| Ooops 16:09 - Oct 26 with 1653 views | Catullus |
Yes it is human made.....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58954530
Of course some people don't want to accept it. Usually those people who want to carry on as we are and not accept tesponsibility...or lower profits!
Too many people on this planet are putting money before our future and it will end very badly. |  |
| |  |
| Ooops on 19:52 - Oct 26 with 1187 views | Flynnidine_Zidownes |
The question is how on Earth do we move from the current necessity for energy to pre industrial revolution levels of pollution almost overnight (relatively speaking) without severely lowering the standards of living we have been accustomed to?
It’s an incredibly difficult one.
It’s almost entirely possible that even the most hardened climate activist would be the first to complain if their home wasn’t heated during the winter months or their avacados and chargrilled artichokes aren’t available at their local Waitrose. | | | |
| Ooops on 20:58 - Oct 26 with 1140 views | Professor |
| Ooops on 19:52 - Oct 26 by Flynnidine_Zidownes |
The question is how on Earth do we move from the current necessity for energy to pre industrial revolution levels of pollution almost overnight (relatively speaking) without severely lowering the standards of living we have been accustomed to?
It’s an incredibly difficult one.
It’s almost entirely possible that even the most hardened climate activist would be the first to complain if their home wasn’t heated during the winter months or their avacados and chargrilled artichokes aren’t available at their local Waitrose. |
Absolutely. Buy a Tesla but fly to Florida. Become vegan but have four kids. | | | |
| Ooops on 21:48 - Oct 26 with 1100 views | A_Fans_Dad |
Jumping in with both feet as usual, looking for anything to pick up on.
The first study is demonstrating the Official position on CO2 for the last 150 years.
It was deliberately put there to show the official position.
The rest of the studies show how clouds influence the climate with far more affect than CO2.
Try reading it all and learn something for a change. | | | |
| Ooops on 22:08 - Oct 26 with 1092 views | Professor |
| Ooops on 21:48 - Oct 26 by A_Fans_Dad |
Jumping in with both feet as usual, looking for anything to pick up on.
The first study is demonstrating the Official position on CO2 for the last 150 years.
It was deliberately put there to show the official position.
The rest of the studies show how clouds influence the climate with far more affect than CO2.
Try reading it all and learn something for a change. |
Well you clearly have not. Have you?
You just churn up the usual pseudoscience. Why are those abstracts redacted? Because the conclusions are not what is stated. Usual amateur, too much time on your hands nonsense we expect from you. | | | |
| Ooops on 23:13 - Oct 26 with 1064 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Ooops on 22:08 - Oct 26 by Professor |
Well you clearly have not. Have you?
You just churn up the usual pseudoscience. Why are those abstracts redacted? Because the conclusions are not what is stated. Usual amateur, too much time on your hands nonsense we expect from you. |
I have and you haven't, the abstracts are not redacted, they are just abstracts.
Seeing as you are suggesting that you have read and understood all of those studies please highlight where they disagree with the abstract quotes made by Pierre L. Gosselin and his understanding of them. | | | |
| Ooops on 05:30 - Oct 27 with 1014 views | CountyJim |
I've said before we are coming out still of the last ice age so temps are bound to get warmer and as the BBC site says there's been hotter periods in the earth's history .
Also look at the crap nature makes volcanoes for example
We shouldn't be giving ourselves such a hard time
Of course recycle and cut the use of our cars it helps us and our animal friends |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ooops on 07:31 - Oct 27 with 994 views | Dr_Winston |
I've said this before, but it's worth repeating.
I don't particularly care whether Climate Change is man made or not. I don't doubt humanity influences it to a degree, but perhaps not as much as some would have us think. Regardless, there are no downsides to trying to lead cleaner, less wasteful, less polluting lives.
Even if man made CC is a lie, so what? Much like the anti-Vaxxers, the anti-MMCC types seem to be opposing change purely to be contrarian rather than because of any specific belief they have about the downsides to it.
Governments, both National and International, need to be stronger on those countries and corporations who aren't cutting their emissions/pollution deeply or quickly enough. It's no good the UK banning gas central heating and petrol/diesel cars when China still pumps out as much CO2 as it does.
Perhaps the biggest challenge is going to be getting much of Africa from the rural to industrial stage whilst skipping the mass polluting part that everywhere else went through. [Post edited 27 Oct 2021 7:32]
|  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| Ooops on 10:38 - Oct 27 with 938 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Ooops on 07:31 - Oct 27 by Dr_Winston |
I've said this before, but it's worth repeating.
I don't particularly care whether Climate Change is man made or not. I don't doubt humanity influences it to a degree, but perhaps not as much as some would have us think. Regardless, there are no downsides to trying to lead cleaner, less wasteful, less polluting lives.
Even if man made CC is a lie, so what? Much like the anti-Vaxxers, the anti-MMCC types seem to be opposing change purely to be contrarian rather than because of any specific belief they have about the downsides to it.
Governments, both National and International, need to be stronger on those countries and corporations who aren't cutting their emissions/pollution deeply or quickly enough. It's no good the UK banning gas central heating and petrol/diesel cars when China still pumps out as much CO2 as it does.
Perhaps the biggest challenge is going to be getting much of Africa from the rural to industrial stage whilst skipping the mass polluting part that everywhere else went through. [Post edited 27 Oct 2021 7:32]
|
There is a major difference between pollution and CO2 output, CO2 is good for all life, pollution is not.
Clean burning coal plants did not exist when the western world went through the industrial revolution, now it does and that is what is needed for places like Africa. It is cheap, clean and baseload, exactly what they need and want.
ps of course "climate change" exists, it always has.
Glovbal warming also exists, otherwise we would still be in the last Ice Age. | | | |
| Ooops on 12:32 - Oct 27 with 931 views | Boundy |
| Ooops on 10:38 - Oct 27 by A_Fans_Dad |
There is a major difference between pollution and CO2 output, CO2 is good for all life, pollution is not.
Clean burning coal plants did not exist when the western world went through the industrial revolution, now it does and that is what is needed for places like Africa. It is cheap, clean and baseload, exactly what they need and want.
ps of course "climate change" exists, it always has.
Glovbal warming also exists, otherwise we would still be in the last Ice Age. |
I'm interested in your definition of clean burning coal plants, what exactly would they be ? | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Ooops on 12:41 - Oct 27 with 919 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Ooops on 12:32 - Oct 27 by Boundy |
I'm interested in your definition of clean burning coal plants, what exactly would they be ? |
The ones where the pollutants, like sulphur, lead and other pollutants have been removed by the use of scrubbers, filters and re-burning.
But not CO2 or Water Vapour that they show coming from the cooling stacks whenever they talk about "carbon pollution".
https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/uncategorized/cleaned-coal-clean-air- | | | |
| Ooops on 13:45 - Oct 27 with 913 views | Professor |
| Ooops on 12:32 - Oct 27 by Boundy |
I'm interested in your definition of clean burning coal plants, what exactly would they be ? |
It's relatively easy to move sulphur dioxide from coal burning plants-important in reducing acid rain. Removing carbon or carbon dioxide is more challenging but can be done -carbon capture and storage (CCS) and there are a few plants that do this. They are, however, massively expensive to build and run (no financial advantage over the cleaner renewables AFD always puts down). The carbon dioxide also has to be stored-pumped normally into the ground. The idea is that it reacts with rocks and becomes incorporated. But, there is no guarantee this will work on a larger scale, and the carbon dioxide may still end up seeping not the atmosphere. The US has invested heavily in development but does not seem to offer an alternative and still produces far more carbon dioxide than renewable or nuclear power. | | | |
| Ooops on 13:59 - Oct 27 with 906 views | Boundy |
Thank you but there is no such thing as a purely clean source of energy, as you have pointed out in the past when referring to wind energy for example, the amount of material used in the manufacture etc,. Coal needs to be mined & transported continually, not so for renewables once its build and installed then it's a stand alone source of energy ." While CCS can effectively capture around 90 percent of the CO2 produced at power plants, some people point to the fact that coal has so many pollutants that no singular technology can capture all of them. They point to mercury, nitrogen oxide, and other poisonous contaminants that coal plants still produce even if they're not pumping out CO2" .To replace existing coal fired stations with ones capable of carbon capture is expensive to build or to retrofit onto old plants. Everything comes at a cost the question now should be which is better for the environment long term | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Ooops on 14:20 - Oct 27 with 895 views | Catullus |
| Ooops on 07:31 - Oct 27 by Dr_Winston |
I've said this before, but it's worth repeating.
I don't particularly care whether Climate Change is man made or not. I don't doubt humanity influences it to a degree, but perhaps not as much as some would have us think. Regardless, there are no downsides to trying to lead cleaner, less wasteful, less polluting lives.
Even if man made CC is a lie, so what? Much like the anti-Vaxxers, the anti-MMCC types seem to be opposing change purely to be contrarian rather than because of any specific belief they have about the downsides to it.
Governments, both National and International, need to be stronger on those countries and corporations who aren't cutting their emissions/pollution deeply or quickly enough. It's no good the UK banning gas central heating and petrol/diesel cars when China still pumps out as much CO2 as it does.
Perhaps the biggest challenge is going to be getting much of Africa from the rural to industrial stage whilst skipping the mass polluting part that everywhere else went through. [Post edited 27 Oct 2021 7:32]
|
I'm caught in the middle on this DrW. I believe we need to lead cleaner, less wasteful and less destructive lives. We need to protect habitats and environments but at the same time, the politicians keep on talking, keep on raising our bills to pay for the things they say need doing but then, THEY DO NOTHING!
Even if I agree something needs to be done, why should I pay extra for it when they aren't doing anything? | |
| |
| Ooops on 14:29 - Oct 27 with 889 views | BarrySwan |
Where I'm a touch puzzled is that I'm sure, like me, a number of you will recall, a few years ago a volcano in Iceland erupted forcing loads of plane cancellations because of the dust clouds for some time.
At that time it was widely reported in the media that scientists had estimated that that one eruption had pumped 10,000 times the entire Co2 contributions made by mankind since its existence on Earth.
Given that a number of volcanoes erupt every year including of course the one on La Palma at the moment how is mans CO2 contributions even remotely relevant? Also of course many volcanoes around the world are simmering away between eruptions also constantly emitting vast volumes of Co2
Also how were there much warmer periods in the past with less ice knocking about than now before industrialisation?
Also with the UKs contribution to CO2 being almost insignificant compared to the likes of China and India for example whats the point of the UK destroying its industry and leaving our population freezing cold in our own homes as we can't afford to pay our fuel bills because of Eco loon green fuel levies?
And also how come its OK for Spain and Portugal for example to be so nice and warm that our own population flock to their holiday spots in their millions while we shiver and have massive heating bills in the UK but yet supposedly its not alright for our UK climate to warm up a bit?
Presumably we have to be freezing and damp while Spain and Portugal, Italy Greece etc etc are fine to be nice and warm? | | | |
| Ooops on 14:41 - Oct 27 with 882 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Ooops on 13:59 - Oct 27 by Boundy |
Thank you but there is no such thing as a purely clean source of energy, as you have pointed out in the past when referring to wind energy for example, the amount of material used in the manufacture etc,. Coal needs to be mined & transported continually, not so for renewables once its build and installed then it's a stand alone source of energy ." While CCS can effectively capture around 90 percent of the CO2 produced at power plants, some people point to the fact that coal has so many pollutants that no singular technology can capture all of them. They point to mercury, nitrogen oxide, and other poisonous contaminants that coal plants still produce even if they're not pumping out CO2" .To replace existing coal fired stations with ones capable of carbon capture is expensive to build or to retrofit onto old plants. Everything comes at a cost the question now should be which is better for the environment long term |
Well, if you are worried about the environment perhaps you should look into the disposal of solar panels & wind turbine blades on a regular basis.
https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/renewable/solar/the-mounting-solar-pa
https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2021/03/16/the-tragedy-of-wind-turbine-blade-dis | | | |
| Ooops on 14:47 - Oct 27 with 877 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Ooops on 14:29 - Oct 27 by BarrySwan |
Where I'm a touch puzzled is that I'm sure, like me, a number of you will recall, a few years ago a volcano in Iceland erupted forcing loads of plane cancellations because of the dust clouds for some time.
At that time it was widely reported in the media that scientists had estimated that that one eruption had pumped 10,000 times the entire Co2 contributions made by mankind since its existence on Earth.
Given that a number of volcanoes erupt every year including of course the one on La Palma at the moment how is mans CO2 contributions even remotely relevant? Also of course many volcanoes around the world are simmering away between eruptions also constantly emitting vast volumes of Co2
Also how were there much warmer periods in the past with less ice knocking about than now before industrialisation?
Also with the UKs contribution to CO2 being almost insignificant compared to the likes of China and India for example whats the point of the UK destroying its industry and leaving our population freezing cold in our own homes as we can't afford to pay our fuel bills because of Eco loon green fuel levies?
And also how come its OK for Spain and Portugal for example to be so nice and warm that our own population flock to their holiday spots in their millions while we shiver and have massive heating bills in the UK but yet supposedly its not alright for our UK climate to warm up a bit?
Presumably we have to be freezing and damp while Spain and Portugal, Italy Greece etc etc are fine to be nice and warm? |
I am sure that they said by now we would have a "Mediterranean climate".
Along with our kids not knowing what snow is, no Arctic ice, all the poley bears would be gone, the Malidives and New York would all be under water etc. | | | |
| Ooops on 15:25 - Oct 27 with 860 views | Boundy |
One point in your article regarding turbines " People concerned with the environment are increasingly aware of the negative impacts of the giant machines and their vast land-use requirements — as well those of their additional supporting infrastructure (including heavy-duty roads, transformers, and powerlines) — on wetlands, birds, bats, beneficial insects, and other wildlife – both directly and by degrading, fragmenting, and destroying habitat"
I suppose none of the above negatives occur with traditional coal fired stations , no transformers , power lines , water intakes with its daily massive losses of water. Its all about striking a balance . | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Ooops on 15:43 - Oct 27 with 851 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Ooops on 15:25 - Oct 27 by Boundy |
One point in your article regarding turbines " People concerned with the environment are increasingly aware of the negative impacts of the giant machines and their vast land-use requirements — as well those of their additional supporting infrastructure (including heavy-duty roads, transformers, and powerlines) — on wetlands, birds, bats, beneficial insects, and other wildlife – both directly and by degrading, fragmenting, and destroying habitat"
I suppose none of the above negatives occur with traditional coal fired stations , no transformers , power lines , water intakes with its daily massive losses of water. Its all about striking a balance . |
Do you have any idea of the difference in "footprint" between a coal, gas or nuclear power station compared to a wind farm? | | | |
| Ooops on 17:12 - Oct 27 with 831 views | Professor |
| Ooops on 15:43 - Oct 27 by A_Fans_Dad |
Do you have any idea of the difference in "footprint" between a coal, gas or nuclear power station compared to a wind farm? |
Do you? Ever actually seen a wind farm.
Most (well all I have seen except a few small urban ones) windfarms have gaps in which things grow, live or swim. Somewhere like the old Aberthaw power station had a pretty large footprint. Plus that of the railway or roads to service it. Plus that of the colliery or gas platform to produce the fuel. Plus the cost of fuel to transport the coal or that to build a gas pipeline. | | | |
| Ooops on 17:26 - Oct 27 with 826 views | Boundy |
| Ooops on 15:43 - Oct 27 by A_Fans_Dad |
Do you have any idea of the difference in "footprint" between a coal, gas or nuclear power station compared to a wind farm? |
Strangely enough yes I do, I've worked in the power supply /transmission industry for over 30 years , in coal gas and renewables , yourself ? | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Ooops on 17:28 - Oct 27 with 824 views | Catullus |
| Ooops on 14:29 - Oct 27 by BarrySwan |
Where I'm a touch puzzled is that I'm sure, like me, a number of you will recall, a few years ago a volcano in Iceland erupted forcing loads of plane cancellations because of the dust clouds for some time.
At that time it was widely reported in the media that scientists had estimated that that one eruption had pumped 10,000 times the entire Co2 contributions made by mankind since its existence on Earth.
Given that a number of volcanoes erupt every year including of course the one on La Palma at the moment how is mans CO2 contributions even remotely relevant? Also of course many volcanoes around the world are simmering away between eruptions also constantly emitting vast volumes of Co2
Also how were there much warmer periods in the past with less ice knocking about than now before industrialisation?
Also with the UKs contribution to CO2 being almost insignificant compared to the likes of China and India for example whats the point of the UK destroying its industry and leaving our population freezing cold in our own homes as we can't afford to pay our fuel bills because of Eco loon green fuel levies?
And also how come its OK for Spain and Portugal for example to be so nice and warm that our own population flock to their holiday spots in their millions while we shiver and have massive heating bills in the UK but yet supposedly its not alright for our UK climate to warm up a bit?
Presumably we have to be freezing and damp while Spain and Portugal, Italy Greece etc etc are fine to be nice and warm? |
Here you go.
https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/volcano-hazards/volcanoes-can-affect-climat
But in short the answer is volcanoes do not put out more Co2 than Humanity produces. | |
| |
| Ooops on 18:06 - Oct 27 with 812 views | Flynnidine_Zidownes |
Volcanos spew out mainly water vapour, which of course is worse for global warming than co2. Some volcanos can actually have a cooling effect though if they spunk out a load of ash that blocks the sun like mr burns in that episode of the simpsons. | | | |
| Ooops on 19:09 - Oct 27 with 780 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| Ooops on 17:26 - Oct 27 by Boundy |
Strangely enough yes I do, I've worked in the power supply /transmission industry for over 30 years , in coal gas and renewables , yourself ? |
Yes, I know how to look it up.
So you know that far greater areas are affected by wind turbine and they require far more infrastructure to transfer the power to the grid. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
