Slashdot Mirror
Blueprints For Taming the Climate Crisis
mdsolar sends this story from the NY Times:
Here's what your future will look like if we are to have a shot at preventing devastating climate change. Within about 15 years every new car sold in the United States will be electric. ... Up to 60 percent of power might come from nuclear sources. And coal's footprint will shrink drastically, perhaps even disappear from the power supply. This course, created by a team of energy experts, was unveiled on Tuesday in a report for the United Nations (PDF) that explores the technological paths available for the world's 15 main economies to both maintain reasonable rates of growth and cut their carbon emissions enough by 2050 to prevent climatic havoc. It offers a sobering conclusion: We might be able to pull it off. But it will take an overhaul of the way we use energy, and a huge investment in the development and deployment of new energy technologies. Significantly, it calls for an entirely different approach to international diplomacy on the issue of how to combat climate change.
Did you bother to note the rather important fact that none of our modern crop foods were alive during that time period. Adaptation of plant and animal life to major geologic changes doesn't happen in a century.
The problem we face isn't one of extinction of life on earth, but the inviability of meta-stable ecosystems we and our economies rely on.
Because the real benefit of the fossil fuels is the high density of the stored energy.
Give me the technology to build a battery that can power an electric car for 500 miles, and ...
Electric cars can now work for 99% of the population - all running on power they store overnight/while at work.
Solar can now store enough to last not only through the night but also through a cloudy day.
Wind based energies can now store enough to get through some calm days
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
If we didn't rear so many of them, the mess we're in might not be quite as bad as it is.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Citing a proven liar, ex TV weatherman's (who has less formal meteorological education than I have) wordpress blog.
Just saying. Oh, and paid shill. Let's not forget that he gets paid money to maintain a specific position.
Got it. The jurassic plants like CO2, but the ones we eat and use today dont. Sure. Right. Yeah, you nailed it Al Goreleone.
The misrepresentation, half truth and putting Al Gore in there are all signs of vapid Talk Radio propaganda.
I know because I used to be in that environment.
Let's examine the parent's statement.
1. State a fact: "jurassic plants like CO2" - which sucks in people.
2. "the ones we eat and use today dont" - complete lie in this case (not even a half truth which is usually the case). Now the typical unsophisticated talk radio listener will think, "Well 1 is true so 2 is true."
"Sure. Right." - sarcasm to suck in them in.
" Yeah, you nailed it Al Goreleone" - bring in the talk radio's environmental symbol. Which by the way, Al Gore is only an environmentalist in talk radio's eyes.
See folks. That's how they do it basically. It's the same formula that used in advertising. Here's Sean Hannity's:
1. Tell a truth.
2. Usually there's a half truth.
3. Outright lie.
4. Blame Liberals.
5. Tell audience that they listen to him because they are smarter than average people. No really, listen to his show sometime.
We have officially lost our "shot at preventing devastating climate change".
Nothing we could have done in the last 100 years would have made a bit of difference with respect to what you mention.
Well, except possibly for doing something to reduce eastern population booms by a few billion people. The couple hundred million people in the west with the economic latitude to pursue the type of stuff laid out in TFA won't make a bit of change, relative to four billion people digging coal in China, sprouting up on the subcontinent, overgrazing in Africa, and plowing down rainforest in Central and South America.
You want any of this to change? Stop having so many babies in places that can't afford them.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Germany gets 2.3% of it's power from solar electric.
Not even for a moment did they get half their power from solar. The headline was wrong/,misleading times two.
More like 6%, unfortunately. That's nice and all, that when the sun is shining really bright, for five minutes you can get a significant amount of power from solar.
Then, within three hours, it's no longer 10AM-2PM and solar energy drops dramatically. (Our eyes see brightness roughly on a logarithmic scale, so what we perceive to be not quite as bright as bright is actually 90% less energy). For example, the moon looks to be maybe 5% as bright as the sun. Actually, the sun is 400,000 times brighter.
So yeah, solar is a great way to REDUCE the demand on your base sources during lunch time. Kind of like regenerative braking REDUCES the demand on the engine. Neither is, or ever can be, a primary energy source.
Why does this guy have so many dedicated fans?
You're the guys who have this whole fictionalized "al gore obsession" where you pretend there's a cult of personality. You don't actually need to have one over Watt. He's just one shithead. Let it go.
Here's your Liar cite promised that a new examination was neutral and he'd base his views on that.
Immediately rejected it when it showed the scientific consensus. He's a liar. Established.
Shilling established
Now will you PLEASE stop defending this scum?
There is an omission in the summary, that is a build out by 2050. But, their fig. 8 does have substantially more nuclear power in 2020 than in 2010 and that seems quite unrealistic.
that website has been debunked with scioence so many time, it's not even funny anymore. He doesn't even know what a 'log' is, mathematically speaking.
paid shill:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
The Heartland Institute published Watts' preliminary report on weather station data, titled Is the U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable?.[12] Watts has been featured as a speaker at Heartland Institute's International Conference on Climate Change, for which he acknowledges receiving payment.[55]
bottom line: His science is wrong, he misrepresents data so bad I don't think he really understand it. He never offers any data to show that the science behind AGW(which leads to GCC) is wrong.
IT's pretty simple science; which is why you never here anyone talk about actual science,. but create nonsense, ad homs and cherry pick.
You want to look at the industry that makes the most money from spreading denier lies? it would be the media.
The media makes a shit ton of money off this false debate.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Why does this guy have so many dedicated fans?
The reason is there is virtually no-one else. Judith Curry, albeit better trained, is just a rhetorical shell over a person who actually thinks the climate is warming, she's useless to that cause. Roy Spencer is under a cloud (after the 'lensing' incident), Monkton is a clown , Richard Muller changed his mind and now accepts the consensus opinion, as (to a large extent) has Bjorn Lomberg.
Only the weatherman blogger fights on, bravely upheld by his salary from the Heartland institute.
You are misinformed. Here is an article from the journal Nature: "Sixteen years into the mysterious ‘global-warming hiatus’, scientists are piecing together an explanation." Scientists are trying to "piece together" an explanation as to why the climate model predictions have failed? This does not sound like settled science to me. Check the data-sets for yourself. It's a plain fact: global surface temperatures show no statistically significant global warming for the last 17 years.
Mosquitoes kill around one million people a year worldwide.
Domestic dogs kill over 3000 people a year worldwide (over 50,000 if you count rabies).
A kick to the head by a cow or horse kills about 40 people a year in the US alone.
ALL species of sharks combined have killed an average of 4.2 people a year worldwide over the last decade.
Too bad they didn't feed the sharks consservtionist[sic] brains.
Too bad you feed your brain with fear rather than facts.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.