Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

[Exile]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Ironically, its chemical formula is C. That might about the only safe way to harvest sequestered carbon.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Perpetual motion machines

True rose coloured glasses

Pie in the sky

Virtual reality - blocks out the real thing

Real big band-aids

Those would be a start.

Quantum teleporters to allow migration to Kepler Earth 2.0's and above would work, too. :-)

Originally Posted by jackdale

Welcome to the Anthropocene



The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene

https://theconversation.com/dawn-of-...al-epoch-52867

Let me get this straight. The most dominant, intelligent (arguably!), widespread and sentient species that has ever evolved on this planet is finally going to have an epoch named after them (because we've increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by 0.0001%) and that's bad? Is that like Carboniferous and Jurassic bad? We can only hope it will last as long.

Or maybe it's more because we've been destroying natural habitat since the day we emerged from the jungle.

As Katherine Hepburn once said...

"Nature, Mr Allnut, is what we were put on this world to rise above"

Originally Posted by jackdale

That is why I am supporting my local, provincial and federal governments as they move away from coal generation. Ontario has all ready done so.

My heating system is about 95% efficient. It has no chimney and exhausts through a PVC pipe. It is an on-demand system. Unfortunately being leading edge, it is also somewhat "bleeding edge." The heating coil burst while I was in the middle of the South Atlantic. My wife was not very happy. The coil was replaced on warranty, but we had to pay for labour.

Wait a few hundred years and your winter temps will be as mild as mine and you won't need no steenkin' heater at all.



Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Read them and see for yourself... They're about the exact opposite, freedom from tyranny and oppression...

Oppression, like a one world type Socialist government and the alarmists telling everyone what to do and demanding unnecessary carbon (tea) taxes.

Now let's get back to the original subject matter. What new technologies will the future bring to make the current worriers about global warming forget about it... And stop worrying about some sort of human-based apocalyptic meltdown?

Ken, we are already well along the way towards a "one world type" of government, except it is one dominated by multi-national corporations and their lackey global groups like the WTO, the IMF and the related "free" trade structures. These have little to do with trade. The main "freedom" they enhance is the freedom of these corporations to make the most profit with the fewest limitations (like pesky environmental or labour protections), while minimizing the taxes they pay.

But to get back to your request, you ask what technologies the future will bring to fix the global environmental issues we face. I would broaden this to ask what new ideas do we need? The dominate economic model is the heart of the problem. Infinite growth in a finite system (Earth) is lunacy. We need new ways of distributing resources (run an economy).

To put this in language some of you may better relate to; until we learn to live on the planet's interest, instead of its capital, we will continue to make the problems worse.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

The dominate economic model is the heart of the problem. Infinite growth in a finite system (Earth) is lunacy. We need new ways of distributing resources (run an economy).

To put this in language some of you may better relate to; until we learn to live on the planet's interest, instead of its capital, we will continue to make the problems worse.

In other words...the 1968 Population Bomb myth scam....

Mike, why are you living in such fear of the future, freedom and capitalism? (the evil dominant economic model of which you speak) Capitalism has raised more people out of poverty, fed more hungry people and led to the spread of freedom around the world than any other economic system in the history of the world...yet you have a problem with it...why.

This myth that we are running out of resources has been around since we were cutting down trees for tall ship masts, but what the Population Bomb and your fear never wants to admit is that humanity marches forward, technology improves, and the city streets are not filled with horse crap from the horse and carts as the "Bombers" of the day would have fretted about.

Creative Destruction is a GOOD thing, stop the fear of the Future and Freedom....it will be ok, there is no monster under the year 2050 Bed that we can not fix in 2050. Who would have imagined the technology and efficiency of today 20yrs ago....so relax and go cruising, the world will be here with OR without you trying to save it...You (and me) are not that important in the big picture...THAT is the key to accepting happiness.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Let me get this straight. The most dominant, intelligent (arguably!), widespread and sentient species that has ever evolved on this planet is finally going to have an epoch named after them (because we've increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere by 0.0001%) and that's bad? Is that like Carboniferous and Jurassic bad? We can only hope it will last as long.

That would be a 40% increase directly linked to burning fossil fuels.

"Nature, Mr Allnut, is what we were put on this world to rise above"

Katherine Hepburn - that well known climate scientist - reading a script that makes her sound like a Dominionist.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That would be a 40% increase directly linked to burning fossil fuels.

OK I guess I don't understand correctly are you saying that 40% of the .0001% increase of atmospheric is man caused ? What is the other 60% of the .0001% from then ?

Just like the line graphs they are not as clear as actual numbers in black and white. ( to me as an engineer).

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

OK I guess I don't understand correctly are you saying that 40% of the .0001% increase of atmospheric is man caused ? What is the other 60% of the .0001% from then ?

Just like the line graphs they are not as clear as actual numbers in black and white. ( to me as an engineer).

That was a 40% increase in the concentration of atmospheric CO2.

You might want to spend some time understanding trace substances.

Some actual numbers:

O3 is 3-10 ppm but protects you from UVB and skin cancer.

Selenium is essential in the human diet but becomes toxic at 400 ppm.

CO2 is essential to photosynthesis, but compromises the nutritional value of food crops at 550 ppm.

CO2 prevents the earth from being a ball of ice and has fluctuated naturally between 180 and 300 ppm for the past 800,000 years until the mid 18th century. The current levels have not been apparent for 3-5 million years.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That would be a 40% increase directly linked to burning fossil fuels.



Katherine Hepburn - that well known climate scientist - reading a script that makes her sound like a Dominionist.

Yet at least half of the world's total forested area has been destroyed in the same period (which would require a 100% increase to restore to 1850 levels). Ignored by AGW alarmists en-masse who in general much prefer to bleat on and on and on about co2 and warming means that yet another very important environmental issue has been lost in the climate change white noise.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That was a 40% increase in the concentration of atmospheric CO2.

You might want to spend some time understanding trace substances.

Some actual numbers:

O3 is 3-10 ppm but protects you from UVB and skin cancer.

Selenium is essential in the human diet but becomes toxic at 400 ppm.

CO2 is essential to photosynthesis, but compromises the nutritional value of food crops at 550 ppm.

CO2 prevents the earth from being a ball of ice and has fluctuated naturally between 180 and 300 ppm for the past 800,000 years until the mid 18th century. The current levels have not been apparent for 3-5 million years.

I rest my case.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That would be a 40% increase directly linked to burning fossil fuels.

I even hate to say this as I'm contributing to a thread that should have died 500 posts ago. But oh well....

That's 40 percent of manmade co2 increase is not to the total atmospheric co2 but to the man make portion of it, which is 4.9%. Mans contribution has increased from 3.5% in 1950 to 4.9% in 2014. The increase from 3.4% to 4.9% is what has increased by 40%.

The other 95% is not from man made sources. Plant and animal decay, volcano, wood fires, ocean's, etc. Co2 concentration has risen from 300 ppm in the 1950's to 398 ppm today. That's 398 parts per 1,000,000. That can be said as 0.0004% from 0.0003% as well.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That was a 40% increase in the concentration of atmospheric CO2.

You might want to spend some time understanding trace substances.

Some actual numbers:

O3 is 3-10 ppm but protects you from UVB and skin cancer.

Selenium is essential in the human diet but becomes toxic at 400 ppm.

CO2 is essential to photosynthesis, but compromises the nutritional value of food crops at 550 ppm.

CO2 prevents the earth from being a ball of ice and has fluctuated naturally between 180 and 300 ppm for the past 800,000 years until the mid 18th century. The current levels have not been apparent for 3-5 million years.

OK there are the numbers I was looking for ( did some gfe work in the navy I dealt with ppm not percentages. ) Thank you

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Yet at least half of the world's total forested area has been destroyed in the same period (which would require a 100% increase to restore to 1850 levels). Ignored by AGW alarmists en-masse who in general much prefer to bleat on and on and on about co2 and warming means that yet another very important environmental issue has been lost in the climate change white noise.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Carbon isotope analysis links the increase from 287 ppm in the mid 18th century to the current level of 400 ppm to the burning of fossil fuels.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

I even hate to say this as I'm contributing to a thread that should have died 500 posts ago. But oh well....

That's 40 percent of manmade co2 increase is not to the total atmospheric co2 but to the man make portion of it, which is 4.9%. Mans contribution has increased from 3.5% in 1950 to 4.9% in 2014. The increase from 3.4% to 4.9% is what has increased by 40%.

The other 95% is not from man made sources. Plant and animal decay, volcano, wood fires, ocean's, etc. Co2 concentration has risen from 300 ppm in the 1950's to 398 ppm today. That's 398 parts per 1,000,000. That can be said as 0.0004% from 0.0003% as well.

1750 - 287 ppm

2015 - 400 ppm

100*(400-287)/287 = 39.4%

39.4% increase in atmospheric CO2 which, using carbon isotope analysis, is directly linked to burning fossil fuels.

Math is not hard.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

Well, I don't think any, but I'm a realist and feel that technology caused about 50 percent of the problem, with the remainder caused by human (or more correctly, life's) nature.

But that's another argument. Most likely, any technologies that help will be refinements of existing ones. Energy storage is very important (this is of course one of the greatest things about fossil fuels in general, and crude oil especially), but nuclear and gas are too. Hydro, solar, wind, tide and geothermal will all play parts, depending on application and environmental criteria.

Here's a couple of newish storage ideas, though they're not based on any new principles, and both are still in varying stages of development.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...Ixt6nMf-IQ#t=3


Technology - LightSail Energy

The real problem (if one believes there is one) can be grasped by taking one of the 'greenie' tests like this,

ISCFC: Calculate Your Footprint#

I took it, and my score was around 13000 tons. The average for my area was 39000 tons (if I remember correctly, it might have been 33000). At any rate, to keep the CO2 PPM below 450, the number they say has to be around 1000 tons per world capita. I'd say the real consumers (like me) have quite a job on their hands...this is also one of the reasons why the 'hand wringers' are so worried.

I took the carbon footprint calculator and it said I produce 9500 tons and well over 5500 tons is my home but I don't think the calculator is even close. Everything on my boat is run off of solar except I use biodiesel for heat and the aux engine, and propane to cook. A 20 pound cylinder lasts me about 6 months. There is no way 40 pounds of propane produce 5500 tons of co2. Their calculator just doesn't have enough variables for full time lives boards. But it was fun and I guess I could reduce my beef intake and increase my fish some.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

In other words...the 1968 Population Bomb myth scam....

Mike, why are you living in such fear of the future, freedom and capitalism? (the evil dominant economic model of which you speak) Capitalism has raised more people out of poverty, fed more hungry people and led to the spread of freedom around the world than any other economic system in the history of the world...yet you have a problem with it...why.

This myth that we are running out of resources has been around since we were cutting down trees for tall ship masts, but what the Population Bomb and your fear never wants to admit is that humanity marches forward, technology improves, and the city streets are not filled with horse crap from the horse and carts as the "Bombers" of the day would have fretted about.

Creative Destruction is a GOOD thing, stop the fear of the Future and Freedom....it will be ok, there is no monster under the year 2050 Bed that we can not fix in 2050. Who would have imagined the technology and efficiency of today 20yrs ago....so relax and go cruising, the world will be here with OR without you trying to save it...You (and me) are not that important in the big picture...THAT is the key to accepting happiness.