Originally posted by Wichita: Let's cut emissions by having rolling blackouts.
Don't be deceived by this ploy.
I would bet "dollars to donuts" that the image that was just posted on this forum was copied from a Twitter thread, where someone was trying to disparage the idea of reducing planet-warming carbon emissions with "green" energy policies that transition to lower carbon energy like wind and solar.
South Africa's electrical grid has problems, but not because of "green" energy policies. South Africa (according to this carefully researched report) has not made a significant investment in renewable or "green" sources of energy. The problems with South Africa's electrical grid lie elsewhere:
quote
In South Africa’s case, the government of President Cyril Ramaphosa ignored years of warnings that demand for power was increasing, in part due to the electrification of the once notorious apartheid-era townships, while supply from the country’s aging fleet of coal-fired power stations was decreasing.
Although the country’s crisis (one of several past and present) has been attributed to an increase in renewable energy, the country [South Africa] has few renewable energy generators. Instead, bizarrely, the government has curried favor with Western activists and governments by portraying the decay in the coal grid as a reduction in emissions. One unintentionally hilarious Reuters story headline in mid-May was "South Africa beats climate goals as blackouts slash emissions"—never mind the misery and economic damage caused by endless blackouts, look at the emissions saved.
Here's a man with a plan... "Biden’s got a plan for ramping up energy transmission"
quote
The White House wants Congress to pass permitting reform. In case that doesn’t work, it’s tapping DOE’s authority to make it easier to build transmission.
Last week, the White House released a comprehensive plan that could help fix America’s dysfunctional energy transmission system. The aim is to break down the barriers that are holding back the buildout of the truly massive amount of high-voltage power lines the country needs to connect clean energy projects to the grid and decarbonize the nation’s electricity supply.
Now the question is how much of the plan can be passed through a politically fractured Congress—and if the answer is none, how much of the plan can be pushed through via executive actions by the Biden administration.
The stakes are enormous—and the deadlines are looming. Over the past decade, the growth of the U.S. transmission grid has slowed from 2,000 miles per year between 2012 and 2016 to just 700 miles per year from 2017 to 2021, according to the Department of Energy. Large-scale transmission projects can face decades of disputes over permitting and cost-sharing. New wind and solar projects currently face years-long backlogs and rising grid-upgrade costs due to the lack of adequate transmission capacity.
If the U.S. can’t rapidly speed grid buildout to accommodate this new clean power, the country won’t be able to realize the majority of the decarbonization potential unlocked by the Inflation Reduction Act, according to a comprehensive study led by Princeton University researchers.
“Given that we have to increase electric transmission 60 percent over the next seven years—which means building transmission lines at twice our current pace—we have to fix this problem now,” John Podesta, senior advisor to the president for clean energy innovation and implementation, said in a May 10 speech in Washington, D.C. introducing the new plan.
Originally posted by Fats: Water absorbs Carbon Dioxide when it comes in contact with the air. Too bad some parts of the country are putting these shade ball things over bodies of water rendering the natural absorption process null and void.
Too much Carbon Dioxide in the air? Plant some trees and uncover that water.
The shade balls are a temporary measure. They are a stopgap to improve municipal water reservoirs until the surface reservoirs can be replaced with underground reservoirs. There are perhaps some other places where shade balls are used near airports to help reduce the numbers of birds that could collide with aircraft.
If you were to compute the fraction of total water surface around the country that's being covered with shade balls, it would come to some remarkably small fraction. I'm confident of that.
As far as the water districts, it's only being done in certain areas where the water district managers are concerned about the effects of UV radiation from sunlight on the water in the reservoirs. The Los Angeles area, for example. If memory serves me, there are certain naturally occurring salts in some of the water that LA uses that react with UV to form unwanted bromine compounds. (Or something like that. I could review my own forum posts on the subject to be more exact.)
Once again, I would refer people with an interest in the topic to some of the more realistic possibilities for lowering the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere by removing CO2 molecules from the atmosphere: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/.../000494-21.html#p838
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-24-2023).]
Originally posted by Patrick: No one ever suggested that you had to "deal" with JazzMan at all... but you made the decision of your own volition that you were going to straighten him out to your liking because you had "experience with dealing with autism"... and oh yeah, your "empathy cup overflows". Worked out really well, didn't it.
No one ever suggested that I should wear Off mosquito repellent. He was a continual pest always insisting he was going to straighten us out. He was actually a bully. I treat my autistic Grandson the same way. JazzMan may have checked out but I still deal with autism. My Wife is a 25 year experienced mental expert. Working at the Texas State Hospital. She, retired, worked with persons deemed "loony". Including people found at criminal trials to be incompenet to stand trial, and those who were found innocent due to insanity. The list of infamous 'clients' would stun you, but I can not disclose them.
What kind of experience do you have ?
quote
Originally posted by Patrick: Wow, that's an interesting way of desperately trying to totally flip the blame for what happened... but I guess you've had years to convince yourself that you weren't the least bit responsible for what unfortunately transpired.
Dream on. Believe anything you want. Just don't believe i.t
Incorrect. Towards the end of his stay here, JazzMan was psychologically "broken" by the continual harassment by certain forum members. He then unfortunately acted in a totally irrational manner... which included deleting much of the valuable technical knowledge he had contributed to the forum. It was a sad and ugly period in PFF history.
How exactly does one delete their own posts? There are a ton of things I'd like to delete that (I'm sure) I wrote back when I was 19/20 on here.... haha. Is it just editing old posts and wiping them out?
EDIT: I debated with JazzMan from time to time, but much in the same way I do with you... with respect. I know he had some autism, and likewise, a lot of people treated him like ass regardless... but to a large extent, he continued to inject himself into political discussions for which he was very opinionated. So he is certainly not blameless. The problem with the internet, is that it's hard for some people to accept that others have a difference of opinions ... that's why we all get into it. But it's the ability to build a rapport with the people you're debating that's important.
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 07-24-2023).]
How exactly does one delete their own posts? Is it just editing old posts and wiping them out?
I certainly don't approve of the practice (I don't believe in re-writing history), but simply EDIT everything out of the post. There needs to be something left behind so that the edit will hold... a period will do.
quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
There are a ton of things I'd like to delete that (I'm sure) I wrote back when I was 19/20 on here.... haha.
You'll be out of luck with any threads that are archived. Those posts are carved in stone.
It had to have taken JazzMan a helluva long time to track down every non-archived thread he had posted in, and then he individually edited/deleted each post. For anyone to go through all that trouble, he must've been awfully upset.
[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 07-24-2023).]
You'll be out of luck with any threads that are archived. Those posts are carved in stone.
It had to have taken JazzMan a helluva long time to track down every non-archived thread he had posted in and then individually edit/delete each post. For anyone to go through all that trouble, he must've been awfully upset.
Hah... unfortunately, all the stuff I probably WANT to get rid of... is probably archived. Well, heck... I cannot be blamed for things I said when I was 19. I was a testosterone-driven boy... and that's what happens.
The left blames everything on Climate Change, because they don't understand how science works and therefore spew irrational political brainwashed dribble.
Man, 71, charged with setting massive Yosemite park fire initially blamed on climate change.
Originally posted by Wichita: The left blames everything on Climate Change, because they don't understand how science works and therefore spew irrational political brainwashed dribble. Man, 71, charged with setting massive Yosemite park fire initially blamed on climate change.
An arsonist can start a wildfire, but climate-related factors are important in determining how rapidly the fire spreads, how difficult it can become for firefighters to bring it under control, and ultimately, how much damage results from the fire.
Persistently drier and hotter weather patterns brought on by the Greenhouse Effect are drying out vegetation, making it more flammable and setting the stage for "super-sized" wildfires. It's a double whammy that also reduces the water resources for fire crews, and for homeowners that are looking towards using their own water hoses and sprayers. Actually, a triple whammy, because the drier and hotter weather patterns brought on by climate change also make it more physiological hazardous for the firefighters, who are trying to avoid succumbing to dehydration, fatigue and heat stroke as they exert themselves in the physically demanding tasks of fire fighting.
It's even a quadruple whammy—a whammy four times over—because the persistently drier and hotter weather patterns that are brought on by the Greenhouse Effect are becoming ever more widespread across California and other Western states, and so there are ever more numerous wildfires going on at the same time.
This spectacle—a small spectacle, to be sure—of Wichita "going on" (yet again) about how "the left" doesn't understand science and how "the left" habitually spews "irrational political brainwashed dribble", while Wichita himself is spewing dribble like this himself, has become very familiar to anyone who keeps tab on his remarks.
Next, he'll probably post something that at first glance, looks grounded in science, until a reasonably informed person deconstructs it and demonstrates that it's based on a misunderstanding of the relationship between the melting of ice and how that contributes to rising sea levels. Because "It's not the melting of icebergs that are already floating in the sea. It's the melting of glacial ice packs that are currently supported by land."
People on Twitter and other social media platforms fell for this misleading image "hook, line and sinker."
Oh wait... he already did.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-24-2023).]
The left blames everything on Climate Change, because they don't understand how science works and therefore spew irrational political brainwashed dribble.
Man, 71, charged with setting massive Yosemite park fire initially blamed on climate change.
Here's a new "wrinkle"... what's the backstory behind this summary?
CLICK FOR FULL SIZE
This was produced by ChatGPT—an Artificial Intelligence app. It's a ChatGPT-generated "layman's translation" of the IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report "Summary for Policymakers."
Having been dubbed "ChatRI" by forum member WonderBoy, I salute my fellow AI app, ChatGPT, for this good work.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-25-2023).]
The shade balls are a temporary measure. They are a stopgap to improve municipal water reservoirs until the surface reservoirs can be replaced with underground reservoirs. There are perhaps some other places where shade balls are used near airports to help reduce the numbers of birds that could collide with aircraft.
If you were to compute the fraction of total water surface around the country that's being covered with shade balls, it would come to some remarkably small fraction. I'm confident of that.
As far as the water districts, it's only being done in certain areas where the water district managers are concerned about the effects of UV radiation from sunlight on the water in the reservoirs. The Los Angeles area, for example. If memory serves me, there are certain naturally occurring salts in some of the water that LA uses that react with UV to form unwanted bromine compounds. (Or something like that. I could review my own forum posts on the subject to be more exact.)
Once again, I would refer people with an interest in the topic to some of the more realistic possibilities for lowering the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere by removing CO2 molecules from the atmosphere: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/.../000494-21.html#p838
Well then. You've went from "Anything to stop Climate Change™" To "We are only doing little things that only cause a small fraction of the Climate Change™". 🙄
You don't want a solution, you want to parrot whatever crackpot media you are blindly following.
Originally posted by Fats: Well then. You've went from "Anything to stop Climate Change™" To "We are only doing little things that only cause a small fraction of the Climate Change™". 🙄
You don't want a solution, you want to parrot whatever crackpot media you are blindly following.
Have you seen any of these shade balls being used to cover up the surface of water in any of your comings and goings?
I can only imagine that if you totaled up all of the water surface that's being covered by shade balls, or would ever likely be covered with shade balls, compared to all of the water surface on the planet, the fraction would be like one thousandth of one thousandth of one percent, or something like that; i.e., 0.0000001, where 1.0 would be if every square inch of water surface on the planet were covered by shade balls.
But beyond that, I don't think your idea that the shade balls are interfering with the natural removal of CO2 molecules from the atmosphere makes any sense to begin with.
Do people talk about "water" as a way to remove CO2 from the atmosphere? Not in my world. They talk about trees. They talk about wetlands—and that's something very different than a municipal water reservoir. (Although there would be some intersection with wetlands near airports that may now be covered by shade balls as a way to mitigate the frequency of birds colliding with aircraft.)
I saw a report recently about the idea of taking some commonly occurring rock type that absorbs CO2 from the air and turning huge amounts of it into gravel and spreading it on land areas where it would absorb CO2 from the air without causing bad things to happen at the same time. (The report offered the view that it wouldn't be very practical.)
I have never been "I am in favor of pursuing anything and everything that's imaginable in pursuit of Climate Mitigation or Climate Adaptation," which I think is a more precise wording of what you just said about me.
I am not even wholeheartedly "sold" on EVs. I just saw a report that favored hybrid and plug-in hybrid automobiles over EVs. The researcher presented the math that was argued to make that case.
I wonder about the tradeoffs that EVs present, between the reduction of CO2 emissions, against the shortened service life for tires and an increase in pollution from tires as they are ground down by pavement; this because EV vehicles are currently heavier than comparable ICE vehicles because of the battery weight. And yet I know I can find at least one report that disputes the significance of this concern about EVs and tires.
I do credit the basic science that finds a quantifiable causal relationship connecting human greenhouse gas emissions with global warming, and in my view, that's a scientific consensus that holds up, regardless of what humans and societies decide to do about it.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-25-2023).]
I saw a report recently about the idea of taking some commonly occurring rock type that absorbs CO2 from the air and turning huge amounts of it into gravel and spreading it on land areas where it would absorb CO2 from the air without doing anything "bad" at the same time. (The report offered the view that it wouldn't be very practical.)
The problem with ideas like these is that while they're fascinating ... how much CO2 would theoretically be generated to both grind the rocks into gravel, and transport it to the location where-by it could then be distributed?
Would it effectively cancel itself out ... and perhaps ruin the new and old environment at the same time?
Have you seen any of these shade balls being used to cover up the surface of water in any of your comings and goings?
I can only imagine that if you totaled up all of the water surface that's being covered by shade balls, or would ever likely be covered with shade balls, compared to all of the water surface on the planet, the fraction would be like one thousandth of one thousandth of one percent, or something like that; i.e., 0.0000001, where 1.0 would be if every square inch of water surface on the planet were covered by shade balls.
But beyond that, I don't think your idea that the shade balls are interfering with the natural removal of CO2 molecules from the atmosphere makes any sense to begin with.
Do people talk about "water" as a way to remove CO2 from the atmosphere? Not in my world. They talk about trees. They talk about wetlands—and that's something very different than a municipal water reservoir. (Although there would be some intersection with wetlands near airports that may now be covered by shade balls as a way to mitigate the frequency of birds colliding with aircraft.)
I saw a report recently about the idea of taking some commonly occurring rock type that absorbs CO2 from the air and turning huge amounts of it into gravel and spreading it on land areas where it would absorb CO2 from the air without causing bad things to happen at the same time. (The report offered the view that it wouldn't be very practical.)
I have never been "I am in favor of pursuing anything and everything that's imaginable in pursuit of Climate Mitigation or Climate Adaptation," which I think is a more precise wording of what you just said about me.
I am not even wholeheartedly "sold" on EVs. I just saw a report that favored hybrid and plug-in hybrid automobiles over EVs. The researcher presented the math that was argued to make that case.
I wonder about the tradeoffs that EVs present, between the reduction of CO2 emissions, against the shortened service life for tires and an increase in pollution from tires as they are ground down by pavement; this because EV vehicles are currently heavier than comparable ICE vehicles because of the battery weight. And yet I know I can find at least one report that disputes the significance of this concern about EVs and tires.
I do credit the basic science that finds a quantifiable causal relationship connecting human greenhouse gas emissions with global warming, and in my view, that's a scientific consensus that holds up, regardless of what humans and societies decide to do about it.
We have to use every available opportunity in order to stop this monster that is Climate Change™. Just because you haven't heard of a way that reduces the evil Carbon Dioxide doesn't mean it doesn't do anything. You need to get with the times and change to save this planet before it's too late! Last I heard we all burned to death a few years ago.
"Heat waves hitting U.S. and Europe 'virtually impossible' without climate change, researchers say"
quote
The heat waves simultaneously broiling the southwest United States and southern Europe would have been “virtually impossible” if not for climate change, according to a group of scientists who study the probability of extreme weather events.
A third heat wave, in China, could have been expected about once every 250 years if global warming weren’t a factor.
“The role of climate change is absolutely overwhelming” in producing all three extremes, said Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at Imperial College London, who contributed to the new research, which was published Tuesday by the World Weather Attribution group.
The group is a loose consortium of climate scientists who study extreme weather and publish rapid findings about climate change’s role in major events. Their research methods are published and peer-reviewed, but this specific, rapid analysis has not yet undergone a typical academic review process. Previous analyses by this group have held up to scrutiny after their initial release and were ultimately published in major academic journals.
Global warming has increased the likelihood of extreme temperatures so significantly that heat waves as powerful as the ones setting records in places like Phoenix, Catalonia and in China’s Xinjiang region this July could be expected once every 15 years in the U.S., once every 10 in southern Europe and once every five in China, the research found.
The heat has been blamed for record-breaking power demand in China and outages in the U.S. and Europe, as well as crop losses or cattle deaths in all three regions, the report found.
This summer has set records at a staggering pace.
“This is not a surprise. This is absolutely not a surprise in terms of the temperatures, the weather events that we are seeing,” Otto said at a news conference. “In the past, these events would have been extremely rare.”
The analysis provides another example of how shifts in global average temperatures can create conditions for new, harmful extremes. The scientists warned that the extremes observed this year are expected to worsen as humans continue to emit heat-trapping gasses and rely so heavily on fossil fuels.
“This is not [even] the new normal, as long as we keep burning fossil fuels. As long as we keep burning fossil fuels, we will see more and more of these extremes,” Otto said.
Six climate scientists contributed to the recent study. It evaluated an 18-day stretch of high temperatures across the U.S. Southwest and northern Mexico, a seven-day stretch of high temperatures in Europe and a 14-day stretch of maximum measures in China’s lowland regions. . . .
It's not a long article. That was more than half of the text.
Wind and Solar on track to provide 40 percent of the electricity used by Texans in 2023
quote
AUSTIN (KXAN) — The electric grid has been stable thus far as Texas has endured a brutal heatwave. Here’s how renewable energy and batteries have done their part to keep the grid operating.
Texas led the country in the generation of renewable energy in 2022, according to a report issued by the United States Energy Information Administration.
Renewables play a vital role as we try to save the planet from a changing climate. Texas has been doing its part as the Lone Star State continues to be the leader in the production of wind power. It’s not just wind energy creation but the production of solar energy, where our state plays a significant role.
President Joe Biden’s climate bill allows Texas to enhance its role as a renewable energy powerhouse with billions in subsidies to be delivered. When the president signed the Inflation Reduction Act last August, he secured the largest investment to advance energy security and further wage the battle in tackling climate change.
In Texas, efforts to increase “go green” initiatives met some resistance from legislators during the most recent legislative session.
The common argument against renewable energy is it is somewhat unreliable. Additionally, opponents say fossil fuels are a critical element to avoid a potential blackout crisis.
The February 2021 winter storm left more than 4.5 million customers without electricity, some for several days. When things returned to normal, blame was widespread, but eventually, it was determined part of the loss of generating capacity came from gas-powered plants.
Solar and wind developers feel arguments against these forms of renewables are designed to penalize their efforts. Those on the side of renewables feel like they are caught in yet another culture war that is resulting in legislation designed to frustrate their efforts.
Texas projects for solar and wind have increased. In fact, the U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts Texas will have 40% of its 2023 power from carbon-free sources.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts Texas’ lead in sustainable energy will continue in 2023. Solar power growth has been enhanced by putting in around 7.7 gigawatts of new capacity, greater than California’s 4.2 gigawatts.
West Texas stands to benefit from wind and solar because it may be the only economic development in that part of the state. Among the beneficiaries of these high-dollar industries are small school districts.
Wind and Solar a big part of Texas' energy portfolio, as Texas has endured the most extreme summer weather in history without blackouts Henry Gass for the Christian Science Monitor; July 21, 2023. https://www.csmonitor.com/U...-grid-powers-through
Texans are faced with a big challenge to safeguard their power grid, but only a dunce would blame it on the popularity of Wind and Solar Naureen S. Malik and Mark Chediak for Bloomberg; republished by the Washington Post; July 25, 2023. https://www.washingtonpost....8a9b62d84_story.html
Only 3% of El Paso's electricity in 2022 was Solar, but El Paso Electric is working to increase Solar's share. A bigger role for Wind is a long term goal. Diego Mendoza-Moyer of "El Paso Matters"; Energy News Network; July 20, 2023. https://energynews.us/2023/...newable-energy-boom/
MAGA-style cartoons are popular on social media, but the thinking demographic is not so easily hoodwinked. Or as another wag has it: "The same crowd that likes these MAGA-style cartoons is hailing Trump's flatulence as a valuable source of gas energy."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-27-2023).]
My area today. I'm guessing in 1941, the GREATEST generations method of measuring temperature was wrong wrong wrong, and the mercury was too impure to provide valid readings. If only they had TTL digital back then. And remotely calibrated and configured newest gen TTTTTTTTL ICs all connected voting machines.
See those two TV weather maps in the previous message from WonderBoy?
Snopes(.com) had a recent column on that:
quote
Communicators in general—including broadcast meteorologists—have been increasingly using colors that are representative of the variable(s) they're showing in order to make their maps more intuitive to non-specialists. For example, using 'cool' tones (blue, purple and white) to show areas where there are very cold temperatures; and using "warm" tones (yellow, orange, red, dark red) to show where there are hotter temperatures. We see similar strategies in other maps too, such as very heavy rains and sea level change / flood maps—using a graduating scale of blue hues to show increasing amounts of water.
"No, Weather Maps Aren't Scare-Mongering About Climate Change"
quote
A NOAA spokesperson told Snopes that the point isn't to trick anyone or make the weather seem scarier ... the point is to make the maps more intuitive and easy to understand.
See the bullsh**ery posted by ChatRI? See the bullsh**ery explanation for the change in colours? Easy on the eyes.
You seem always at the ready to defend the cabal of industrial wealth relocation. But sorry, I can see the numbers better on a green map than a red map. Your S-I-C-K C-U-L-T with your word definition changing, colour representation changing, gender redefining, fat is the new skinny isn't convincing those living in reality. You know, non distopia-SimCity folk.
Notification on my phone today. More controlled propaganda. BlackRock must own and control a big stake in Motorola. Never a single notification about the Briben crime family though.
Notification on my phone today. More controlled propaganda. BlackRock must own and control a big stake in Motorola. Never a single notification about the Briben crime family though.
Yeah... and they also show a wildfire in the background, which we know has nothing to do with global warming.
The higher temperatures and dry spells that have become more common are not just weather variability. It's climate change driven by human-attributable greenhouse gas emissions. And it's contributing to more numerous and more intense wildfires, wherever wildfires are possible.
An international group of scientists just made that assertion (again), according to Sky News science and technology editor Tom Clarke. He doesn't pin down this international group of scientists, so maybe it's the IPCC. Or it could have been some other group.
It's right at the beginning of this video report.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-02-2023).]
Yeah... and they also show a wildfire in the background, which we know has nothing to do with global warming.
Do "we"?
I certainly don't speak for anyone but myself... but anyone who believes that wildfires aren't far more prevalent the last few years is totally ignoring reality. Are they due simply to more idiot smokers flicking their butts into the underbrush? I rather doubt it.
I certainly don't speak for anyone but myself... but anyone who believes that wildfires aren't far more prevalent the last few years is totally ignoring reality. Are they due simply to more idiot smokers flicking their butts into the underbrush? I rather doubt it.
$Global BOILING$©
