The Earth, Science and Global Warming.

[st3v3]

I'm not sparking up another green-thread here, but I've recently watch a documentary about Atlantis the lost city and one 'fact' it mentioned is that in the downfall/sinking of this city, there was eruption of an age old Volano where 2 types of Magma joined causing a freak 150Billion tonnes of the stuff to erupt.

Can that be right?

I don't actually believe we're going through a Global warming phase due to our impression on the planet; whatevers happening is natural and we happen to be inhabitting at this time - we're overdue and ice age I hear so it's all kiking off sometime.

But, what science is there to use and shut these eco-freaks up? I mean, I dont turn my stuff off, I boil the kettle if i forget i did it and I want a warm bru.. add to that my Diesel car and 2t bike I'm doing my share to fuck the place up.

There's speculation the whole 'electric car' thing is another votes scandal by our dearest PM and backhanders are all too common.

But, really, what's the science and belief of it's validity here? I'd reckon it's happening, but not half as fast as they say. That said, how fast is it happening on the earth timeline compared to humans as a species? Then there's religious nut views on 2012 being a world ending year - Will we all be dead before we see real change?
____________________
Roger wrote: Women don't get damp for clingy puppies. Get some better happy pills, hit the gym & buy a medallion the size of a dinner plate. Job done

[smegballs]

Interesting article I read here about electric cars.

It looks at the constrains in terms of the rare metals used to make the batteries used in leccy/hybrid vehicles. The writer shows that for X amount of batteries, more hydrocarbon fuels are saved by having a large fleet of hybrids than one or two leccy onlys.

[doggone]

Those cars tata are starting to make even now driven by compressed air seem a better option than expensive batteries that might need replacing after 5 years with an estimated cost of £7000
You can compress air in a variety of relatively simple ways.

A lot of vested interests are pulling strings behind the scenes in the CO2/warming industry.
In particular the windmill and solar business gets huge subsidy to produce what is currently hopelessly uneconomic power, but we must start moving away from fossil fuel dependancy for obvious reasons.

There has been very little measured warming the last 20 years now, which is not what the computer models we were shown predicted.
This makes me think they are missing out significant unknown factors or more likely they biased the models from the start to produce the desired result.

'Climate science' seems to be dominated by a surprisingly small number of people who seems suspiciously more like activists than scientists to me.

[daemonoid]

[Kickstart]

Hi

Basic science is that higher levels of CO2 will increase the amount of some wave lengths of light that are trapped, and these will result in increased temperatures.

But it is far more complicated than that due to many feedback mechanisms. For example, warmth leads to more water evaporation, which reflects the suns light before it warms the earth (and to add complexity, the effect of clouds at different levels in the atmosphere are very different). The assumption at the moment appears to be that these feedbacks will be positive (ie, add to the temperature), hence the estimates for temperature increase are in the region of 3 times that which could be caused directly by the increase in CO2 levels.

To me it seems that these feedbacks are very poorly understood, as the whole system is hideously complicated. I am not averse to the idea that increased CO2 could increase temperature, nor that this might have happened / be happening. But I would like some real evidence (the real evidence we have is very poor quality, and we only have ~33 years of accurate worldwide temperature measurements since satellite measuring started, with older measurements being of very variable quality). Claims that X is definitely happening and anyone saying otherwise is a nutter / denier / some other insult just tend to make me thing the opposite as the evidence either way is so weak. Whether X is claims of warming or cooling.

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing

[Hetzer]

Who gives a fuck? The scum at the top don't, the only thing that motivates them into doing anything is whatever puts more money in their pockets. And that's all the climate-change BS is, a money-whoring scam.
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!"

[angryjonny]

[GhostRider]

Trying to predict the outcome of a whole set of different factors which all fall pray to chaos theory seems like an excercise in futility. If you can't accurately predict the weather day to day, then how can you estimate it's effects several hundred years into the future? But yeah, as long as everyones getting paid, just sweep those nuisance facts out of the way, carbon tax anyone??

GhostRider
____________________
I have all the characteristics of a human being: blood, flesh, skin, hair; but not a single, clear, identifiable emotion, except for greed and disgust. Something horrible is happening inside of me and I don't know why. My nightly bloodlust has overflown into my days. I feel lethal, on the verge of frenzy. I think my mask of sanity is about to slip.

[calyx]

[fatpies]

[Im-a-Ridah]

I'm almost offended by you raising the issue of global "warming" after being outside when it's anything but "warm". Stop getting my hopes up, it's not fair

Also, as part of the "big society", everyone should drive a big powerful car or motorbike to help warm the place up a bit.

As for global warming statistics, weren't these being manipulated by some Universities a year or two back? Oh, and I agree with most of renewable energy industry being a scam, it's just a scam for hippy/liberal/greeny types and so somehow acceptable to some? Similar perhaps the the way environmental campaigners chug around a great big old oil burning ship, or how (Soviet funded) CND campaigners turn fields in to virtual sewers?

[Robby]

Whether or not MMGW is true, it makes a good excuse to work on getting solutions in place that do not rely on fossil fuels.

Developing, building and testing these solutions is expensive and time consuming. Most green electricity generation is currently mostly a large and costly experiment, to see what works and what could be reasonably improved to be useful. This is starting to show some promise - wind turbines were the big thing for the last decade or so, but found to not perform too well. Offshore wind looks more promising, although it will need more efficient turbines and sturdier structures to be really worthwhile. Solar, which for years was a real waste of time, has shown strong development in recent years. Wave/tidal makes the most sense to me - water is always moving - but it is very expensive to build. Try building an extremely solid structure, under water, in a place where the tide is very strong.

The same goes for battery technology. Currently batteries are a bit crap. The energy density isn't good enough, they cost far too much to make, and cost too much to recycle. Development over the last decade have mostly involved gradual improvements in existing tech, rather than new breakthrough tech. If someone had told you 10 years ago that your mobile phone in 2012 would still need to be charged every couple of days, you would laugh at them.

A few breakthroughs will make a big difference, but they won't happen without massive investment, which won't happen without a MMGW agenda. A working solar-steam array that can be manufactured and operated for an equivalent price/KWh to an existing gas-fired power station would be such a breakthrough. A battery or fuel cell tech that uses something seawater and graphite or cardboard would also be useful. Nuclear fusion would solve a lot of problems, providing enough clean energy to make hydrogen from seawater a practicality, but that is a long way off yet. We may see a working prototype by 2050, some of us may see it rolled out globally during our lifetimes. Something needs to fill the gap between fossil fuels getting too expensive, and that sort of tech happening.

[daemonoid]

[st3v3]

[mistergixer]

Global warming = ice caps reduce, sea levels rise.

Problem?

Nope. What do you want to do on a nice hot day? I like to go to the seaside. Thanks to global warming you'll have more hot days and the seaside will be right on your doorstep*.



* Shamelessly stolen from Johnny Vegas.
____________________
Space Monkey #7
Don Eladio is dead. His capos are dead. You have no one left to fight for. Fill your pockets and leave in peace. Or fight me and die!
Mistergixer's videos on YouTube

[Rogerborg]

The issue is this: even if you and I beggar ourselves, in the time it took to read this, India and China produced another 7,438,593 babies and 2,394 coal fired power plants (more or less) and they Do. Not. Give. A. Damn.

The new industrial economies are a long way away from being rich enough that they can actually con their populace into wanting to be povs, so we should just buy some wellies and sandbags and get ready for the Flood.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike

[daemonoid]

[Robby]

The India and China argument is always a fun one.

They are rapidly industrialising countries with a high birth rate. They need more electricity and resources. They are not, however, all that rich in terms in GDP/capita. This means that they will do whatever is cheapest.

If a UK company has a breakthrough in any clean tech and copyrights it, they can sell it internationally. Combined wiith the ongoing international push to get all countries signed up to a legally binding agreement that will require clean tech, the UK can make a lot of money out of this.

Still, trying to explain the big picture to Steve is like trying to explain Newton's laws to my cats; all you get is a glassy stare until they go off and find some food.

[Kickstart]

[Rogerborg]

[el_oso]

the only way we will be able to sustain the power requirements we need is with nuclear power. nature figured this out ages ago, and is the thing that powers our entire universe.
Trouble is, our current understanding of the atom and the way it behaves is still largely unknown. to this day the only atom that can be fully understood is a single hydrogen atom.
There is so much energy contained within the atom that using atoms as a source of energy may become so cheap that no one would be willing to invest the time and the money needed to make such a low return if any at all.
____________________
Duke 390
Previous: '05 XR125L | '96 XJ600S Diversion |'05 Suzuki GSXR1000 | '05 Honda CBR125-R | '97 YZF 600R Thundercat | '11 Honda CBR250
Car: Jeep Wrangler 4.0L

[ThoughtContro...]

Considering the upset to TPTB and their corporations that mere digital duplication and the resultant "free software", "free music" and "free films" causes, I can't ever see "free (or even dirt cheap) energy" being let out of the bag. Mr Rockefeller may consider himself a "philanthropist", but I can't see him ever giving up the power and control that the oil monopoly brings. Dream on.
____________________
Prize cunt
--
"In a world of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act" - George Orwell

[Babba]

I've just thought up an excellant way to make me money which is greener than a greenie hanging from a frogs nostril.

I'll sign up to this solar panel bollox & claim my 43.3p kwh yet not actually fit any solar panels.

I'll just connect my normal mains supply into their infeed box, pay my leccy bill as usual & retire to my own island in the Carribean on the profits.

Simples.



P.S. Man made/released Co2 isn't even a fraction of 1% of all the Co2 released into our atmosphere by mother nature every second, of every day, of every week etc. etc. etc.

Why aren't there any soap dodging, tree huggerz participating in this thread?

[waffles]

[ThoughtContro...]