Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Weather Acting Funny in Your Neighbourhood?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Conor Dary View Post
    Not sure I see the point of this thread anymore....it's not even a serious discussion now....
    the answer is simple: then stay away

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Master403 View Post
      Strange debunking. It takes very little effort with Google to find any number of earlier articles than the Newsweek piece, going back to at least "Colder Winters Held Dawn of New Ice Age - Scientists See Ice Age In the Future" (Washington Post, January 11, 1970). Peter Gwynne seems to have been trying to create a journalism legacy for himself.

      Those of us in the energy fields (lonewolf in petroleum, me in nuclear) have spent decades studying not only our own profession, but the effects of our energy production on quality of life, mortality rates and climate. A continuing frustration is the really bad science that is cited by both sides in so may of these debates.
      The bad science is really almost all on one side.

      Fwiw nuclear should be part of the solution for clean energy....it has its problems but doesn't add to greenhouse gases....
      Conor Dary
      Senior Member
      Last edited by Conor Dary; 09-13-2019, 06:00 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by gh View Post
        the answer is simple: then stay away
        Right a discussion on one of the most important topics of the day and I'm suppose to just ignore it....not even sure what one can say....you can't even point out nonsense like someone just noted when you see it because that is too political.....

        Oh I see your correction....I thought you were talking about bad hammy...I take back what I said...continue on...
        Conor Dary
        Senior Member
        Last edited by Conor Dary; 09-13-2019, 05:49 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Conor Dary View Post
          The bad science is really almost all on one side.
          I think we can all agree on that.

          Originally posted by Conor Dary View Post
          Not sure I see the point of this thread anymore....as rsb3 noted it's not even a serious discussion now....
          When one group uses a thread to propagandize everyone else and then some of us respond with "not-so-fast" I can see why the thread has lost its purpose for you.

          regarding the politics, I am careful never ever to be the first to bring politics into a thread. I always simply respond to its injection by another.

          One thing that I have seen this season in southern new england is a large number of crickets. Probably a sign of greater than usual rain fall this summer but maybe im imagining things.
          user4
          Senior Member
          Last edited by user4; 09-13-2019, 06:14 PM.

          Comment


          • In today's FT ...

            Wyoming’s Powder River Basin wants to be known for the element one row up the periodic table.

            “Carbon Valley” is a vision of the future for America’s largest coal-producing region. The basin’s officials dream of a high-tech place where thick seams of coal are turned into graphene, aircraft fuselages, wind turbine blades and the black granules in water filters.

            The move is an act of desperation as much as inspiration. Wyoming thermal coal, which is burnt to generate electricity, has now followed the rest of the US industry into irreversible decline.

            The basin’s annual output has dropped by more than a third in the past decade to an estimated 300m short tons in 2019, as US utilities demolish coal-fired power plants in favour of natural gas, wind and solar energy (a short ton is equivalent to 2,000lb).

            Comment


            • Is it too late to ask, how is "climate" political?

              Comment


              • In a nutshell, some politicians have made it a political issue. Let's not go there.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by lonewolf View Post
                  People observe the same events/circumstances and reach different conclusions, ideally without denigrating the opinion of others, but are under no obligation to impose their opinion on others.
                  I have no quarrel with wind, solar, hydro or nuclear..whatever fits.
                  One thing I do not understand is the contempt for fossil fuels.
                  Fossil fuels made possible the Industrial Revolution, continue to manufacture renewable energy equipment, will be the only practical fuel for all purpose/conditions internal combustion engines for the foreseeable future and, not insignificantly, made US energy independent.
                  I rest my case.
                  And the horse and Camel were once the main means of transportation. Bring back the horse? And Poop was the main form of heating. Bring back poop?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by lonewolf View Post
                    Is it too late to ask, how is "climate" political?
                    It's not the climate that is political it's the role of humans, and where there are humans their is politics.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Conor Dary View Post
                      In today's FT ...
                      This is news? Ramaco Carbon was formed in 2011 and a successful project was described two years ago today in Bloomberg:

                      https://d17tjsihmynk9n.cloudfront.ne...marines-v2.pdf

                      Ramaco lists over twenty articles and press releases about their activities:

                      https://www.ramacocarbon.com/news-presentations/

                      Other than the gratuitous "act of desperation" description of Ramaco's activities, I'm not sure what FT's point was.
                      Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants

                      Comment


                      • Right ....from the FT...

                        The projects are tiny in scale. Atlas Carbon can only use up to 32,000 short tons a year of coal. Two of the 60 trains leaving the basin every day can haul that much coal with dozens of cars to spare. “We can’t keep a coal mine open,” Mr Levy says, shrugging his shoulders.

                        Since a ribbon-cutting in May 2018, the Wyoming ITC remains unused. The Xprize recently postponed the finalists’ deadline to June 2020. Walking across the empty gravel site in the shadow of the Dry Fork smokestack, Mr Begger says his biggest challenge is recruiting tenants: “We’re still patiently waiting for that first one.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Conor Dary View Post
                          Right ....from the FT...

                          The projects are tiny in scale. Atlas Carbon can only use up to 32,000 short tons a year of coal. Two of the 60 trains leaving the basin every day can haul that much coal with dozens of cars to spare. “We can’t keep a coal mine open,” Mr Levy says, shrugging his shoulders.

                          Since a ribbon-cutting in May 2018, the Wyoming ITC remains unused. The Xprize recently postponed the finalists’ deadline to June 2020. Walking across the empty gravel site in the shadow of the Dry Fork smokestack, Mr Begger says his biggest challenge is recruiting tenants: “We’re still patiently waiting for that first one.”
                          How is the volume of coal relevant? Coal costs a couple of hundred dollars a ton. Look up the price of potential products such as carbon fiber, graphene, and carbon nanotubes.
                          Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by jeremyp View Post
                            And the horse and Camel were once the main means of transportation. Bring back the horse? And Poop was the main form of heating. Bring back poop?
                            I think you miss the point completely. Carbon based energy sources meet approximately 80% of US energy demand. That is just reality. We are all for finding and developing more efficient sources of energy. But until those energy sources are found and proven cost effective we (you and i) are going to continue to base our high standard of living on carbon fuels, natural gas, petroleum and coal.

                            the biggest reason coal is in relatively low demand is the recent abundance and low cost of NG , natural gas. You can thank the people that find NG and drill it and pipe it to us for the lower use of coal. Carbon is your friend, only plants need it more than you.
                            But NG may not be around forever so User 4 advocates the building of 50 more nuclear power plants in the next decade.
                            user4
                            Senior Member
                            Last edited by user4; 09-14-2019, 07:48 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by bad hammy View Post
                              There's enough hot air in this thread from lonewolf and user4 alone to raise global temps a degree or two . . .
                              Thank you, I was going to take my private jet to Davos to discuss the importance of a global consensus on climate change policy and investment but decided to come here instead.

                              Ministry of Truth, definition of "hot air " : Perspectives that do not promote EngSoc climate science view and policy prescriptions.

                              In all seriousness, be thankful for a warm climate, savor it, future generations are coming that will not have this coveted luxury.
                              user4
                              Senior Member
                              Last edited by user4; 09-14-2019, 08:20 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Once again terrible tropical storm in SE Texas, flooding much of the area. Beaumont can't seem to catch a break, and some areas near Houston have had 30"+.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X