Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Environmentalism and Global Warming Thread

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts


  • https://www.dumbenergy.com/?gclid=EA...SAAEgLim_D_BwE

    Free summary

    Dumb Energy: A Critique of Wind and Solar Energy


    From the Introduction

    The core characteristic of wind and solar is that these are erratic sources of electricity. The supply is randomly intermittent.

    The wind and solar promoters demand that the grid be reengineered to become a “smart” grid. The idea is that if the grid is smart enough, that will compensate for the dumb wind and solar energy. That’s what they have in mind. The point of the smart grid is to make the grid more agile, the better to follow the ups and downs of wind and solar.
    ....
    Extracting energy from wind and sunlight is a seductive theory. But, the theory is impractical. The installations are too expensive. The power produced is erratic, changing with the comings and goings of the wind and sun. Erratic power saves fuel in fossil fuel plants when it arrives, but it does not displace investment in fossil fuel plants. Those plants must still be present as backup for the erratic power.

    The renewable energy industry is financed by government subsidies and sweetheart deals that are hidden from consumers.
    ....

    Arguing facts with a believer in renewable energy is often futile. Rarely will a true believer change his mind because he is presented with facts. Fortunately, most people are not true believers, but victims of propaganda. One can plant a seed of doubt in such persons by presenting facts.
    ....
    https://www.dumbenergy.com/freesummary.html
    TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

    Comment


    • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

      https://www.dumbenergy.com/?gclid=EA...SAAEgLim_D_BwE

      Free summary

      Dumb Energy: A Critique of Wind and Solar Energy


      From the Introduction

      The core characteristic of wind and solar is that these are erratic sources of electricity. The supply is randomly intermittent.

      The wind and solar promoters demand that the grid be reengineered to become a “smart” grid. The idea is that if the grid is smart enough, that will compensate for the dumb wind and solar energy. That’s what they have in mind. The point of the smart grid is to make the grid more agile, the better to follow the ups and downs of wind and solar.
      ....
      Extracting energy from wind and sunlight is a seductive theory. But, the theory is impractical. The installations are too expensive. The power produced is erratic, changing with the comings and goings of the wind and sun. Erratic power saves fuel in fossil fuel plants when it arrives, but it does not displace investment in fossil fuel plants. Those plants must still be present as backup for the erratic power.

      The renewable energy industry is financed by government subsidies and sweetheart deals that are hidden from consumers.
      ....

      Arguing facts with a believer in renewable energy is often futile. Rarely will a true believer change his mind because he is presented with facts. Fortunately, most people are not true believers, but victims of propaganda. One can plant a seed of doubt in such persons by presenting facts.
      ....
      https://www.dumbenergy.com/freesummary.html
      More bunkun from bock, for example germany gets a large percentable of its power from renewable sources

      The German economy is large and developed, ranking fourth in the world by GDP. Because of this, Germany ranked sixth in global energy consumption between 2004 and 2007.[1]Germany was Europe's largest consumer of electricity in 2002; electricity consumption that year totaled 512.9 terawatt-hours. In 2013 Germany's electricity production reached 631.4 TWh.[2]

      Key to Germany's energy policies and politics is the "Energiewende", meaning "energy turnaround" or "energy transformation". Germany intends to eliminate current use of nuclear power by 2022. Some plants have already been closed ahead of their intended retirement dates. It is presumed that fossil fuels, wind power, solar power, biofuels, and energy conservation will be enough to replace the existing capacity from nuclear power. The policy includes phasing out nuclear power, and progressive replacement of fossil fuels by renewables.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by bill shack View Post

        More bunkun from bock, for example germany gets a large percentable of its power from renewable sources

        The German economy is large and developed, ranking fourth in the world by GDP. Because of this, Germany ranked sixth in global energy consumption between 2004 and 2007.[1]Germany was Europe's largest consumer of electricity in 2002; electricity consumption that year totaled 512.9 terawatt-hours. In 2013 Germany's electricity production reached 631.4 TWh.[2]

        Key to Germany's energy policies and politics is the "Energiewende", meaning "energy turnaround" or "energy transformation". Germany intends to eliminate current use of nuclear power by 2022. Some plants have already been closed ahead of their intended retirement dates. It is presumed that fossil fuels, wind power, solar power, biofuels, and energy conservation will be enough to replace the existing capacity from nuclear power. The policy includes phasing out nuclear power, and progressive replacement of fossil fuels by renewables.
        The Energiewende in Germany has turned into a nightmare.

        Germany's per KWH cost of electricity is one of the highest in the world at about $ .34. That's almost triple what people in the US pay for electricity. Could you afford for your electric bill to triple? Electricity has become a luxury item there. Over 800,000 Germans have had their electricity cutoff at one time or another due to inability to pay for it. The Renewable Energy Levy (aka tax) in Germany has raised $9.6 billion as of 2013 and by today that amount has more than doubled. This tax was, and is, necessary to pay for Germany's "Smart grid" (about 25% complete) at a current cost of about $33.6 billion and expected to cost in excess of $94 billion when finished.

        Poland and France are working to disconnect their grid from Germany's because both claim the Germans regularly "steal" power from them when solar and wind production are low.

        Many large companies in Germany are installing uninterruptable power supplies and back up diesel generators because of repeated and common fluctuations in the power grid that disrupt their business and often cost millions in lost production and down time.

        Germany got rid of their six (6) nuclear power plants, but found that they had to build 25 "clean coal" plants to replace these. That's actually caused Germany's "carbon footprint" to increase substantially...

        So, the "bunkum" is that Germany's green energy program has been a success.



        Comment


        • Media Hysteria: Climate Change ‘Heat Records’ Are a Huge Data Manipulation

          ...
          The idea that climate change is producing heat records across the Earth is among the most egregious manipulations of data in the absurd global warming debate.

          Americans receive a daily barrage from the fake news media and climate “experts” reporting that each and every day, week, month or year is the hottest on record due to global warming. On Feb. 7, several major newspapers carried stories of the declaration by NASA and NOAA that the past five years have been the warmest on record.

          Sadly, these supposed experts use mathematical equations that do not jibe with reality over the past 140 years.

          The same climate experts warn that record heat is just the tip of the iceberg. We are constantly told that global warming is the root cause behind any and all weather events that are extreme, destructive, unusual or uncomfortable.

          Many of these fear mongers also say we should stop burning fossil fuels that are causing this mayhem.

          Is the Earth truly experiencing the hottest weather on record?

          Absolutely not.

          Actual weather records over the past 100 years show no correlation between rising carbon dioxide levels and local temperatures.

          However, climate change alarmists always find somewhere on Earth where temperatures are higher than ever. The focus is always on isolated temperatures that have reached all-time highs while the same reports ignore all-time record lows. These zealots would like you to believe that due to fossil fuel emissions, summers are now longer and hotter while winters are shorter and milder.

          Yet, the actual temperature records tell a very different story. Did the Earth experience its highest temperature ever this year? The answer is no.

          The highest temperature ever reported was 136 degrees Fahrenheit in Libya in 1922. The record high temperature for the United States was 134 degrees Fahrenheit in Death Valley, California, in 1913. Fossil fuel emissions in 1913 and 1922 were negligible compared to today.

          The coldest temperature ever reported was 129 degrees below zero Fahrenheit in Vostok, Antarctica, in 1983, when Carbon dioxide emissions were five times higher than in 1913. The coldest temperature in the lower 48 states of minus 64 degrees Fahrenheit was recorded in 1996 in Embarass, Minnesota. Did the media and climate scientists warn that this low temperature indicated that we are headed for another Ice Age?

          The maximum reported difference between high and low temperatures at a single location is 188 degrees Fahrenheit (from minus 90F to plus 98F) in Verhoyansk, Siberia. In fact, record changes of highs and lows have occurred in 22 U.S. cities on a single day. For example, in 1989 the temperature in Alamosa, Colorado, varied between a low of 35F and a high of 91F for a temperature swing of 56 degrees F.

          We hope these examples, right out of the weather record books, compiled by C.C. Burt in his book “Extreme Weather Changes,” will help you to understand the scams alarmists are trying to pull. These examples all illustrate that cherry picking record high temperatures in isolated locations tells absolutely nothing about the Earth’s climate.

          The strongest heat wave ever recorded occurred in July 1936, generating high temperatures in half of America’s states. In 1935, fossil fuel emissions were 96 percent lower than today. America’s coldest year occurred in 1899, when temperatures dropped below 0 F in all 48 states.



          Interesting that the figure above shows the most severe historic cold wave during the past century took place in 1936, which was the same year when the strongest heat wave took place. In terms of general behavior, the global warming alarmist prediction is that as time progresses and fossil fuel emissions increase, the number of record highs should increase and record lows should decrease. However, these trends do not exist and the data dispels, rather than supports, the global warming hypothesis.

          Concurrently a compilation of all days since 1915 when temperatures exceeded 90F shows them decreasing with time rather than increasing in Figure 2.



          The heat wave experienced in the 1930s and 1950s are clearly evident here. Once again, the data does not support the claim that the United States is hotter than ever as a result of rising Carbon dioxide levels.

          From 1970 until 1998 there was a warming period that raised temperatures by about 0.7 F that helped spawn the global warming alarmist movement. However, since 1998, little warming has occurred while carbon dioxide emissions continue to increase. This is totally consistent with variations in the amount of heat the Earth receives from the Sun.

          These facts are completely supported by 4,000 ocean floats which measure ocean temperatures at a variety of depths. This data at argo.ucsd.edu measures the oceans where climate-induced temperatures occur.
          ...
          https://www.westernjournal.com/media...-manipulation/
          TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

          Comment


          • More crap funded by the The Charles G. Koch Foundation , the biggest oil producers, trying to get us to consume more oil.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by bill shack View Post
              More crap funded by the The Charles G. Koch Foundation , the biggest oil producers, trying to get us to consume more oil.
              OMG

              Koch funded Nature to not conform to the lies and distorted data presented by the ACC/AGW Luddites.

              Did you take any science classes in school and/or pass them?
              TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

              Comment


              • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                OMG

                Koch funded Nature to not conform to the lies and distorted data presented by the ACC/AGW Luddites.

                Did you take any science classes in school and/or pass them?
                What is striking is the utter contempt useless people have for useful people. They have faith in the revelation that industries are bad because they have been parasitized by the cult of Marxism in our schools and by the statists in our governments. The fact that the worst industrial pollution in history can be found in the socialist states of the USSR and China seems to be lost on them.

                Renewable energy from an economic perspective has been as much a failure as Venezuela's economy with an average of electric costs being three times higher where it has been heavily invested in. The fact that they confuse corporatism with capitalism is just proof of the vacuous nature of their faith.

                That many our hypocrites with a political agenda is born out by the lack of criticism for the socialist state of Valenzuela being entirely dependent on oil exports. A few years ago when all the socialists, celebrities and pundits such as Sanders, Corbyn, Chomsky, Stone, Jesse Jackson, Michael Moore, Madonna and Danny Glover were celebrating the wonders of socialism not a mention was made of Venzuala's contribution to the end of the world that oil is suppose to be responsible for. Perhaps more importantly the failure to understand that having oil and making it profitable being two completely different economic propositions must surely mean that these political thinkers and celebrities are completely ignorant of the value of management.
                We hunt the hunters

                Comment


                • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                  OMG

                  Koch funded Nature to not conform to the lies and distorted data presented by the ACC/AGW Luddites.

                  Did you take any science classes in school and/or pass them?
                  i thought your side does not believe in science as it is fake news

                  Comment


                  • Bock and those with a vested interest would have you believe that everything is fine with the planet warming. trust those with no vested interest a true impartial judge

                    NOAA and NASA jointly released their global temperature data, making it official: 2015 was the hottest year on record (since 1880). The previous hottest year was 2014, and the last time back-to-back hottest yearsoccurred were 2006-07.
                    The 10 Hottest Years on Record | Climate Central

                    http://www.climatecentral.org/galler...ears-on-record

                    Comment


                    • Just look around ,and tell me everything's fine
                      1) polar bears in russia eating at a garbage dump because the ice did not form over the arctic
                      https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/12/1...climate-change
                      2) storm that are the worst of the century
                      2018-09-13 · According to a new study from NOAA, climate change is responsible for the increase in size and intensity of storms during hurricane season. Warmer waters and slower wind currents have created the ...
                      3) coral dying off due to increase water temperature
                      https://us.blastingnews.com/world/20...-00623137.html
                      4) crops are now being able to be planted further north ,Crops normally seen growing in the south of Europe will be able to be grown further north. This would allow more sweetcorn, grapes, sunflowers, soya and maize to be grown in Britain. In Scotland

                      https://www.theguardian.com/environm...-food-supplies
                      5) fish stocks dying off due to increased water temp,Exotic warm water marine species such as anchovy, bluefin tuna, stingray, and thresher shark are spreading northwards into British coastal waters, where average sea temperatures are now moving ...

                      https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ing-northwards

                      6) crops will fail with increase heat and lack of rain due to climate change ,
                      Large-scale crop failures like the one that caused the recent Russian wheat crisis are likely to become more common under climate change due to an increased frequency of extreme weather events, a new study shows.

                      https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...1007092817.htm

                      so look around and tell me you do you believe,

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by bill shack View Post

                        i thought your side does not believe in science as it is fake news
                        I doubt you know what "my side" is. And if you followed my posts on the other threads here you'd find I'm one of the few whom does do science.

                        ACC/AGW is politics and emotional faith, not science.

                        If you knew how to read and comprehend you'd see the issue isn't if climate changes and fluxes, but if the shifts now are more the result of human activity or just more expression of natural process and flows. I subscribe to the latter.
                        TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                        Comment


                        • Interesting article demonstrating how the consensus is enforced.

                          https://www.iflscience.com/environme...communication/

                          The question is why do people have such confidence in the models when so little is known about the background temperatures? You would think the modelers would be very interested in solar activity.
                          We hunt the hunters

                          Comment


                          • A World Without Clouds

                            A state-of-the-art supercomputer simulation indicates that a feedback loop between global warming and cloud loss can push Earth’s climate past a disastrous tipping point in as little as a century.
                            ...
                            On a 1987 voyage to the Antarctic, the paleoceanographer James Kennett and his crew dropped anchor in the Weddell Sea, drilled into the seabed, and extracted a vertical cylinder of sediment. In an inch-thick layer of plankton fossils and other detritus buried more than 500 feet deep, they found a disturbing clue about the planet’s past that could spell disaster for the future.

                            Lower in the sediment core, fossils abounded from 60 plankton species. But in that thin cross-section from about 56 million years ago, the number of species dropped to 17. And the planktons’ oxygen and carbon isotope compositions had dramatically changed. Kennett and his student Lowell Stott deduced from the anomalous isotopes that carbon dioxide had flooded the air, causing the ocean to rapidly acidify and heat up, in a process similar to what we are seeing today.

                            While those 17 kinds of plankton were sinking through the warming waters and settling on the Antarctic seabed, a tapir-like creature died in what is now Wyoming, depositing a tooth in a bright-red layer of sedimentary rock coursing through the badlands of the Bighorn Basin. In 1992, the finder of the tooth fossil, Phil Gingerich, and collaborators Jim Zachos and Paul Koch reported the same isotope anomalies in its enamel that Kennett and Stott had presented in their ocean findings a year earlier. The prehistoric mammal had also been breathing CO2-flooded air.

                            More data points surfaced in China, then Europe, then all over. A picture emerged of a brief, cataclysmic hot spell 56 million years ago, now known as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM). After heat-trapping carbon leaked into the sky from an unknown source, the planet, which was already several degrees Celsius hotter than it is today, gained an additional 6 degrees. The ocean turned jacuzzi-hot near the equator and experienced mass extinctions worldwide. On land, primitive monkeys, horses and other early mammals marched northward, following vegetation to higher latitudes. The mammals also miniaturized over generations, as leaves became less nutritious in the carbonaceous air. Violent storms ravaged the planet; the geologic record indicates flash floods and protracted droughts. As Kennett put it, “Earth was triggered, and all hell broke loose.”

                            The PETM doesn’t only provide a past example of CO2-driven climate change; scientists say it also points to an unknown factor that has an outsize influence on Earth’s climate. When the planet got hot, it got really hot. Ancient warming episodes like the PETM were always far more extreme than theoretical models of the climate suggest they should have been. Even after accounting for differences in geography, ocean currents and vegetation during these past episodes, paleoclimatologists find that something big appears to be missing from their models — an X-factor whose wild swings leave no trace in the fossil record.

                            Evidence is mounting in favor of the answer that experts have long suspected but have only recently been capable of exploring in detail. “It’s quite clear at this point that the answer is clouds,” said Matt Huber, a paleoclimate modeler at Purdue University.
                            ...
                            The simulation revealed a tipping point: a level of warming at which stratocumulus clouds break up altogether. The disappearance occurs when the concentration of CO2 in the simulated atmosphere reaches 1,200 parts per million — ...
                            ...
                            https://www.quantamagazine.org/cloud...ming-20190225/

                            So a couple points to consider here;
                            1. This was 56 million years ago, long before humans appeared on this planet so we aren't looking at human-caused/anthropogenic factor ...
                            2. Whatever caused that peak to 1200ppm of CO2 was some form of "NATURAL" ...
                            3. If we replace most of the Flora biomass lost in the past 100-150 years, such will uptake on our CO2 level and likely increase, which means there would be little prospect that it will triple within the next century, which the "cassandras" of this article are trying to claim.
                            4. We are not experiencing the highest levels ever of CO2 on this planet nor the warmest ever global climate average.
                            Last edited by G David Bock; 28 Feb 19, 15:01.
                            TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                            Comment


                            • The obvious fraud is that climate research has violated the basic principles of science. First you establish back ground conditions then ad the modifier into your models. Not only has most of the research money gone into theoretical models but there is evidence they distorted actual measurements to match the models. Wildly inaccurate predictions don't leave you with much confidence in any case.
                              We hunt the hunters

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                                If you knew how to read and comprehend you'd see the issue isn't if climate changes and fluxes, but if the shifts now are more the result of human activity or just more expression of natural process and flows. I subscribe to the latter.
                                It really does not matter does it.

                                The real issue is how to deal with the consequences of said shifts, which are apparent.

                                The endless discussion over the cause is just obfuscation.



                                High Admiral Snowy, Commander In Chief of the Naval Forces of The Phoenix Confederation.
                                Major Atticus Finch - ACW Rainbow Co.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X