PDA

View Full Version : Is it too late to stop climate change?



Maciamo
30-09-20, 21:45
Here are two great videos from Kurzgezagt.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipVxxxqwBQw


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbR-5mHI6bo

Maciamo
01-10-20, 08:56
Few people realise how serious the situation has become.

Science News: Global warming may lead to practically irreversible Antarctic melting
(https://www.sciencenews.org/article/global-warming-practically-irreversible-antarctic-melting)
"How is melting a continent-sized ice sheet like stirring milk into coffee? Both are, for all practical purposes, irreversible.

In a new study published in the Sept. 24 Nature, researchers outline a series of temperature-related tipping points (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2727-5) for the Antarctic Ice Sheet. Once each tipping point is reached, changes to the ice sheet and subsequent melting can’t be truly reversed, even if temperatures drop back down to current levels, the scientists say.

The full mass of ice sitting on top of Antarctica holds enough water to create about 58 meters of sea level rise. Although the ice sheet won’t fully collapse tomorrow or even in the next century, Antarctic ice loss is accelerating (https://www.sciencenews.org/article/antarctica-lost-3-trillion-metric-tons-ice-since-1992-sea-level-rise) (SN: 6/13/18). So scientists are keen to understand the processes by which such a collapse might occur."

[...]

"The new study suggests that below 1 degree Celsius of warming relative to preindustrial times, increased snowfall slightly increases the mass of ice on the continent, briefly outpacing overall losses. But that’s where the good news ends. Simulations suggest that after about 2 degrees Celsius of warming, the West Antarctic Ice Sheet will become unstable and collapse, primarily due to its interactions with warm ocean waters, increasing sea levels by more than 2 meters. That’s a warming target that the signatories to the 2015 Paris Agreement pledged not to exceed, but which the world is on track to surpass (https://www.sciencenews.org/article/united-nations-climate-report-finds-countries-urgently-need-reduce-emissions) by 2100 (SN: 11/26/2019).

As the planet continues to warm, some East Antarctic glaciers will follow suit. At 6 degrees Celsius of warming, “we reach a point where surface processes become dominant,” Winkelmann says. In other words, the ice surface is now at low enough elevation to accelerate melting. Between 6 and 9 degrees of warming, more than 70 percent of the total ice mass in Antarctica is loss, corresponding to an eventual sea level rise of more than 40 meters, the team found."


The world has already warmed by 1°C compared to pre-industrial times and we are set to reach +2°C around 2060.

http://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/LongtermTrend2017.png

You can see on this simulation map (https://ss6m.climatecentral.org/#12/40.7298/-74.0070) what a 2 metres sea rise is going to do. Many coastal cities, including New York, the San Francisco Bay Area, Venice, Tokyo, Shanghai, Bangkok, Dhaka, Mumbai... and their surrounding area will be flooded. A third of Florida will be under water. It's not going to be a progressive sea rise. Once part of the Antarctic sheep collapses, the oceans are going to rise abruptly, like when adding an ince cube in a glass that is almost full. Young people buying a house now should keep that in mind as in 40 years houses in these areas may needed to be evacuated and would become worthless.

blevins13
02-10-20, 16:28
Few people realise how serious the situation has become.

Science News: Global warming may lead to practically irreversible Antarctic melting
(https://www.sciencenews.org/article/global-warming-practically-irreversible-antarctic-melting)
"How is melting a continent-sized ice sheet like stirring milk into coffee? Both are, for all practical purposes, irreversible.

In a new study published in the Sept. 24 Nature, researchers outline a series of temperature-related tipping points (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2727-5) for the Antarctic Ice Sheet. Once each tipping point is reached, changes to the ice sheet and subsequent melting can’t be truly reversed, even if temperatures drop back down to current levels, the scientists say.

The full mass of ice sitting on top of Antarctica holds enough water to create about 58 meters of sea level rise. Although the ice sheet won’t fully collapse tomorrow or even in the next century, Antarctic ice loss is accelerating (https://www.sciencenews.org/article/antarctica-lost-3-trillion-metric-tons-ice-since-1992-sea-level-rise) (SN: 6/13/18). So scientists are keen to understand the processes by which such a collapse might occur."

[...]

"The new study suggests that below 1 degree Celsius of warming relative to preindustrial times, increased snowfall slightly increases the mass of ice on the continent, briefly outpacing overall losses. But that’s where the good news ends. Simulations suggest that after about 2 degrees Celsius of warming, the West Antarctic Ice Sheet will become unstable and collapse, primarily due to its interactions with warm ocean waters, increasing sea levels by more than 2 meters. That’s a warming target that the signatories to the 2015 Paris Agreement pledged not to exceed, but which the world is on track to surpass (https://www.sciencenews.org/article/united-nations-climate-report-finds-countries-urgently-need-reduce-emissions) by 2100 (SN: 11/26/2019).

As the planet continues to warm, some East Antarctic glaciers will follow suit. At 6 degrees Celsius of warming, “we reach a point where surface processes become dominant,” Winkelmann says. In other words, the ice surface is now at low enough elevation to accelerate melting. Between 6 and 9 degrees of warming, more than 70 percent of the total ice mass in Antarctica is loss, corresponding to an eventual sea level rise of more than 40 meters, the team found."


The world has already warmed by 1°C compared to pre-industrial times and we are set to reach +2°C around 2060.

http://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/LongtermTrend2017.png

You can see on this simulation map (https://ss6m.climatecentral.org/#12/40.7298/-74.0070) what a 2 metres sea rise is going to do. Many coastal cities, including New York, the San Francisco Bay Area, Venice, Tokyo, Shanghai, Bangkok, Dhaka, Mumbai... and their surrounding area will be flooded. A third of Florida will be under water. It's not going to be a progressive sea rise. Once part of the Antarctic sheep collapses, the oceans are going to rise abruptly, like when adding an ince cube in a glass that is almost full. Young people buying a house now should keep that in mind as in 40 years houses in these areas may needed to be evacuated and would become worthless.

You have the president of the US that doesn’t believe on the science behind global warming.......so if he doesn’t realize it, who is going to......now is called bad forest management.....

Ps. I can’t post any pictures.....why is that


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Salento
02-10-20, 17:22
POTUS believes in climate change, ... he questions the data, ... the influence of human activity vs nature, ... and if the efficacy of the proposed solutions are worth the economic impact on the people.

Yetos
02-10-20, 20:52
as engineer on hydraylics and enviromental techniques, I had to made some works and presentations as pre-gratuate (diploma) and post-gratuate (master and doctora)
The climate change and global warming is a fact, but happens myriads of milleniums
But as always some exagerate,
when I did my first work as pre-gratuate, I choose to work on solar activity and the solar eras known as solar cirlcles, and the little ice age theory.
that was the time of terror, some numbers terrorizing humanity, announcing such disasters etc etc, coming from minds believing that human activity is responsible for more than 70%.
I remember I have seen once a doctora (2002-3) lecture predicting huge disasters start from 2018 AD.
that era passed infront me a fine work for solar activity through millenias, studying even old trees and especially the ones who turn in stone (απολιθομενα)
I made a work about to see about 20th century effect and especially data from the valley of Po river at Italy which was hit very hard by warming at 1970's, and at local upper and central Makedonia river Aliakmon,
with help from the School of Physicomathematicians, the department of meteorology and the school of Topography (space maps) made a work-effort to search solar activity to these specific areas,
by calculating the model we have seen that a huge 'flame tongue' from sun had strike Po river (if remember correct 1977 or 78) and sun was at a max activity this 9-11 year circle,
when I present the work, only 2 proffesors watch it. and 11 students, but next day was a discuss at department of school
after many works, personally I had a feeling that solar activity is more than 60% and human activity is about 24% and rest is nature activity (like termites)
from 70% to 24% human activity the difference is huge.
after years when CO2 data and stock exchange etc establish made another work for predicting the climate and especially the precipitations at Makedonia. and part of this work had to evolve with the global warming and climate changes.
(damn the grey maths are ..... ) this time with more data and varriants on my hands the human activity was max 28%.
(btw this time I was proud for I had unexpected audience)

Anyway, models are models and tools, maybe I was wrong, maybe others were wrong, but solar activity was underestimate, (I believe in purpose for creating the CO2 stock exchange) while human activity was overestimate.

Global warming, global cooling, and climate changes happens and is happening from the birth of the planet,
even eras when human did not dominate at earth or not even exist.
next strong 'warming up' solar activity will be among 2040-2060,
simply human activity will make the next 'warm' solar activity look like 'closer to hell' than ever, than it should be if only solar and nature activity should be.

our sun shine and lives under a fracture which is a mix of added cosinus circles,
and this is how humanity has to live,

only we have to do is to organise and synchorinise our (human) activities with the solar circles,
so not to live the phaenomena under harm conditions,by theory we know that chaotic and eternal phaenomena that have at least 1 trigonometrical fracture, tend to maximize it and work under it, at a normal, non accidental mode.at the end all happpen normally under this trigonometrical fractures

Planet and nature have the ability to synchronise with sun's willing, accepting and rejecting his 'life giving, and life taking' energy
only we have to do as humans is to organise our societies not to push to the killing limits.
and since human is a animal and not a tree, helps more to global warming, than global cooling.

Think, a big volcano explodes, and spread microdust on atmospheara, and the area nearby burns, but the dust cloud even warm, makes a shield to solar activity, reflecting the warming rays back to space,
so no matter the cloud temperature, for days after it will have a cooling effect at a bigger suround area.

So my opinion is not to input fear and terror to humanity,
but also help reduce and raise human activity in accordance with sun's extreme limits.

So my answer is that organisations that had subject the global warming and the climate change, made a lot of mistakes the previous decades, overestimating the human activity on climate, and I believe in purpose, so to create a CO2 buraeu for stock exchange market.


Btw
Do you think that if for example a new ice age climate is to come, or a new dinosaur climate era? human activity can prevent it? or push it?
that is a good question to start creative thinking on subject.

besides after 1940 which is the starting point of modern measurements, we also had underwater and desert subterranean nuclear bomb tests.
have we consider for how many years the warming of deep ocean water may affect climate? or phenomena like el Nigno? etc etc


these is average temperature maps of planet,

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/94/9a/5b/949a5bf068633acf7fa3ab9f0ba99f9f.jpg

this the last ice ages

https://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/what-we-dont-know/images/150kyrs_petit150.jpg/image



and WOW, was Human responsible for that global climate temperatures also that happened in past
lets take a look 330 000 years before, was human responsible for that?
to make a joke, was Haidelbergensis? Neantherthal? or primitive Sapiens activity?https://clivebest.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Global-temps.png



From 2040 to 2060 there is a high peak of 90 years solar activity, but we enter a new circle of milleniums of high solar activity, the second big cosinus circle as it is known, we are already at first max one.
using the trigonometrical fractures of sun warming ray waves transmission to earth from 2200 we enter high dangerous for human kind eras,

Well I think that even today, human is not able to control sun to shine to his will, maybe in future, but not today,
As for these enviromentalists who they want to put fear, and stress and terror to simple and ignorant people life,
the answer are the above time maps,

THERE IS ONLY ONE THING I AGREE WITH THESE Group of Scientists and organisations

WE CAN NOT CHANGE OUR GENES TO SURVIVE (well Neantherthal had developed genes for very cold climates)
WE CAN NOT CHANGE OUR CLIMATE TO SURVIVE ( well Sapiens manage with clothes and fire to survive hostile climates like Arctic ones)
WE CAN ONLY CHANGE OUR WAY OF LIFE TO SURVIVE (but this will NOT stop climate change as these groups and organisations believe)

bigsnake49
02-10-20, 22:10
as engineer on hydraylics and enviromental techniques, I had to made some works and presentations as pre-gratuate (diploma) and post-gratuate (master and doctora)
The climate change and global warming is a fact, but happens myriads of milleniums
But as always some exagerate,
when I did my first work as pre-gratuate, I choose to work on solar activity and the solar eras known as solar cirlcles, and the little ice age theory.
that was the time of terror, some numbers terrorizing humanity, announcing such disasters etc etc, coming from minds believing that human activity is responsible for more than 70%.
I remember I have seen once a doctora (2002-3) lecture predicting huge disasters start from 2018 AD.
that era passed infront me a fine work for solar activity through millenias, studying even old trees and especially the ones who turn in stone (απολιθομενα)
I made a work about to see about 20th century effect and especially data from the valley of Po river at Italy which was hit very hard by warming at 1970's, and at local upper and central Makedonia river Aliakmon,
with help from the School of Physicomathematicians, the department of meteorology and the school of Topography (space maps) made a work-effort to search solar activity to these specific areas,
by calculating the model we have seen that a huge 'flame tongue' from sun had strike Po river (if remember correct 1977 or 78) and sun was at a max activity this 9-11 year circle,
when I present the work, only 2 proffesors watch it. and 11 students, but next day was a discuss at department of school
after many works, personally I had a feeling that solar activity is more than 60% and human activity is about 24% and rest is nature activity (like termites)
from 70% to 24% human activity the difference is huge.
after years when CO2 data and stock exchange etc establish made another work for predicting the climate and especially the precipitations at Makedonia. and part of this work had to evolve with the global warming and climate changes.
(damn the maths of Grey are ..... ) this time with more data and varriants on my hands the human activity was max 28%.
(btw this time I was proud for I had unexpected audience)

Anyway, models are models and tools, maybe I was wrong, maybe others were wrong, but solar activity was underestimate, (I believe in purpose for creating the CO2 stock exchange) while human activity was overestimate.

Global warming, global cooling, and climate changes happens and is happening from the birth of the planet,
even eras when human did not dominate at earth or not even exist.
next strong 'warming up' solar activity will be among 2040-2060,
simply human activity will make the next 'warm' solar activity look like 'closer to hell' than ever, than it should be if only solar and nature activity should be.

our sun shine and lives under a fracture which is a mix of added cosinus circles,
and this is how humanity has to live,

only we have to do is to organise and synchorinise our (human) activities with the solar circles,
so not to live the phaenomena under harm conditions,by theory we know that chaotic and eternal phaenomena that have at least 1 trigonometrical fracture, tend to maximize it and work under it, at a normal, non accidental mode.at the end all happpen normally under this trigonometrical fractures

Planet and nature have the ability to synchronise with sun's willing, accepting and rejecting his 'life giving, and life taking' energy
only we have to do as humans is to organise our societies not to push to the killing limits.
and since human is a animal and not a tree, helps more to global warming, than global cooling.

Think, a big volcano explodes, and spread microdust on atmospheara, and the area nearby burns, but the dust cloud even warm, makes a shield to solar activity, reflecting the warming rays back to space,
so no matter the cloud temperature, for days after it will have a cooling effect at a bigger suround area.

So my opinion is not to input fear and terror to humanity,
but also help reduce and raise human activity in accordance with sun's extreme limits.

So my answer is that organisations that had subject the global warming and the climate change, made a lot of mistakes the previous decades, overestimating the human activity on climate, and I believe in purpose, so to create a CO2 buraeu for stock exchange market.


Btw
Do you think that if for example a new ice age climate is to come, or a new dinosaur climate era? human activity can prevent it? or push it?
that is a good question to start creative thinking on subject.

besides after 1940 which is the starting point of modern measurements, we also had underwater and desert subterranean nuclear bomb tests.
have we consider for how many years the warming of deep ocean water may affect climate? or phenomena like el Nigno? etc etc


these is average temperature maps of planet,

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/94/9a/5b/949a5bf068633acf7fa3ab9f0ba99f9f.jpg

this the last ice ages

https://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/what-we-dont-know/images/150kyrs_petit150.jpg/image



and WOW, was Human responsible for that global climate temperatures also that happened in past
take a look 330 000 years before, was human responsible for that?

https://clivebest.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Global-temps.png



From 2040 to 2060 there is a high peak of 90 years solar activity, but we enter a new circle of milleniums of high solar activity, the second big cosinus circle as it is known, we are already at first max one.
using the trigonometrical fractures of sun warming ray waves transmission to earth from 2200 we enter high dangerous for human kind eras,
Yetos,
Thanks for your work in this area. We have amongst us two extreme viewpoints, one that ascribes all warming and climate change to solar activity and the other one all to human activity. Now for me even if there was no global warming as an engineer and a human being I like electric cars (and trucks and other means of transportation) for two reasons, noise pollution and exhaust pollution in addition to CO2. You all have seen the before and after pics of cities with extremely clear views post lockdown. I heard birds that I had never heard before because of noise pollution. I do believe that we can remake our economies so that they are not fossil fuel dependent.

03-10-20, 04:02
I'm not a scientist so I depend on what the 'experts' tell me.

What bothers me are those non-scientists that tell me that this is an existential crisis, but are unwilling to do more than token efforts. Non-token efforts would include shutting down aviation: no sight-seeing, no business travel (phone/VTC/Zoom instead). It would include dramatically cutting imports (if it can't be provided locally consider whether we really need it . . . I mean really need it). It would also include any extraneous use of power (including the servers that support Eupedia). You don't need YouTube, Google, or Twitter.

It's draconian, but didn't somebody say this was an existential crisis? If so, then own it.

I don't recommend any of this because I don't know if this is a crisis or not, I'm not an expert.

Maciamo
03-10-20, 13:04
I'm not a scientist so I depend on what the 'experts' tell me.
What bothers me are those non-scientists that tell me that this is an existential crisis, but are unwilling to do more than token efforts. Non-token efforts would include shutting down aviation: no sight-seeing, no business travel (phone/VTC/Zoom instead). It would include dramatically cutting imports (if it can't be provided locally consider whether we really need it . . . I mean really need it). It would also include any extraneous use of power (including the servers that support Eupedia). You don't need YouTube, Google, or Twitter.
It's draconian, but didn't somebody say this was an existential crisis? If so, then own it.
I don't recommend any of this because I don't know if this is a crisis or not, I'm not an expert.

You really do see everything in black and white, don't you? What you propose is unrealistic and many of your claims are factually wrong too.
Google already uses 100% renewable energy for its servers and became a "net zero" company in 2017. This means that searching Google, using YouTube or any other Google services does not increase global warming. Well on their side at least. We use electricity to power our computers and phones, but it is our responsibility to choose an electricity provider with 100% green electricity (like I do) or install solar panels (which I also have).

Apple, Microsoft and Facebook have all pledged to become carbon neutral soon. Microsoft is going to become carbon negative and plans to remove all of its historical emissions from the atmosphere.

As for travelling, people travelling by train or driving electric cars cause negligible emissions. When I travel I spend most of my time walking around cities or in nature. Aviation is indeed an issue for long distance travel, but the whole aviation industry, both passenger and freight, is only responsible for 3.5% of of anthropogenic climate change (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_aviation) worldwide (which includes both CO2 and non-CO2). In contrast agriculture is responsible for 13% of global warming (https://skepticalscience.com/animal-agriculture-meat-global-warming.htm) and ruminants (mostly cows, but also sheep) make up half of that. So if all people stopped eating beef and lamb worldwide, it would be lower global warming twice more than if all planes stopped flying.

According to the chart below, air transport is only responsible for 1.9% of greenhouse gas emissions - the exact same percentage as the methane are other decomposition gases emanating from landfills. The burning of forests, especially in the Amazon and in Indonesia, generates 3.5% of all emissions and could easily be avoided if there was more political will to condemn the practice.

The image of global warming is easily attached to exhaustion emissions from factories, cars, trucks and airplanes, but agriculture, construction, and the electricity and heat required for residential and commercial buildings are responsible for half of global warming. This could be prevented by making it compulsory in developed countries to use only green electricity. In many European countries governments have granted substantial subsidies to individuals to isolate better their homes, replace old gas heaters by newer, more efficient ones (consuming 25% less gas to heat one's home), etc. In Belgium these grants have been around for over 15 years and in some cases the government will pay up to half of the bill.

https://www.eupedia.com/images/Greenhouse_gas_emissions_by_sector.png
Source: World Resources Institute (https://www.wri.org/resources/data-visualizations/world-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2016)

Yetos
03-10-20, 19:44
The burning of forests, especially in the Amazon and in Indonesia, generates 3.5% of all emissions and could easily be avoided if there was more political will to condemn the practice.



that is indeed a great problem in the equation of recycling energy.
and is at least for me a top variant on the balance of globa l warming and global cooling.

Trees have the ability to absorve more CO2 with photosynthesis than release with their breath, and turn solar energy to chemical one, not to heat-warmness.
Forests are generally considered as cooling variants to the climate.
That is the primary we must do, protect and reserve the needed surface of forests and green,

Notice that industry advertise a lot the solar photovoltaic panels.
But did not compare or tell us how the same surface, could absorve CO2 if was covered by trees,
and what happens with rain water at the areas of solar panels parks .

maybe one of the top urgent actions we must do is to keep and spread more forests, generally tree coverage,
one of the top things that help planet to cool .

bigsnake49
04-10-20, 14:44
that is indeed a great problem in the equation of recycling energy.
and is at least for me a top variant on the balance of globa l warming and global cooling.

Trees have the ability to absorve more CO2 with photosynthesis than release with their breath, and turn solar energy to chemical one, not to heat-warmness.
Forests are generally considered as cooling variants to the climate.
That is the primary we must do, protect and reserve the needed surface of forests and green,

Notice that industry advertise a lot the solar photovoltaic panels.
But did not compare or tell us how the same surface, could absorve CO2 if was covered by trees,
and what happens with rain water at the areas of solar panels parks .

maybe one of the top urgent actions we must do is to keep and spread more forests, generally tree coverage,
one of the top things that help planet to cool .

There are places like deserts where nothing else will grow. The same places have plenty of sunshine. Places like the Sahara or the deserts of Arizona.

Yetos
04-10-20, 21:12
There are places like deserts where nothing else will grow. The same places have plenty of sunshine. Places like the Sahara or the deserts of Arizona.

better place is to building roofs and walls,
nextby the energy consuption.
and less needed wires/cables

but we all know and seen huge panel parks even in fertile lands.

capita
12-10-20, 08:09
Reacting to environmental change will include a two-level methodology: 1) "alleviation" – lessening the progression of ozone depleting substances into the air; and 2) "transformation" – figuring out how to live with, and adjust to, the environmental change that has just been gotten under way. The key inquiry is: what will our discharges of carbon dioxide and different contaminations be in the years to come? Reusing and driving more eco-friendly vehicles are instances of significant social change that will help, yet they won't be sufficient.

Axion
13-10-20, 21:36
stop wasting Your time, CO2 is way lesser concern than CH4 thus all this willingness for reversal of the CH4 feedback-loop is impossible at this present time, only what we can do is to prep for the upcoming enormous sea level rise and all the consequences that will come along with that coz more than half of human civilization now is leaving 200 km from shores and around 2050 that means massive relocation of population need for rearrangement of infrastructure and resources selfsufficiency mids economic collapse etc. tho this last risk even without melted glaciers is announced that will happen soon than we expect as global great economic depression ...

... this means we need Risk Management immediately on many basic levels as collective so as individual, but most of all alerting that all this is unavoidable so governments and people to be prepared, there is some action here and there as strategy but all that is on very theoretical level lets say ...

1. as Yetos said the solar maximum is great concern, this decade will go high, next decade to low and in cycles after again higher, so we need to face the fact that we are helpless if there is something problematic in future with sun eg, while is shifting its multipolarity ...

2. now when we consider which risk is greater among the greenhouse gasses for sure CH4 is way more dangerous than CO2 simply its present in abundance in the sea floor and the permafrost, and already the current emissions are growing exponentially from year to year ...
2.1. on this small but not neglectful contribution is the shale-gas exploitation emissions, which trend is also on rise globally ...

3. altho there is science that is applied for shrinkage of the ozone hole still we are lacking solution how to null the CH4 in the troposphere ...

4. on top of all this, if we are stricken by asteroid and it fell in the oceans, that will slow even more the circulation in the global ocean conveyor belt and thus evaporation will worsen all the processes instantly, releasing large amounts of CO2 and CH4 in the atmosphere ...

5. yes another risk is eventual ww3 and bombs on arctic and antarctic, scenario that was in place earlier in history as option in the minds of us-generals, probably in ussr too, but also dont forget that today are in place even more dangerous global weapons like the vlf ionizators i.e. weapons for weather warfare - haarp alike etc.

6. another big risk is our decadent lifestyle provoked by consumeristic glitch and mammonistic traps i.e. spiritually we are loosing our Grace big time, even more though the introduction of egobook (fakebook) alike wasting of time through lusts anger and voyeurism, what eventually as cymatic greeting will bounce back by our free will , dont get me wrong I am not saying that we are doomed but we are loosen for natural and anthropological risks what about spiritual, so dont expect any good outcome in the next decades, just be brave and if You are aware what will happen prepare Yourself at least with knowledge on survival and all necessities that in global economic collapse will be in scarce, eg. clean water and steady supplies of food, or transportation and fuel for it, including know-how for bio-diesel for agricultural machinery, for sure metal casting and similar knowledge for tool production on local level in some village etc. ... Please move on from this point in another thread so we wouldnt go too much oftopic in this one, here lets stay focus on the global warming, altho I take the liberty to think about the worst case scenario and how we are approaching to such risk, usually instead building for any case rural retreat, most of the humanity is just stacking urban walls as cards as some security option investment, hm, probably they will use them for mushroom growing or hay and straw stacking!?

Yetos
14-10-20, 03:03
Yetos,
Thanks for your work in this area. We have amongst us two extreme viewpoints, one that ascribes all warming and climate change to solar activity and the other one all to human activity. Now for me even if there was no global warming as an engineer and a human being I like electric cars (and trucks and other means of transportation) for two reasons, noise pollution and exhaust pollution in addition to CO2. You all have seen the before and after pics of cities with extremely clear views post lockdown. I heard birds that I had never heard before because of noise pollution. I do believe that we can remake our economies so that they are not fossil fuel dependent.

well
1) Global climate will change, either we (humans) take measures, either not.It is sun's will
The least we (humans) can do is not to make this change way bigger than the sun wants it to be,
Everything that is friendly to enviroment, but mainly to global cooling, is welcome,
every better ratio of chemical energy to mechanical or electric one is welcome, but his ratio will never be equal to 1 (100%).
explaining my shelf Fuel = mechanical + warm-heat Perfect is 100% = fuel / mechanical but due to attrition-loss is never 100%
so the closest to 100% yes the better and welcomed mechanism for human activity.

2) Needed energy and consuption energy for a 'machine'
an example,
Offcourse modern electric cars are better and help enviroment to urban areas.
I agree especially at the matters of noise polution,
what we must also be informed and study is the CO2 or Joules needed to be constructed an electric car, a benzin car and a diesel car. and how much CO2 will transim at a life of 10 years and 200 000 km, and the average power that can serve/haul

for if we compare this we see that a for example 50 kW electric needs A1 sum of CO2 to be build and needs A2 CO2 to make lets say 100 000 km with same weight cargo, or a total work of lets say X kNm (kiloNewton * meter) (max ability of machine production)
for the abone lets say benzine engine car of 50 kW needs B1 and B2.
the equation must be A1 +A2 < B1+B2, but is it? offcourse A2 is way lower than B2 and that is why help enviroment at Urban areas, also much more clean from other chemicals like H-C that are release from not well burning of liguid fuel.
but how much is difference among A1 comparing B1 ?
an old search on hybrid cars I have in mind at that making a hybrid car the amount of CO2 needed was more than a compatible one.
so the question is, Do they really help global enviroment, or just local enviroment?
I mean are they trully less CO2 for the same life time and work with a compatible?
Or just they heavily polute Beijing and Bombay (factory) and help to stay clean NY or Athens (working and concuption area)?

Electric mobility is a part of future for helps to many other reasons.
but we also must change our minds,
I love cars like 2cabin(5 seats) 4x4 pickup trucks, they start from >2500 cc. Some others love fast cars with >3500 cc,
So the big question is, Do I have to use the above to go alone at a cafe 500 m downstreet? or to go alone to the beach to swim running with a speed 150 km/h?
Do I have to work an engine of 150 HP to go to swim? and consume chemical or electrical Joules to roll-move 1,5-2,5 tones mass, or an engine of 250 HP and run 100 km/h to drink a coffee?
and here is where electric cars must help, as also goverments, and media.
The cost of making an equal ability electric-compatible car is not same, so we must reduce the kw and speed limits primary to personal usage cars, primary, etc etc political desicions

:laughing: Just think the price of copper or lithium if most planet population has access to cheaper electric cars !!!!!

Axion
14-10-20, 08:23
Yetos even we are in decade of solar minimum the current melting trend of the permafrost is releasing enough huge amounts of ch4 that Sun would be at all at fault for worsening of the global worming, and Tramp is right we can stop this process simply with co2 industrial regulation, as I have stated on historum (https://historum.com/threads/is-environmentalism-harmful.185992/page-6#post-3362980) recently if something could be done anthropologically is to ban the shale-gas exploitation what is unimaginable especially in usA ...

so we cant stop the worst case scenario but prepare for it, yet no one is talking systematically for such outcome, even the western scientific community is sleeping in front of the fact that CH4 became ticking bomb, and all the focus is on CO2 which even we continue with the current pace of releasing we would never trigger so quick melting of the earths glaciers as could in 10 years the methane natural emissions! and altho co2 and ch4 natural releasing from the sea bed is casually tied its not at all possible to expect that even we have put to stop all the co2 emissions that permafrost would stop melting and we will escape the worst case scenario, by its own with the current chain reaction of exponential melting and releasing ch4 on the permafrost we already probably have passed the tipping point from which there is no coming back, but what is true is that elites are fearing from panicking thus they are not revealing this fact, its almost like taboo on the west to speak about, tho at least they are not still censuring the videoarts ... we are all too late to do anything but to start moving upwards ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiRic6Dw0xw

ScottPreot
14-10-20, 19:44
There are too few incidents in our world for global climate change. If, for example, the sun came within a couple of kilometers of the planet, then there would be a need to sound the alarm

ScottPreot
14-10-20, 19:47
In addition, the resources are still enough for us to live a few hundred thousand years on Earth. Plus, the Crown has reduced the population, which means we can save resources for several hundred more years

ScottPreot
14-10-20, 19:49
POTUS believes in climate change, ... he questions the data, ... the influence of human activity vs nature, ... and if the efficacy of the proposed solutions are worth the economic impact on the people.
But if Nature defeats Man, then the planet will definitely survive. This can happen in a global flood, and not the one described in the Bible, but a real and destructive one. It seems to me that there may be thousands of guesses in this case and they all have a place to be

Axion
15-10-20, 09:21
Tramp is right we can stop this process simply with co2 industrial regulation

nice typo imagine Trump would say this :) sadly but I agree with him WE CANT do now nothing about the rampant glacier melting as consequence of massive ch4 release that is in place in the very moment ...

to be honest I didnt have clue how deep and far are we with the permafrost methane ticking bomb until suddenly didnt analyzed existing russian estimates ... these posts are in macedonian either translate them in GT or simply follow the centered link and proposed footnotes and U`ll figure out the context ... I hope I am wrong but, even there is chance for ch4 resolve (https://youtu.be/yOICSEgJayI?t=132) but who when and how to burn all the methane, and even if this could be done, that amount of co2 will be again runnaway momentum for the glaciers!

http://www.build.mk/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=559&PN=8

as hotter its get > faster it gets hotter i.e. the exponential release its on its way, thus for sure there would be huge sea level rise after decade or two, how high will it go I can just guess probably 100 km inland from current shires, and as noted above knowing that more than half of the humanity leaves 200 km around the sea shores that is enough alarm for urgent Risk Management in my opinion mostly forcing selfsufficient Agrarianism at least for those that are already poor or social cases what could be done with clever rural reemigration helped mostly by local municipal Machinery Rings that will serve the newcomers just with fuel participation but also through land reform that will guarantee them also Three Hectares of arable land, normally in that machine-ring every municipality to have also well drilling pumps except agro-machinery, for sure know-how educational forums-portal etx. but also Co-Op strategy so as reimmigrant community there could be pushed rural tourism packaging and storing, simply promoting an village commune Kibbutz alike ... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz)

http://forum.idividi.com.mk/forum_posts.asp?TID=31595

easy to be said but painfully hard to convince the voters to give their voice to some centrist green party, especially coz any land reform will means extra nationalization of rural land which I guess as is in south-eastern europe is hold still without any taxation or its not with reinstated ownership in cadaster but still people are using it or lay some folk rights on it, but if there is will this could be eased through double tax for those that are holding arable land but not working it, or till they do their land to be left to those that are rural reemigrants eg. on three years subsequently and thus to be avoided taxation but kept ownership for those that are tied somehow to that land ... Sorry for this digression, but really nor people nor states around the world have any long strategy or doable plan how at least to have backup options for any case scenario ... in this way tomorrow for sure could be helped any cocitizens or starving immigrants, future that is not at all far if U dive in the proposed methane info on build.mk above ...

Axion
18-10-20, 14:48
this arctic revolution will not be televised, simply such panic will lead to instant financial crush coz speculators, other risks are corporative stagnation if investment strategies are put on hold coz eventual sea rise fears, no doubt people will go in frantic mode as result of coastal real estate unattractiveness and with it the risk of eventual global warming housing mortgage bubble, and even we can slow down our human footprint stil now we cant stop the natural trend, at least no as we think, on top of this we just need great economical world depression, dont wont to think about greater evils, so what we need now is urgent Risk Management and TURBO preparation, cant imagine how difficult will be around food shortages coz droughts, altho we live in times when with drip system from artesian wells (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artesian_aquifer) it could be irrigated most of the current arable land, tho if we find better and cheaper way for water desalination through mxenes [1 (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40820-020-0411-9)][1 (http://www.build.mk/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=559&KW=MXenes&PID=242665#242665)][1 (http://www.build.mk/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=142&PID=242678#242678)] we can make even from Sahara green valley ...
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cdux2zJcMI)


... its global effect than simply arctic effect! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cdux2zJcMI)


With 90 degree heat reported in the high Arctic in both Canada and Russia this summer, and sea ice near record lows, has the Arctic changed permanently into a new state? That could alter the weather in the entire northern hemisphere where the majority of humans live – and raise sea levels beyond expectations.

https://www.ecoshock.org/2020/09/the-arctic-has-entered-a-new-climate-state.html


do we need to be worried, dont ask me ask the scientists, I'll say where is smoke for sure there will burst fire in dry circumstances, can we use haarp technology for more rain, hm cants say, it depends again from the solar interdependence of earths atmosphere, but what about apophis risks alike [1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xaW4Ol3_M1o)][1 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99942_Apophis#2029/2036/2068_approaches)][1 (https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/doc/apophis/)] would such asteroid hinter the warming air even more [1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-ReuLZ2quc)] lets be honest we need to focus on Help From Above coz there is no other way to stop the inevitable an ice free Arctic ...


https://climatetippingpoints.info/2019/05/13/fact-check-is-an-arctic-methane-bomb-about-to-go-off/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWYvgJw1Owg

Axion
18-10-20, 15:59
https://grist.org/article/scientists-are-baffled-by-a-giant-spike-in-this-greenhouse-gas-its-not-co2/

haha clever social engineering by nasa, you'll easily notice that only No.Am. continents is missing in this methane emissions video, at least they are busy with Asia ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpLbd2fe3h4

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2930/a-third-of-california-methane-traced-to-a-few-super-emitters/

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2241347-fracking-wells-in-the-us-are-leaking-loads-of-planet-warming-methane/

~

maybe this next math is not precise but gives perspective How Soon Is Now! (https://rutube.ru/video/8feee9766d65b7e597c73d2e9c1bde47/)

approximately one fracking usA region leaks 500k tones methane annually (https://archive.ph/eJVEv#selection-1541.0-1549.50)

x

20 smaller or larger regions (https://postimg.cc/zL3WTg7y)

=

10 million tones methane leakage just from usA annually
but where are the others shalers!? [1 (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EIA_World_Shale_Gas_Map.png)][1 (https://postimg.cc/DSntgqSy)]
so that would be 20 to 30 million tones leaked methane globally
which is double than the current Arctic release of 17m tones annually ... (https://archive.ph/Bfg1M#selection-843.1-843.190)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7FGStMxofs

https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/09/23/us-exporting-fracking-oil-gas-climate-catastrophe (http://archive.ph/fhlV4#selection-1763.0-1766.0)

[1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0MzwyhQN-w)] https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/08/14/fracking-boom-us-and-canada-largely-blame-massive-rise-global-methane-levels-study

Carbon on Steroids : The Untold Story of Methane, Climate, and Health (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZnavYK5ghM)

The New Valves (https://www.globalmethane.org/sectors/index.aspx?sector=oilngas)

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse ~ Time to Wake Up: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yrx2kkv4sRM) Methane and the Captured EPA

>>> The Next Shale Revolution <<< (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2017-11-10/the-next-shale-revolution-video)

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=26552