Climate Change: How to turn the Earth into Venus, redux.

Sylverlokk

Golden Knight of the Realm
1,554
491
4m


From herehttp://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

And here they talk about how they had to add a new color to temperature maps in Australia for new areas that are over 130 degrees, among other things.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astro...ge_denial.html

So what are we going to do about it, and how much are we willing to pay or do without? Unfortunately a lot of the culprits are emerging nations that refuse to even consider "Green" actions and restrictions. Getting away from Oil and coal is a great start, but ultimately we have to help the rest of the world get past oil and coal as well or it won't make any difference.
 
2,199
1
0
Unfortunately a lot of the culprits are emerging nations that refuse to even consider "Green" actions and restrictions. Getting away from Oil and coal is a great start, but ultimately we have to help the rest of the world get past oil and coal as well or it won't make any difference.
To be fair, we don't really have the moral high ground. For us to tell the developing world "sorry, you can't use cheap energy to help get yourselves out of poverty because we've been polluting non-stop for the last 150 years." is ridiculous. If we're serious about it, we're going to have to pay them off in the short term and share whatever clean energy technology we develop with them for free in the long term. Of course, we're not really serious about it because monied interests that control our political system have a stake in making sure that we don't ever tax at the rates that are going to be necessary to do anything about it.
 

Tuco

Janitor of the Realm
35,772
50,156
41d 12h 10m
I'm pretty hopeful that we can avert any massive threat of global warming. Despite the dumb media and your dumb neighbor/co workers not believing in climate change, global warming and science, efficiency, alternative energy and renewable energy are massive industries with incredible research and a bright future.

I agree that we have no moral position to make clean/renewable energy demands of India/China/Brazil, but I think as we improve our technology, infrastructure and standards developing countries will improve as well. It's not like every developing country needs to go through a 100 year industrial revolution by chucking coal dust everywhere.

And wrt the national conversation about climate change, the more evidence that comes out the less contentious the argument will get.
 

LiquidSmell_sl

shitlord
7
0
0
To be honest, if they want to help tell the car manufacturers to stop making all the "affordable" hybrid and electric cars completely stupid looking.
 

TPDDODD_sl

shitlord
119
0
0
There was a science program that detailed how to sequester huge amounts of atmospheric C02, effectively returning the carbon back to the earth crust. The claim being that we presently actually have the technology to reverse global warning now, as opposed to just slowing the increase.
 

Heylel

Molten Core Raider
3,543
370
3d 14h 51m
To be honest, if they want to help tell the car manufacturers to stop making all the "affordable" hybrid and electric cars completely stupid looking.
Or make them actually affordable. The tax credits aren't doing a lick of good since that just hikes the price. There's no net savings involved at all.
 

LiquidSmell_sl

shitlord
7
0
0
Or make them actually affordable. The tax credits aren't doing a lick of good since that just hikes the price. There's no net savings involved at all.
Yeah, i once calculated how far I would need to drive a Ford Hybrid (compared to the same model, non-hybrid) before I would make money on the fuel savings. The extra cost of the damn hybrid would be covered by fuel savings once I drove 130,000 miles...and that's not including the battery replacement fees, etc...
 

Tuco

Janitor of the Realm
35,772
50,156
41d 12h 10m
Yeah, i once calculated how far I would need to drive a Ford Hybrid (compared to the same model, non-hybrid) before I would make money on the fuel savings. The extra cost of the damn hybrid would be covered by fuel savings once I drove 130,000 miles...and that's not including the battery replacement fees, etc...
Yep. Good news is that will stop being true in the near future, especially with implementations like the Chevy Volt that can get power off the grid instead of gasoline.
 

Eomer

Golden Squire
5,471
258
0
It's not like every developing country needs to go through a 100 year industrial revolution by chucking coal dust everywhere.
Yeah, the problem is, that's exactly what happened with the first third or so of the world that industrialized (the "West") and that's exactly what the second third of the world is doing as we speak (China/India). By the time rapid industrialization hits the entire continent of Africa in the next couple decades, we'd have better come up with something else not just for our energy sources, but theirs too.

And wrt the national conversation about climate change, the more evidence that comes out the less contentious the argument will get.
I don't really agree. In the early 90's it wasn't an overly contentious issue when it was first starting to be raised seriously. By the late 90's when Kyoto came around, it had started to get pretty contentious. Now it's an extremely contentious issue pretty much everywhere, whether that contention is about whether it's happening or not, who should bear the costs of mitigating it (developed vs developing, corporations vs individuals, etc etc), and the best ways of mitigating it (carbon capture vs renewables vs geo-engineering).

Meanwhile the evidence for it has gotten better and more detailed continuously. I dunno, maybe there's some sort of tipping point where suddenly everyone will accept that it's happening, on the severity of the problem, and the best ways to go about addressing it. But I'm not holding my breath. And it's much more complicated than a binary "yes/no" on whether it's happening. There's far more to it than that.

Heylel_sl said:
Or make them actually affordable. The tax credits aren't doing a lick of good since that just hikes the price. There's no net savings involved at all.
Gasoline is too cheap in the US. That would address part of the problem with hybrids, anyways. But talk of raising the federal gas tax even a few cents is anathema to any politician who wants to get elected again.
 

Kedwyn

Silver Squire
3,915
82
0
Gasoline prices aren't the problem with Hybrids. Hybrids are their own problem. Its a feel good purchase and nothing more for the vast majority.

While its true these newer industrialized nations may require less time on the dirty stuff than ourselves or Europe, the population of these places is significantly greater and likely would far offset the small time savings.

The issue is people don't like the options we have available. Nuclear being a big one that will take most of our life times to even start to implement and the other renewable sources are very over hyped and under deliver in actual use. We are 25 to 40 years away from any meaningful change in how we get and use energy.

Unfortunately, until it becomes "crisis" level nothing is going to get done. Mostly because investing in these sectors is suspect at best for returns and the governments that could do something are so bloated with debt and other spending there is nothing left. Regardless I'm sure once we get to that level most of the "solutions" will involve removing CO2 with scrubbers or moving it under ground / water and not on the actual problem. Par for the course from our leaders and society.
 
2,199
1
0
the other renewable sources are very over hyped and under deliver in actual use.
1. Nuclear isn't renewable.
2. This is a throw-away line that totally ignores the radical improvements that have been made in the technologies behind them which, frankly, has been promulgated by the same politicians that have fought tooth and nail to keep from funding research so that way we could waste time on stupid shit like nuclear power.
 

Xeldar

Silver Squire
1,546
133
0
I read a whole pseudo-scientific/propaganda book about abiotic petroleum creation being the primary source of fuel. The book even had the Nazi swatiska on the front! It was written by a dude with a PHd in either poli sci or history ie a master of bullshit, buthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer-Tropsch_processwas the mechanism he said was creatin' all dem hydrocarbons.
 

Itzena_sl

shitlord
4,609
4
0
1. Nuclear isn't renewable.
2. This is a throw-away line that totally ignores the radical improvements that have been made in the technologies behind them which, frankly, has been promulgated by the same politicians that have fought tooth and nail to keep from funding research so that way we could waste time on stupid shit like nuclear power.
Yeah, you're talking bollocks.
Base load power has two possible solutions for the foreseeable future: Fossil fuels or nuclear fission.
So go ahead and pick one.
 

Itzena_sl

shitlord
4,609
4
0
Citation needed.
Let me turn that around to you: Which renewable power source (or sources) is a) suitable for base load generation and b) capable of being produced in sufficient numbers to provide base load on a national scale.

E: I mean, we already know that fossil fuels are suitable (apart from the whole peak oil/gas/coal thing, pollution emission and output of more radioactivity per year than a nuke plant does in it's entire lifetime) and fission plants are also capable (as long as you don't a) built it on a sodding fault line or b) build it with a positive void coefficient and then deliberately get your night/retard shift to try and break it).
 

Tuco

Janitor of the Realm
35,772
50,156
41d 12h 10m
Thorium is where it's at.

(Note I have no idea what I'm talking about).
 

Beef Supreme_sl

shitlord
1,207
0
0
There isn't a replacement for oil waiting anywhere. No other energy source has the EROEI, is liquid and scarce enough to create a market while ubiquitous enough to fuel our growth.

 

Eomer

Golden Squire
5,471
258
0
Let me turn that around to you: Which renewable power source (or sources) is a) suitable for base load generation and b) capable of being produced in sufficient numbers to provide base load on a national scale.
Tidal has the potential for some smaller nations with large coastlines, but even for the UK it's maybe 20% of total load. I don't know what percentage of total power generation is considered "base", but that's at least getting you part of the way there.

Overall though I agree with you on nuclear and the lack of viable alternatives in the short to medium term. However changing to natural gas from coal would make a pretty significant difference in emissions if the whole world did it.