine, near Muswellbrook, is approved to operate until 2026, but BHP has told the ASX it would apply to extend that until 2030.

After that, it will close.

Rehabilitation of the site is expected to take 10 to 15 years.

The mine's pit was today shut temporarily while employees were informed of the decision.

BHP's minerals president Edgar Basto said the company had reviewed potential options for the mine, including divestment and future investment requirements.

"Seeking approval to continue mining until 2030 avoids closure in 2026 and enables BHP to balance the value and risk of those considerations and our commitments to our people and local communities," he said.

The mine was once valued at $2 billion, but that has been progressively slashed.

After a write-down last year, BHP said the mine was worth nothing, once rehabilitation obligations were factored in.
 
Anyway, everybody knows that coal shouldn't be burnt for air conditioner to work but for bitcoins to be mined.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that mining of bitcoins is so energy-intensive, that it's worse than actual mining for minerals, etc.


This story doesn't mention the words climate change or global warming, because it's happening in Republican country, but I have to wonder if anyone will figure it out:

Thousands of Cattle Reported Dead

The current heat wave blazing through Kansas feedlots has killed an estimated 10,000 head of fat cattle.

Final death numbers continue to come in, but that early estimate was shared with DTN by livestock experts, who put the geographical center point for those deaths at Ulysses, Kansas.

ETA: here's what it looks like:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/vd5dan/thousands_of_cows_found_dead_in_kansas/
 
Last edited:
Yet, having 17% of the world's population, India only contributes 8% of global GHG emissions yearly, adding up in two centuries to a 3% of the whole problem.
So far.

But everything so far is water under the bridge. We can't undo what we did, we can only try to not make it any worse. India has a chance to not pollute like we did. But will they take it? Their population is exploding and they want a more affluent lifestyle. In a few years they could be bigger polluters than China, if they don't plan to avoid it.
 
I seem to recall reading somewhere that mining of bitcoins is so energy-intensive, that it's worse than actual mining for minerals, etc.


This may help

"How much energy? Bitcoin, the world’s largest cryptocurrency, currently consumes an estimated 150 terawatt-hours of electricity annually — more than the entire country of Argentina, population 45 million. Producing that energy emits some 65 megatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually — comparable to the emissions of Greece — making crypto a significant contributor to global air pollution and climate change."
Source:
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2022/05/04/cryptocurrency-energy/
 
So far.

But everything so far is water under the bridge. We can't undo what we did, we can only try to not make it any worse.


Can't we? Carbon dioxide from fosile fuels thrown into the atmosphere in 1985 enters entirely into the oceans this year, so to speak. Why does old carbon dioxide from the US and the UK have a priority over the new one spewed by India? Make room for others, please.
India has a chance to not pollute like we did. But will they take it? .


Who's footing the bill? Are the old polluters contributing a big chunk of the cost or is it supossed that India will do it out of the goodness of their hearts?

Their population is exploding and they want a more affluent lifestyle. In a few years they could be bigger polluters than China, if they don't plan to avoid it.

So what? They have and always have had about a sixth of the Earth's population. Admonish them when they surpass that mark in the yearly budget. And keep in mind they won't be able to reach a sixth of the historical pie chart because PREVIOUS MISCONDUCT OF OTHERS HAVE PREVENTED THEM FOR SO DOING.

I used to generate 7 tons of carbon dioxide each winter just for myself to warm my home and enjoy plenty of hot water. I reduced It to 1.5 tons now and can't go any further without getting chilblained. Each one has a compromise to accept and an obligation yo avoid any lets-gather-courage-and-make-them-do-it approach.
 
So far.

But everything so far is water under the bridge. We can't undo what we did, we can only try to not make it any worse. India has a chance to not pollute like we did. But will they take it? Their population is exploding and they want a more affluent lifestyle. In a few years they could be bigger polluters than China, if they don't plan to avoid it.
A birth rate of 2.159 and falling, is not an exploding population.

Their death rate is also going down, but that will level off at some point. India is like nearly every other country: A declining birth rate.

The difference between India and China though is that their demographics won't screw them in the long term, as their population will continuie to grow for longer (and exceed China), but its not set to do so in an "explosive" way.

And:
The current UN medium projection says that Indian fertility will decline by 1.8 births per woman. As a result, the population of India is expected to reach 1.7 billion by 2060 and decline to 1.5 billion by the end of the 21st century. The lower projection expects fertility to decrease to 1.3 births per woman. As a result, the population will decline to 1.5 billion in 2040 and 900 million by 2100.
https://iipsindia.org/the-population-of-india-over-time/

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/demographics-china-india-diverging/
China’s population has plateaued, and will eventually decline over the remainder of the 21st century. There is plenty of room to grow economically, but the weight of an aging population will create additional social and economic pressures. By 2050, it’s estimated that over one-third of the country will be 60 years or older.

On the other hand, India is following a more traditional demographic path, as long as it is uninterrupted by drastic policy decisions. The country will likely top out at 1.6-1.7 billion people, before it begins to experience the typical demographic transition already experienced by more developed economies in North America, Europe, and Japan.

On the point of emissions, of course they could do more. But getting their population out of poverty must also be a priority. Rich nations must be at the forefront of innovation to help acheiving this.
 
Anyone ever heard of Russ George? I came across this video and it all sounds rather too good to be true, as well as gives off crank vibes:



And why would the Canadian Government send a "swat team" after him? Obviously, there's something he's not telling us in this video. The persecuted outsider whose ideas are being suppressed because it just works so well that it would threaten the profits of vested interests who don't want the problem to be solved so easily.

I have heard of the idea of "seeding" the oceans with iron to stimulate plankton growth. What's the downside though? Plankton blooms can be toxic, right? Is that the downside? And do they really sequester as much carbon dioxide as he claims they do?
 
And why would the Canadian Government send a "swat team" after him?

A swat team seems like simple dishonesty on his part. I'm speculating but I suspect of there is any truth what happened was than he was planning the unauthorized dumpling of millions of tonnes of material into Canadian territorial waters and it took a large team to seize all the materiel he was planning to dump illegally.



I have heard of the idea of "seeding" the oceans with iron to stimulate plankton growth. What's the downside though? Plankton blooms can be toxic, right? Is that the downside? And do they really sequester as much carbon dioxide as he claims they do?

Toxic and they consume oxygen and can create dead zones where nothing can live expect sulfur dioxide producing bacteria.

While we often talk about climate change, and rightly so CO2 emissions also causes ocean acidification, something that has the potential to kill off most complex life on the earth so his fundamental premise is broken. You don't just need to absorb CO2 you need to sequester it, this doesn't happen if other organism eat the plankton.

What needs to happen is for the plankton to grow then sink to the bottom and turn into carbonate rock without going though the process of decay. This is a slower process than he claims, and indeed isn't even what he's trying to do.

He's also making claims that are clearly suspect. For example he's claiming that his small ocean seeding project was responsible for a massive salmon catch the following year, but Salmon lifecycle is typically 4-5 years. Also note that even if the salmon did come about because of his seeding project, catching them and eating them returns the captured CO2 to the atmosphere so the net reduction for that CO2 is zero.
 
Last edited:
Methane-reducing seaweed asparagopsis up for sale after years of research

After years of frantic research and fast-tracked commercial licensing, cattle feedlots can now buy asparagopsis, a native Australian seaweed touted to reduce methane emissions by "90 to 95 per cent" when fed to cows and sheep.

The first global sale of asparagopsis was announced this month by CH4, one of three businesses licensed to sell the feed additive in Australia.

South Australian meat processor CirPro was the buyer.

"We're very proud that we are the first to be able to announce a commercial supply to the marketplace," CH4 Australia general manager Adam Main said.

Asparagopsis has been the subject of numerous research trials and a fast-tracked commercialisation effort since it was first identified as a way to reduce ruminant animals' methane emissions.
 
Ahem...
The current fertility rate of India is 2.3 births per woman and has remained constant for the past two decades. At this rate, the population of India is expected to grow up to 1.8 billion by 2050. Despite the attempts to reduce the fertility rate to 2.1, the expected population growth is expected to reach 1.9 billion by the end of the century. In any case, there is no stopping for India to become the most populous nation in the world.
But it's not the population per se that's the problem, it's the pursuit of more affluent (and greater polluting) lifestyles. India has a lot of poor people. If living standards are raised closer to the West it will be a disaster for the environment - unless they plan to avoid it.
 
The new Australian government was elected partly on a platform of climate change action, and they continue to deliver on that.

Climate modelling abandoned by Abbott nine years ago reinstated by Labor government

Treasury has not modelled the economic impacts of climate change for almost a decade, after the practice was abandoned by former prime minister Tony Abbott.

But new Treasurer Jim Chalmers has ordered the Treasury to restart its climate modelling and says work is underway to restore the department's role in climate action.

"Treasury is working closely with other departments to rebuild this capacity after years of neglect under the Coalition, and we'll have more to say about this important work," Mr Chalmers told the ABC.

"Treasury's modelling will help us chart a path that maximises jobs and opportunities for our country as we take advantage of this transformation.

"Australia's economic prospects will be in large part determined by our ability to take ambitious action on climate change and deliver cheaper and cleaner energy."

The head of Treasury admitted last year that it had not been asked for climate modelling since 2013.
 
Ahem...

But it's not the population per se that's the problem, it's the pursuit of more affluent (and greater polluting) lifestyles. India has a lot of poor people. If living standards are raised closer to the West it will be a disaster for the environment - unless they plan to avoid it.

That is not an exploding population though, as the rate is low and dropping.
 
There's more than one way to skin arrogantly ignorant pachyderms

Here are 3 ways the EPA can still regulate climate pollution - https://grist.org/regulation/supreme-court-west-virginia-epa-clean-air-act/

...the Supreme Court issued a narrow but consequential opinion that only ruled out one specific mechanism for slashing carbon emissions: so-called generation shifting. The mechanism was one aspect of the Clean Power Plan, first proposed by the Obama administration in 2015, which set maximum carbon emission rates for coal and natural gas plants and allowed utility companies to comply using a variety of methods. They could improve efficiency at individual plants, or they could opt for generation shifting — changing their overall mix of electricity generation to use less coal and a greater share of natural gas (which is less carbon-intensive than coal) and renewable sources. The rule quickly got tied up in litigation and never took effect, but the falling prices of natural gas and renewables changed the country’s energy mix anyway and the U.S. met the Clean Power Plan’s target a decade ahead of schedule.

The Supreme Court’s six-member majority ruled that the EPA’s proposed use of generation shifting overstepped the authority it was given by Congress when it passed the Clean Air Act, which was the legal basis for the Clean Power Plan. However, though this ruling invalidated the already-defunct Clean Power Plan, it didn’t eliminate any carbon-cutting approaches besides generation shifting. Unlike the court’s sweeping ruling overturning the 50-year precedent of Roe v. Wade, the West Virginia opinion respected precedents declaring carbon dioxide a threat to public health that the EPA can regulate...​

Time to pass a new set of clean environment regulations that aren't gerrymandered by corporate lobbyists ahead of passage.
 
Last edited:
Hey was thinking of you Trakar when I read this.....

a few years ahead of time
Dr Simon Lee @SimonLeeWx
In 2020, the @metoffice produced a hypothetical weather forecast for 23 July 2050 based on UK climate projections.

Today, the forecast for Tuesday is shockingly almost identical for large parts of the country.
FXtxVXTVQAEk3VX
 
That's record temperatures, and yes, Aussies, 40 degrees is a big deal in the UK.

Stay cool and hydrated, British friends.
 
Hey was thinking of you Trakar when I read this.....

a few years ahead of time

[qimg]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FXtxVXTVQAEk3VX?format=jpg&name=small[/qimg]

...disturbing, but a good example of the creeping conservatism that is a fundamental component of mainstream, consensual science consideration. This is both a flaw and a feature of the process that is modern science. This flaw definitely retards and slows scientific discovery, advancement and development, but it also preserves and respects rigorous and compelling evidence as the testing measure to distinguish mainstream scientific consideration from mere majoritarian consensus.
 
That's record temperatures, and yes, Aussies, 40 degrees is a big deal in the UK.

Stay cool and hydrated, British friends.


I was watching a Twitch streamer from Ireland yesterday and he was talking about how expensive air conditioners are there and how their houses aren't built to keep the interiors cool. It's not going to be good.
 
Coping is the answer according to deniers. Everyone is now rich enough to buy as many airconditioners as they need.


Any non human species, they should get an economy too.

Not to mention that air conditioning contributes to even more greenhouse emissions.
 
This just dropped:

Majority of Australia's environment in 'poor' state as Labor blames the Coalition for decade of 'inaction and wilful ignorance'

Australia's environment is in a "poor and deteriorating state", according to the latest State of the Environment Report.

Climate change, mining, pollution, invasive species and habitat loss are outlined in the five-yearly report that has been released on Tuesday, with Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek laying the blame squarely at the feet of the previous Coalition government.

"It tells a story of crisis and decline in Australia's environment [and] of a decade of government inaction and wilful ignorance," Ms Plibersek said.

The report was handed to the Morrison government in December last year, but former environment minister Sussan Ley did not release it before the election.

The lead author of the report, Emma Johnston from the University of Sydney, said the biggest difference between this report and the previous one from 2016 was how climate change was now damaging the environment.

"In previous reports, we've been largely talking about the impacts of climate in the future tense," she said.

"In this report there's a stark contrast, because we are now documenting widespread impacts of climate change."

However, the report also outlined ways in which the grim assessment could be improved through stronger protections, innovative thinking and courageous leadership.
 
Last edited:
That's record temperatures, and yes, Aussies, 40 degrees is a big deal in the UK.

Stay cool and hydrated, British friends.

I was on vacation in the UK in the Summer of 2003, when they had a couple of days of 100 degree temperature.
It was Horrible.And Ihave lived most of my life in the American West, where yu can expect 100 F of higher days ever year, so I am used to high temperature, and I found 100 F in London hard to take. It was probably the damn humidity that made it so bad.
I don't envy you in the UK.
 
I was on vacation in the UK in the Summer of 2003, when they had a couple of days of 100 degree temperature.
It was Horrible.And Ihave lived most of my life in the American West, where yu can expect 100 F of higher days ever year, so I am used to high temperature, and I found 100 F in London hard to take. It was probably the damn humidity that made it so bad.
I don't envy you in the UK.


The humidity does make a difference.

Around here on the US East Coast, weather reports always say things like "96 degrees, and feels like 104." But it doesn't, it feels like 96, because it's always humid when it's hot here, so that's what 96 feels like. When it's 104 it will feel hotter, because it will be humid then too.

But someone from a dry Western state might benefit from the extra warning.
 

Back
Top Bottom