Global Warming & Climate Change Discussion

[Eskimonster]

I sincerly think in future we will have to deal with food shortages for billions and eviroment ruining our way of life.
no matter what we do.

 

[dorsetknob]

I sincerly think in future we will have to deal with food shortages for billions and eviroment ruining our way of life.
no matter what we do.

Actuality i think Despite the amount of water on this planet potable water will be the main problem.
In parts of the planet it allready is and its only going to get worse

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I think this Topic requires more choices.

I think it is a scandal in that different tribes are using the whole thing according to their own agendas, some just to make more money, other's too grandiose themselves or push a career as well as a great many well-thinking people too.

Just because I think its a scandal does not mean it is no concern, our noxious output definitely needs to be regulated in order to make room for growing economies to also progress, hopefully quicker than us to an ideal carbon low future, not neutral IMHO.

won't be long till the big freeze when planes all go electric IMHO.

warming is not the only consideration either, acidification plastification and radiation of the whole soddin planet should also concern someone other than me.

 

[R-T-B]

Actuality i think Despite the amount of water on this planet potable water will be the main problem.
In parts of the planet it allready is and its only going to get worse

If we had fusion, all would be well, supposedly.

We could boil the oceans for drinking water!... oi, that sounds fun.

 

[Grog6]

The overall problem is that everything we do increases the basic enthalpy of Earth.

We are converting energy from its stored form to heat.

When that's coal, oil, or gas, we have waste products to deal with, CO2 and water vapor are the most benign.

With Hydro or wind power, we change the flora and fauna of the ecosystem, and add heat as well.

With atomic power we have waste products, whether its fission daughters, or neutron activated linings in fusion plants; both are equally bad, and will be dangerous for a very long time.
Nuclear reprocessing can concentrate those 'tailings' to a much smaller volume, but then we have the plutonium problem; you really don't want a bunch of it laying around, people can do bad things with it.
The hard part of nukes is the material, all else is engineering.

At some point, all the waste heat we are dumping into the environment is going to boil the oceans; SF writers saw this a long time ago.
In fact, almost every problem we keep running into was discussed in SF before the 70's, lol.

I remember "The Sea is Boiling Hot, George Bamber (1971)" as being one of the more alarmist books of the 70's; that, and all the porn, lol.

We won't be around to see any of this, most likely. And that's why nothing will be done about it.

The money will be spent to build seawalls around cities, they will fail, fingers will be pointed, but in the end, we will fight the small battles, not the big ones.

I personally want someone like Elon to get us off this planet, and Maybe the human species can save itself.

We're one asteroid strike, Solar CME event, orbital EMP device, bioweapon, or global thermonuclear war away from the stone age.

James P. Hogan is one of my favorite authors; he wrote some really good books about how it can end; I really hope for the best, but all of the bad political memes in his books are coming back into vogue. Read Cradle of Saturn, and The Anguished Dawn, I liked both.

Vellikovsky's theories on weird shit happening are fanciful, but all good SF is based on a nugget of "what if this happens?".
Seeing the frozen wolf's head brought him back into my conciousness recently; he wrote a book that postulated that the earth shifted suddenly on its axis, rapidly freezing Siberia, thus the stuff we find frozen in the area.

I think we're basically screwed, whatever we do, as citizens of Earth; the politicians will kill us all for their 30 pieces of silver, long before climate change does.

 

[R-T-B]

At some point, all the waste heat we are dumping into the environment is going to boil the oceans

It's a good scifi premise yes, but it's firmly fiction without a good insulation layer. Why? Because the heat isn't what matters. Space is a damn good (and huge) heatsink.

What matters, is what's trapping said heat.

 

[Grog6]

Space isn't as good a heatsink as you think; it can only radiate heat by IR photons.
There is only radiation, convection, and conduction; the last two require somewhere to send the heat to.

Radiation of photons works really well at incandescent temperatures; not so much for human tolerable conditions, lol.

Unless we start boiling off the atmosphere, which is a whole other problem, lol.
Hey, it worked for Mars, so I shouldn't knock it.

I've made systems to radiate heat in a vacuum; it's not terribly easy; adding waste heat to an incandescent filament is actually possible.

Add the insulating layer of 400+ ppm pf CO2, the remnants of the freon problem, and the methane layer, and heat leakage to space will not be going down in our lifetimes.
Look at Venus; we might look like that in another 1000 years or so, depending.

If there weren't a good insulating layer, we'd freeze; if it were stronger, we will cook.
Earth is a balancing act, on a knife edge; eventually we'll slide down it, to devastating effect.
Personally, I hope humanity will get the f out of there before then, but I doubt it, just from politics.

Currently, the big heat sink is the oceans; that will eventually boil them.
Everything in them will die first, and that's already starting, mostly due to pollution.
The gulf's dead spot comes to mind.

Again, the big consequences will not likely occur in our lifetimes; so Screw the future people, they can just deal with it, right?

 

[Space Lynx]

Space isn't as good a heatsink as you think; it can only radiate heat by IR photons.
There is only radiation, convection, and conduction; the last two require somewhere to send the heat to.

Radiation of photons works really well at incandescent temperatures; not so much for human tolerable conditions, lol.

Unless we start boiling off the atmosphere, which is a whole other problem, lol.
Hey, it worked for Mars, so I shouldn't knock it.

I've made systems to radiate heat in a vacuum; it's not terribly easy; adding waste heat to an incandescent filament is actually possible.

Add the insulating layer of 400+ ppm pf CO2, the remnants of the freon problem, and the methane layer, and heat leakage to space will not be going down in our lifetimes.
Look at Venus; we might look like that in another 1000 years or so, depending.

If there weren't a good insulating layer, we'd freeze; if it were stronger, we will cook.
Earth is a balancing act, on a knife edge; eventually we'll slide down it, to devastating effect.
Personally, I hope humanity will get the f out of there before then, but I doubt it, just from politics.

Currently, the big heat sink is the oceans; that will eventually boil them.
Everything in them will die first, and that's already starting, mostly due to pollution.
The gulf's dead spot comes to mind.

Again, the big consequences will not likely occur in our lifetimes; so Screw the future people, they can just deal with it, right?

incorrect, it's moving faster than anyone expected. expect mass economic changes, ways of life, displacement within 30 years.

don't forget to calculate compounding interest

 

[Grog6]

I guess you missed the implied sarcasm there.
I'll add the /s tags next time.

I don't really expect to last another 30 years; but then, I never figured I'd last the first 30 either, lol.

Also, one of my friends pointed out that if you raise the temperature high enough, you can radiate energy by neutrino emission.
Let's hope it doesn't get that hot.

 

[R-T-B]

I mean, if space wasn't a good heatsink you'd see a lot less dead planets. I think the proof is in the pudding there, it sucks a lot of energy out of our system (the earth) unless some other force stops it from doing so (atmospheric gas).

 

[FordGT90Concept]

space = vacuum
heat = dissipation of energy
Only way for heat to leave an object in space is via radiation. Convection and conduction aren't options because there is no medium for it to occur through. Result: radiated objects in space are quick to heat and slow to cool.
Atmosphere traps radiation, provides medium for conduction and convection to occur through. Atmosphere and relatively constant rotation stabilizes climate from the intense heating and cooling of solar bombardment.
Earth has a global thermal budget on an annual basis. Amplifying greenhouse gases throws that budget off in favor of heating.

Canadian permafrost melting for the first time in 1000s of years is proof there's abnormally high amounts of heat in the system. And that melting permafrost is slowing it...for now. Doesn't take a genius to figure out what happens when the cold places are no longer cold: everything gets hotter faster.

They may be right. We may be too late. Virtually all signs are pointing to a sixth extinction event unfolding.

 

[Space Lynx]

space = vacuum
heat = dissipation of energy
Only way for heat to leave an object in space is via radiation. Convection and conduction aren't options because there is no medium for it to occur through. Result: radiated objects in space are quick to heat and slow to cool.
Atmosphere traps radiation, provides medium for conduction and convection to occur through. Atmosphere and relatively constant rotation stabilizes climate from the intense heating and cooling of solar bombardment.
Earth has a global thermal budget on an annual basis. Amplifying greenhouse gases throws that budget off in favor of heating.

Canadian permafrost melting for the first time in 1000s of years is proof there's abnormally high amounts of heat in the system. And that melting permafrost is slowing it...for now. Doesn't take a genius to figure out what happens when the cold places are no longer cold: everything gets hotter faster.

They may be right. We may be too late. Virtually all signs are pointing to a sixth extinction event unfolding.

The rich will move underground, the poor will dig holes, but they won't be deep enough. Then after 2 generations, and the species is mostly wiped out, but Earth has re-balanced, the rich's offspring will come out of the ground and create a new world, it will be glorious!!! Rejoice!!!

 

[Eskimonster]

Even the Himalayas ice melts faster then the last 40 years recorded.

AAAS

advances.sciencemag.org

 

[Vayra86]

Actuality i think Despite the amount of water on this planet potable water will be the main problem.
In parts of the planet it allready is and its only going to get worse

Dark Reign was WAAAY ahead of its time. Note the blue pond - its a pure water source, the primary resource of the game.

 

[Eskimonster]

Ice bears going to city, no ice to support it .

 

[R-T-B]

Ice bears going to city, no ice to support it .

View attachment 125350

They also are interbreeding with grizzly bears now that they have moved so far south, leading to a whole new hybrid species.

It'd be cool if it wasn't so sad.

 

[Grog6]

The rich will move underground, the poor will dig holes, but they won't be deep enough. Then after 2 generations, and the species is mostly wiped out, but Earth has re-balanced, the rich's offspring will come out of the ground and create a new world, it will be glorious!!! Rejoice!!!

That is mentioned in the book I referenced above, as well as Heinleins classic "The Caves of Steel" and related books.

"The Naked Sun" references the fact that long after the planet recovers from the worst of it, people are afraid to go outside, due to fear of the natural elements.

SF did it first, lol. (Reference the South Park Simpsons did it meme)
In the 50's.



I saw this today:

U.S May Have to Spend Over $400 Billion on Seawalls by 2040 to Protect Itself From Rising Seas

Florida alone is likely to have to spend $76 billion on seawalls in the next two decades as sea levels continue to rise.

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[Space Lynx]

I saw this today:

U.S May Have to Spend Over $400 Billion on Seawalls by 2040 to Protect Itself From Rising Seas

Florida alone is likely to have to spend $76 billion on seawalls in the next two decades as sea levels continue to rise.

www.thedailybeast.com

yep our taxpayer money being spent wonderfully. instead of people moving inland, these walls will do nothing but delay the inevitable. that's ok though, 6 trillion and counting in war debts still unpaid since 2001 with compounding interest = value of american dollar will be crap someday.

 

[Eskimonster]

Its so hard to be a #Climanutt

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/embed/p07dr0s1/48714864

 

[hat]

yep our taxpayer money being spent wonderfully. instead of people moving inland, these walls will do nothing but delay the inevitable. that's ok though, 6 trillion and counting in war debts still unpaid since 2001 with compounding interest = value of american dollar will be crap someday.

That's a tough call. That's a LOT of infrastructure to leave behind as you move inland. This displaces millions of people, crowding already crowded cities even more. On the other hand, all we need is one good hurricane to turn seawalled coastal cities into New Orelans after Katrina hit. And we have plenty of those to go around...

 

[Space Lynx]

That's a tough call. That's a LOT of infrastructure to leave behind as you move inland. This displaces millions of people, crowding already crowded cities even more. On the other hand, all we need is one good hurricane to turn seawalled coastal cities into New Orelans after Katrina hit. And we have plenty of those to go around...

oh don't get me wrong, I meant slowly over time, "tax incentives" to build more inland so to speak, similar to tax incentives electric cars had under Obama. whether we like it or not, those ocean walls will never be strong enough in 50 years. so people will move inland whether we want them to or not

 

[Grog6]

Hey, on the good side, I live at elevation ~+750 feet, so when the polar icecaps melt and the oceans go up 300 feet, the beach will be about 30 miles from here or less.

Just covering the nearest nuclear power plant, lol.

 

[R-T-B]

Hey, on the good side, I live at elevation ~+750 feet, so when the polar icecaps melt and the oceans go up 300 feet, the beach will be about 30 miles from here or less.

Just covering the nearest nuclear power plant, lol.

Me too. I'll be a nice little private island in the Puget Island Chain (500+ feet now).

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Economic reality check:

Weaning U.S. power sector off fossil fuels would cost $4.7 trillion: study

Eliminating fossil fuels from the U.S. power sector, a key goal of the "Green New Deal" backed by many Democratic presidential candidates, would cost $4.7 trillion and pose massive economic and social challenges, according to a report released on Thursday by energy research...

www.reuters.com

Biden's plan would cost $1.7 trillion.
O'Rourke's plan would cost $5 trillion.
Ocasio-Cortez plan would cost $10 trillion.

These price figures are just in relation to electric generation.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll here on Wednesday showed most Americans back "aggressive" climate change action like that proposed by Democrats, but that support falls off dramatically if they sense the initiatives would cost them.

We'll fix climate change by being aggressive and angry then hide when it comes time to pay for it. Yay! Hypocrisy!

It estimated that 1,600 gigawatts of wind and solar capacity would have to be added, at a cost of around $1.5 trillion. That’s more than 11 times the nation’s current wind and solar capacity. And while the costs of wind and solar have come down, a sharp increase in demand could strain supply chains and send prices of key materials like steel and copper upward.

The study also said 900 GW of energy storage would be required to make sure wind and solar assets can work reliably even when the weather isn’t cooperating, 900 times more than is currently installed. That sharp increase in investment in still-nascent energy storage technology would raise the cost of all-renewable generation to $4 trillion, the report said.

And remember, they have to be replaced every 5 years because they lose capacity. Anyone else here facepalming yet?

Finally, adding 200,000 miles of high voltage transmission to get wind and solar energy from the plains or deserts to major metropolitan areas would add another $700 billion.

Major ecological disruption, that.

The report warned that sharp increases in customer electricity rates to pay for such a transition could also result in a public backlash against aggressive climate policies and ultimately slow progress.

They echo what I've said and what every other economist that looks at the problem said:

The report said extending the timeframe for such a transition to allow for newer technologies to be developed and including nuclear power plants and some portion of natural gas generation could reduce the costs significantly.

Natural gas is mentioned because its far superior to using batteries...but still is a fossil fuel.

 

[Assimilator]

Economic reality check:

Weaning U.S. power sector off fossil fuels would cost $4.7 trillion: study

Eliminating fossil fuels from the U.S. power sector, a key goal of the "Green New Deal" backed by many Democratic presidential candidates, would cost $4.7 trillion and pose massive economic and social challenges, according to a report released on Thursday by energy research...

www.reuters.com

Biden's plan would cost $1.7 trillion.
O'Rourke's plan would cost $5 trillion.
Ocasio-Cortez plan would cost $10 trillion.

These price figures are just in relation to electric generation.


We'll fix climate change by being aggressive and angry then hide when it comes time to pay for it. Yay! Hypocrisy!



And remember, they have to be replaced every 5 years because they lose capacity. Anyone else here facepalming yet?

Major ecological disruption, that.

They echo what I've said and what every other economist that looks at the problem said:

Natural gas is mentioned because its far superior to using batteries...but still is a fossil fuel.

All of this ignores what will happen to wind, solar, and battery technology if it becomes the only game in town (spoiler: expect massive improvements in an extremely short timespan as the R&D departments of every energy company in the world try to get a piece of the pie in the world's wealthiest country). It also ignores the plethora of new employment opportunities that will be created in construction and maintenance.