Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 324
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

The 130 or so windmills just outside of Eburg, at 2 MW each, generate enough power for 70,000 homes. The wind farm takes up a fair bit of land...but not really, as you can still use 99% of that land for whatever you want. An airport would probably not be a good idea, though.

Posted

I don't give a shit about this issue anymore. According to many ecology experts, it's practically too late to prevent the continuing loss of biodiversity and mass extinctions of many of the world's species without massive redirection of "the how", the "to whom", and "for what" human energies are being spent. It's not happening. Oh well, humanity's due for another dark age. Maybe the next "renaissance", if there is one, will teach us not to shit where we eat, squander the paradise we were given, and think about other species than our own. Hope you like breathing through a mask, looking at animals in zoos, and keeping yourself from being impressed into a redneck militia!

Posted (edited)

When/IF my doctor says I'm gonna die of cancer in three months, there is certainly a chance he will be wrong.

 

But I'd definitely get my affairs in order at that point. Maybe even study up on cancer...............

 

Dyson's article, as can be expected, gets quickly to real heart of data, about which Fairweather will never know, and which offers a rather poor prognosis.

 

Though pushing 90 years old, Dyson is rather hopeful (and skeptical).

Edited by johndavidjr
Posted

Dyson presents the essential relevant data and suggests this could be addressed by giant plantations of genetically engineered trees that can suck up excess carbon dioxide.

 

He adds:

"Many of the skeptics are passionate environmentalists. They are horrified to see the obsession with global warming distracting public attention from what they see as more serious and more immediate dangers to the planet, including problems of nuclear weaponry, environmental degradation, and social injustice. "

 

 

Posted

The main issue with wind power is dispatch and storage. It will never work as the main power producer without a storage mechanism. Grid stability is also challenging. Conservation is way cheaper than any other energy source, including coal. Up those gas prices w/ a carbon tax, and add a carbon tax on coal, and we'll see some changes.

Posted

Dyson thinks a solution may be finding a means of absorbing carbon dioxide, which he believes may be through engineering trees.

 

Dr. Fairweather, (Father, Rev.?? Fairweather?) (not quite up to Dyson's credentials) thinks there isn't a problem.

 

If I could afford a doctor, I might or might not listen to his/her advice.

Posted

wind power can be stored with either compressed air or elevated hydro systems. In the future, home battery banks might help the problem. Power can also be smoothed by a higher peak usage rates, which direct demand to periods when the wind is highest in the area. A wind farm can also be interleaved with solar generation, which would complement and smooth overall power generation. Or cows could be raised for a shitpile generation system.

Posted
CO2 may, in fact, be the cause--but to claim the science is settled to the same degree as, say, evolution or plate tectonics is ridiculous. Easterbrook thinks that solar output and natural decadal oscillations are largely to blame. I wouldn't be surprised if diminished albedo due to (anthropogenic)soot is a factor in glacial recession as well. There is a NASA study underway right now investigating this--which, of course, begs the question: Is this really settled?

 

Ivan. You gonna ask me this again in a couple months? Where's the quid pro quo from cc.com's only libnontard? :wazup:

i might very well ask again out of genuine confusion - so, if i translate your passage proper, you ascribe to the notion that the earth is warming, that mankind might be part of the problem, but that largely its a natural phenomena that shouldn't concern us?

 

you gonna miss the glaciers?

 

so long as there's enough ice to put in my gin n' tonics i reckon i'll be alright, especially since i'll need the tonic to fight off the malaria spreading into the pnw :)

Posted

Nice find on the link JD jr.

 

Of course the problem with trying to human engineer a change through carbon dioxide sucking trees might be a huge other ecological disaster for all the other existing life form from insects through birds.

Posted

 

Cutting carbon dioxide output may save some lives in Bangladesh or similar swamplands populated by millions of destitute people.

 

But the probability appears to be that the Doug Fir/Cedar/Whatnot forests of PNW coast are already doomed. Little glaciers? Don't think so.

 

Yeah whatever.

 

Alternate energy may help at the margins. Dyson's idea might be more useful in sucking up Co2 from cheap mini-cars... and the North Face/Mountain GEar/Wal-Mart toy factories in Asia.

 

Neither Fairweather's wishful thinking nor Obama's politicking is going to stop this.

 

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...