Originally posted by cliffw: Do you know what ROI means ?
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: Yes.
quote
Originally posted by cliffw: I still have to wonder. What do you think it means ?
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: What do you think I think it means?
quote
Originally posted by cliffw: If you don't know what it means, ask anyone. I will tell you.
Did rinselberg, the Champion of GloBull Warming ever answer the question ?
rinselberg's reply ...
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: Right on cue, another example of how the "Memes and Cartoons" people limit their contemplation of the world to peering upon it as if they were squinting to see into a darkened room through a keyhole, from the other side of the door. "Dumb it down, and make it small enough for a cartoon."
[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 05-02-2023).]
When I created the "Electric Viking Wants You!" poster—a virtual poster—the vibe that permeated the act of creation was mirthful.
It's a fair assessment of this Sam Evans bloke, who has a blog and a YouTube channel and is clearly very enthusiastic about what he considers to be this nascent but steadily accelerating "EV revolution" in road vehicles.
It is not an effort on my part to represent informed discourse about the pros and cons of Electric Vehicles and road traffic electrification.
It's conceived as a lark or jest... a jape or a caper... or even a prank.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-02-2023).]
Originally posted by rinselberg: When I created the "Electric Viking Wants You!" poster—a virtual poster— ... It's conceived as a lark or jest... a jape or a caper... or even a prank.
We know. Just like a meme, .
You still won't answer the question. I think I know why.
quote
Originally posted by cliffw: I am surprised your GloBull Warming Gods have not figured it out.
Thanks rinselberg ! I have figured out why.
They and you pretend to not know how to reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere by 50%. It would end the GloBull Warming Grift.
"New York becomes the first state to ban natural gas stoves [kitchen range tops and ovens] and furnaces in most new buildings" Rachel Ramirez and Ella Nilsen for CNN; May 3, 2023. https://www.cnn.com/2023/05...n-climate/index.html
New York State follows a precedent set by San Francisco, Berkeley and also New York City.
This is a 5-minute "read".
"Kick methane in the Aspercreme"
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-03-2023).]
"New York becomes the first state to ban natural gas stoves [kitchen range tops and ovens] and furnaces in most new buildings" Rachel Ramirez and Ella Nilsen for CNN; May 3, 2023. https://www.cnn.com/2023/05...n-climate/index.html
New York State follows a precedent set by San Francisco, Berkeley and also New York City.
This is a 5-minute "read".
"Kick methane in the Aspercreme"
And when these stories first came up, all the Leftists said, "It's just an idea, no one would really do that. You are just overreacting. You are a conspiracy theorist. I'll bet you believe all those Hunter Biden stories, too."
Well so far, these laws are not retroactive. It's not as if there is a squad of federal or state agents getting ready to "take down" anyone's gas-fired kitchen range or oven. That's what a lot of the "chatter" and memes and cartoons were about.
I'm not surprised that they're going after new buildings in this way. I expected it.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-03-2023).]
Well so far, this law-making is not retroactive. It's not as if there is a squad of federal or state agents anywhere getting ready to "take down" anyone's gas-fired kitchen range or oven. That's what a lot of the "chatter" and memes and cartoons were about.
I'm not surprised that they're going after new buildings in this way. I expected it.
The journey of a thousand footsteps begins with a ban of gasoline powered cars.
Originally posted by rinselberg: "New York becomes the first state to ban natural gas stoves [kitchen range tops and ovens] and furnaces in most new buildings" Rachel Ramirez and Ella Nilsen for CNN; May 3, 2023.
New York State follows a precedent set by San Francisco, Berkeley and also New York City.
Wow ! I knew you was envious of Julia. I didn't realize how much. Do you really want to live a life like Julia ?
quote
In his 2012 re-election campaign, President Barack Obama implemented what would become a highly controversial political ad called “The Life of Julia.” This ad followed the life of a fictional person named Julia – whose life was demonstrated to be better as a result of the welfare state programs of the Obama administration. Reaction to the campaign ad was so negative that it was quickly removed from President Obama’s official website, and to this day cannot be found there. Staunch resistance to the ad stemmed from the accusation that it glorified the idea of a welfare state and illustrated what a life without genuine purpose or meaning would look like. In Julia’s world, the state was all that mattered, and all of her life’s decisions were supposed to support the legacy and longevity of the state – at the expense of her natural, God-given liberties and her individuality.
Do you want, perhaps need, government to take care of you from cradle to grave ?
Real men can provide for themselves, their family, and their community.
Julia, a cartoon character, from age 3 to age 67 and explains how Obama’s policies, from Head Start to Obamacare to mandated contraception coverage to Medicare reform, would provide Julia with a better life than Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan could.
Julia is not your typical all-American girl, but an obviously independent, yuppie liberal woman. She goes to public school, graduates college, and becomes a Web designer. She is able to pursue her career because, at age 27, “her health insurance is required to cover birth control and preventive care, letting Julia focus on her work rather than worry about her health.”
At age 31 she “decides to have a child,” with no mention of a father or husband. Her son Zachary heads off to a Race to the Top funded public school, while Julia goes on to start her own Web business. She retires at age 67 with Social Security and Medicare supporting her financially and spends her later years volunteering in a community garden.
Pajama Boy is wearing pajamas—a zip-up onesie in classic Lamar Alexander plaid—and drinking hot chocolate. He is in his twenties, sporting hipster glasses he could have bought at Warby Parker and an expression of self-satisfied ironic amusement.
Originally posted by rinselberg: It means Return On Investment. And I did not have to look it up.
Correct. It is important that you know.
I feel that I must apologize to you. I meant to post a comical quip to something you said. What I posted now sounds mean.
quote
Originally posted by cliffw: It is honest of you to admit you are a tool.
We are all tools. Some for good, some for bad. Perhaps well intentioned, maybe not. I am a tool box full of tools.
Next questions.
How much are you willing to invest to cut GloBull Warming in half. In money, and also in sacrifice ? I think you can see how important this question is.
What kind of investment are you willing to risk, in cash and also in sacrifice, to achieve what kind of degree (pun intended) of success ?
Originally posted by cliffw: How much are you willing to invest to cut GloBull Warming in half? In money, and also in sacrifice?I think you can see how important this question is. What kind of investment are you willing to risk, in cash and also in sacrifice, to achieve what kind of degree (pun intended) of success?
I see a doorway in front of me. The door is swung closed. I can't see what is behind the door, but I think it's the person of Christopher Warren Monckton, the 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, often referenced with more brevity as "Lord Monckton".
So behind the door, Lord Monckton and his "50 to 1 Project", along with others who have aligned themselves with his thinking on this.
I don't think there are sensible answers to this line of questioning from "cliffw", about investment and sacrifice on a personal (my person) basis.
Originally posted by rinselberg: I don't think there are sensible answers to this line of questioning from "cliffw", about investment and sacrifice on a personal (my person) basis.
Oh course not. I expected as little from you. That's a despicable attitude from you. I would like to say it makes no matter to me, except, your fingers have already taken 50 trillion dollars from my wallet.
My, the GloBull Warming Gawds are omnipresent. It seems as if they have been monitoring our conversation. I got this e-mail which was meant for you.
quote
rinselberg, STFU ! You are making all of the GloBull Warming Grifters look bad !
Console yourself rinselberg. You are no worse than the assistant United States Energy Secretary.
What a co ink-y-dinky. Take a look peek at this. From yesterday !
Decisions about how and when to decarbonize the global energy system are highly influenced by estimates of the likely cost.
Most energy-economy models have produced energy transition scenarios that overestimate costs due to underestimating renewable energy cost improvements and deployment rates. This paper generates probabilistic cost forecasts of energy technologies using a method that has been statistically validated on data for more than 50 technologies.
Using this approach to estimate future energy system costs under three scenarios, we find that compared to continuing with a fossil fuel-based system, a rapid green energy transition is likely to result in trillions of net savings. Hence, even without accounting for climate damages or climate policy co-benefits, transitioning to a net-zero energy system by 2050 is likely to be economically beneficial.
Updating models and expectations about transition costs could dramatically accelerate the decarbonization of global energy systems.
Roadmap
quote
Empirically validated probabilistic forecasts of energy technology costs
Future energy system costs are estimated for three different scenarios
A rapid green energy transition will likely result in trillions of net savings
Energy models should be updated to reflect high probability of low-cost renewables
"Empirically grounded technology forecasts and the energy transition" Rupert Way, Matthew C. Ives, Penny Mealy and J. Doyne Farmer for Joule; September 2022. https://www.sciencedirect.c...ii/S254243512200410X
CLICK FOR FULL SIZE
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-05-2023).]
Sam Evans is all agog about the new generation of large, grid-connected battery installations in the United Kingdom and Australia. These super-sized batteries will store surplus electricity from wind turbines during the diurnal (daily) hours of favorable winds, and release the stored electricity to the grid as needed during the hours when the winds are suboptimal and wind energy generation is diminished. He emphasizes wind energy, but solar energy could also be evened out over every 24-hour cycle by these same battery systems.
Just past the 1-minute mark, the "Electric Viking" talks about the experts at Oxford University and their assessment that the world's energy costs would be reduced by $10 trillion under a complete transition to renewable energy by 2050, and reduced by $20 trillion under a complete transition to renewable energy by 2040.
The video is under 6 minutes, which is on the short side for a "Viking".
UCLA's "SeaChange" project uses ocean water and electricity to trap carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into solid material, which can [also] produce hydrogen "green energy." Dante Simonetti, associate director of the UCLA Institute of Carbon Management, joins KCAL News Mornings to discuss the technology.
KCAL News; April 13, 2023. Video report is 3 minutes.
"UCLA Institute for Carbon Management to Unveil Seawater-based Carbon Removal Pilot Systems in Los Angeles and Singapore"
quote
"SeaChange" technology [would] utilize oceans to remove billions of metric tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
A vast power grid on the seabed of the central North Sea is being planned as part of a £20bn project to power oil and gas platforms with green electricity.
Cerulean Winds won the rights to develop projects aimed at reducing the use of gas by offshore installations. It aims to link more than 400 offshore turbines with the high voltage cables. The company says the plan will involve 10,000 jobs, many of which could be in the supply chain in Scotland.
It hopes to have the infrastructure in place by 2028. . . .
"Seabed Power Grid to link North Sea wind turbines"
Copper, lithium, cobalt and nickel aren't being burned.
It is mined using child slave labor. I'd like to propose that that is worse than burning coal, which is still needed to make the power for the batteries.
It [cobalt] is mined using child slave labor. I'd like to propose that [this] is worse than burning coal, which is still needed to make the power for the batteries.
This is such a thoughtful and carefully researched observation—so "on point" in its cogency and relevance—that I've been energized—too funny, eh?—to pursue another act of online research. You won't believe what I just discovered about cobalt!
"Cobalt Myth Mechanics" is the title that was given to the 14th issue of Eye Magazine. About 150 copies are known to have circulated after it was published in 1986 by the New York City-based Eye Publications (of Brooklyn).
Cobalt Myth Mechanics featured contributions from Robert Atkins, Perry Bard, Jo Babcock, Roger Boyce, Lee Roy Champagne, Vincent Desiderio, Nancy Evans, Tom Finkelpearl, Karen Finley, Jeff Goodman, David Hammons, C K Kuebel, Dona Ann McAdams, Tom Sarrantonio, Lori Seid, Janice Yudell and John Zax.
Karen Finley's contribution deserves special notice. Titled "I'm an Ass Man", it's documented online at Printed Matter, Inc.
quote
This unique piece by Karen Finley is a photocopy with colored pencil on paper. The typed narrative, an excerpt from Finley’s “I’m an Ass Man” spoken word piece, describes the inner monologue of a character whose fascination with women’s bodies quickly turns dark. Corrections to the narrative are made by the artist in colored pencil.
This artwork is being curated by the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) at 11 West 53 Street, Manhattan. Anyone wishing to view this art is advised to call in advance, as these works are not always on public display.
I didn't want to copy any images of this art, but anyone can see some of it online by using the Hypertext Transfer Protocol or 'http" links that I have provided herein. These, as everyone is doubtless well aware, are the text that is highlighted using the #ORANGE text color tag. Like this.
Cobalt—it's like "everywhere!"
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-07-2023).]
Originally posted by rinselberg: "The Electric Viking Is My Co-Pilot"
Perhaps you should choose a better Grifter than that.
I must say, "The Electric Viking" is an apt description. Considering Vikings were know for plundering, looting, and barbaric character.
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: UCLA project explores carbon capture through ocean water
Are you serious, ?
I thought I was being a smart azz. It seems you really do want to pollute the planet thinking you are saving the world.
CO2 being absorbed by the oceans create carbonic acidification !
quote
carbon dioxide being absorbed by the ocean dissolves in seawater as carbonic acid. This process is known as ocean acidification, and it’s literally causing a sea change that is threatening the fundamental chemical balance of ocean and coastal waters from pole to pole. Increasingly, corrosive waters are making it difficult for fragile marine life to build their protective shells and skeletons.
quote
Originally posted by Patrick: Copper, lithium, cobalt and nickel aren't being burned.
Is rinselberg your mentor ? Do you know haw many cars are in the world ? Even the USA, and Canada ? Where are all these batteries going to go when they deplete. Every ten years.
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: rinselberg's much anticipated autobiography will be published by Random House. It's expected to start arriving at retailers before the end of 3Q 2023.
Where will we find it ? The humor section ? The mystery section ? Or the science fiction section ?
Originally posted by cliffw: CO2 being absorbed by the oceans create carbonic acidification...
Well... "cliffw" has overlooked something:
quote
Working with industry leaders, national agencies and government leadership, the two pilot plants will intake seawater, which holds nearly 150 times more carbon dioxide than air, and leverage the SeaChange technology to convert dissolved carbon dioxide, calcium and magnesium into solid limestone and brucite (the mineral form of magnesium hydroxide) — in a manner similar to how some marine organisms form seashells. The alkalinized outgoing seawater, depleted of CO2, is then able to absorb more of the greenhouse gas just like a sponge, rinsing and repeating the same process. The ready-to-scale method also yields hydrogen gas as a co-product, which can be used as a clean fuel.
It's a process that would remove CO2 from the atmosphere by chemically converting it into limestone.
It's similar to what "Mother Nature" has been doing for hundreds of millions of years, with the various (and small) marine organisms that metabolize carbon dioxide to grow shell material. Uncountable numbers of these organisms. The organisms die and the shell material—calcium carbonate—is deposited as sediment at the bottom of lakes and oceans and is eventually transformed by the weight of the same kind of sediment that is deposited on top of it. It becomes limestone.
This SeaChange project is a way to use chemistry to turn atmospheric carbon dioxide into limestone but to do it way faster than these natural, biological processes that I've just described... Mother Nature, as it were.
What to do with the limestone? Their idea is to discard it at the bottom of the ocean. I guess (maybe) some of it could be used in other ways. To make concrete? I may review what's available and have more to say about it. I think that their thinking is that it is possible to remove "gi-normous" and climate mitigation-significant amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere with this SeaChange process, and not ever have to be concerned about where to discard this artificial limestone or limestone-like material. It would remain inert at the bottom of the ocean(s) where it would be discarded. It wouldn't release the carbon that's in it back into the sea as carbon dioxide.
Theoretically, this could be done for almost forever in human terms. It could be an important part of climate mitigation until other changes in the way that humans do "human" would make it no longer necessary.
The answer is simple. China is the world's largest coal producer and although Australia produces the most lithium, it is mined by Tianqi, which is (you guessed it) Chinese.
Now, if the US cuts coal production and demands electric cars, who do you suppose benefits?
China only has to worry about Russia now, right? Except that Russia is a little busy right now.
Who can tell me when all of this changed? Bueller, Bueller, Biden?
So I'm looking at this bar graph of the top five coal-producing nations. The data is from year 2021. China, the number one coal producing nation, was producing significantly more coal (in 2021) than the next four coal-producing nations combined; namely, India, Indonesia, the U.S. and Australia.
It may not look exactly the same in 2023, but I see a complete disconnect in what "williegoat" is insinuating, about China being the beneficiary of all of the climate mitigation ideas and efforts that are aimed at reducing the use of coal (and other fossil fuels) for energy in the U.S. and other nations around the world.
If China continues to maintain and even enlarge the use of coal for energy in China and other nations, that obviously works against these "Green New Deal"-like ideas that have caught my fancy, like EVs, wind energy, solar and the like.
There will be increasing pressure on China to fall into line and not keep enlarging the use of coal for energy. Some of it will come from within China, even despite the authoritarian mode of their governance and society. There are people in China that are well aware of the greenhouse effect and its connection with coal-fired power plants. Some of them have published research about it, even with the support of some of China's own universities.
I don't see any hope whatsoever of influencing China on coal unless the U.S. and other nations are aggressive in this climate mitigation or Green New Deal-like arena.
I guess it's like the aspirational motto that has sometimes appeared on some of the Major League Baseball team websites: "World Champions [in climate mitigation], or Die Trying..."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 05-07-2023).]
!
