Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Global Warming - Page 147







Post#3651 at 08-14-2013 09:59 AM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
08-14-2013, 09:59 AM #3651
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

No, there's no "ideal" answer, but there are certainly better and worse answers and solar is the best answer we have available if we look at single-source options, although a mix of renewable power is better still. If nothing else, wind and solar have different downtimes. Natural gas IS a fossil fuel, although a cleaner one than coal or oil. Again, the reason we are building natural gas in preference to solar or wind (although we're also building a lot more solar and wind these days) is pure short-term economics, and has nothing to do with availability of energy. There is a LOT more solar power available than there is natural gas, but at this point it still costs more per kwh.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"

My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/

The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903







Post#3652 at 08-14-2013 10:11 AM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
08-14-2013, 10:11 AM #3652
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Deb C View Post
There are exceptions to every rule - but "a literal death ray?" I wonder if that was what Flash Gordan used as a weapon?

Actual Martian Ray gun prop used in the Flash Gordan series:





Sorry, I couldn't resist.
A parabolic concentrator of solar radiation focuses solar radiation into a narrow ray that then heats something else up. Diffuse solar radiation can give one a nasty sunburn even if the air temperature is about 65F, and some of the worst sunburns that I have ever gotten I received while a slight chill in the air masked any discomfort, as at beaches in northern California. Contrast summer in Phoenix or even Dallas, where "it's a dry heat"; you might feel nausea from the heat before you are out in it long enough to get a sunburn. Now just imagine how hot a concentrated beam of sunlight is. 1000F? It would kill you.

All concentrated energy is potentially dangerous, whatever the source.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#3653 at 08-14-2013 11:46 AM by Bad Dog [at joined Dec 2012 #posts 2,156]
---
08-14-2013, 11:46 AM #3653
Join Date
Dec 2012
Posts
2,156

Quote Originally Posted by Mikebert View Post
When I was a kid and you a young adult they were saying the same thing. I'll believe it when I see it.
and, we'll all have flying cars!







Post#3654 at 08-14-2013 11:48 AM by Bad Dog [at joined Dec 2012 #posts 2,156]
---
08-14-2013, 11:48 AM #3654
Join Date
Dec 2012
Posts
2,156

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
A parabolic concentrator of solar radiation focuses solar radiation into a narrow ray that then heats something else up. Diffuse solar radiation can give one a nasty sunburn even if the air temperature is about 65F, and some of the worst sunburns that I have ever gotten I received while a slight chill in the air masked any discomfort, as at beaches in northern California. Contrast summer in Phoenix or even Dallas, where "it's a dry heat"; you might feel nausea from the heat before you are out in it long enough to get a sunburn. Now just imagine how hot a concentrated beam of sunlight is. 1000F? It would kill you.

All concentrated energy is potentially dangerous, whatever the source.
FLASH! Ahhh-Ahhh!







Post#3655 at 08-14-2013 11:49 AM by Bad Dog [at joined Dec 2012 #posts 2,156]
---
08-14-2013, 11:49 AM #3655
Join Date
Dec 2012
Posts
2,156

Two more disturbances forming in the Atlantic. One looks like a nasty Cape Verde storm.







Post#3656 at 08-14-2013 04:46 PM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
08-14-2013, 04:46 PM #3656
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#3657 at 08-14-2013 08:15 PM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
08-14-2013, 08:15 PM #3657
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

If we ever start generating solar power from orbiting arrays and laser-beaming the energy to the Earth's surface, then the potential for a solar catastrophe will become real. Probably a good reason not to do that even if it would improve efficiency. (Not sure it would. The generation would be more efficient but it would lose some in the transmission.)
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"

My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/

The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903







Post#3658 at 08-15-2013 08:12 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
08-15-2013, 08:12 AM #3658
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by radind View Post
Solar alone is a problem. Some form of energy storage would also be required. There is no reason that energy storage cannot be developed with commitment of resources over time.
The limitation is pretty damning. Even ideal storage is limited by basic physics, and no one has a solid answer that is also feasible. The best storage medium we have is plant life, and that isn't even viable ... unless we decide to have electricity in lieu of food.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#3659 at 08-15-2013 08:15 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
08-15-2013, 08:15 AM #3659
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Deb C View Post
Maybe the point is that at least there are strides being taken in Germany toward a viable alternative energy.
You ignored his main point: Germany reduced nuclear power, with its excellent record of safety and zero emissions, by adding coal-fired plants, not known for either. Do you honestly consider that as progress?
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#3660 at 08-15-2013 08:18 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
08-15-2013, 08:18 AM #3660
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Mikebert View Post
When I was a kid and you a young adult they were saying the same thing. I'll believe it when I see it.
Managing plasma is hard, but the ITER project is getting very close. That's the last hurdle in the science realm; after that, it's all engineering. I'm very optimistic, but 40 years is still a long time.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#3661 at 08-15-2013 08:23 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
08-15-2013, 08:23 AM #3661
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Rush View Post
Despite any statements of what is or is not equivalent to what else, here is an unequivocal statement. Enough solar energy falls on the Earth to provide thousands of times the current global energy consumption. It is certainly possible to meet all of humanity's energy needs this way for the foreseeable future, provided we manage to stabilize our population (and if we don't, we have bigger problems). The only thing that has kept us from doing so up to now is economics, not energy availability. That is, solar power could not compete in terms of price with fossil fuels. Increasingly, it can. This is due partly to reduction in the cost of solar power and partly to rising costs of fossil fuels. At some point in the quite-near future, those lines will cross and then we WILL replace fossil fuels with solar (and wind) power, because it will make economic sense -- short-term, immediate economic sense -- to do so. It already makes long-term economic sense. It already makes environmental sense. And it has always been possible.
I agree 100%. Still, intermittant sources are inherently intermittant. Our demand is also intermittant, but the two do not correlate. It's the major hurdle that may be impossible to leap. Knowing that, we should still move agressivley with both technologies, understanding that they are not adequate for out total needs and likley to never be.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#3662 at 08-15-2013 10:25 AM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
08-15-2013, 10:25 AM #3662
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
You ignored his main point: Germany reduced nuclear power, with its excellent record of safety and zero emissions, by adding coal-fired plants, not known for either. Do you honestly consider that as progress?
Considering Germany is on track to totally get rid of nuclear energy by 2022, I'd say they're far ahead of us in making the world environment a safer place to live. Meanwhile, Americans are being fed a line about *clean* coal. Germany is at least telling the truth about nuclear energy and making giant strides toward better resources of energy. Plus, to make up for the phased out nuclear electricity, Germany plans intensive expansions of energy efficiency, as well as renewable alternative sources, like wind and solar, for which it is already a world leader.

Germany to phase out nuclear power by 2022!


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/wo...many.html?_r=0


Last edited by Deb C; 08-15-2013 at 10:33 AM.
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#3663 at 08-15-2013 10:43 AM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
08-15-2013, 10:43 AM #3663
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

This is what can happen when the citizens get behind the idea of renewable energy and take part in the transformation.

Germany's energy revolution in the hands of ordinary citizensOCTOBER 15, 2012
51% of the renewable energy on the German grid is put there by individuals (like us) and farmers. Individuals and private investors are contributing the equivalent generation capacity in renewables of 20 nuclear power plants. None of it is state owned. More than one million Germans are involved as energy producers or investors in renewable energy production. According to Germany's environment ministry, "New ownership models such as citizens’ wind parks and energy cooperatives show that the Energiewende cannot only bring about environmental protection and economic growth, but also decentralized production structures in the hands of local initiatives.
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#3664 at 08-15-2013 10:52 AM by Bad Dog [at joined Dec 2012 #posts 2,156]
---
08-15-2013, 10:52 AM #3664
Join Date
Dec 2012
Posts
2,156

The Cape Verde Storm is now named Erin.







Post#3665 at 08-15-2013 10:53 AM by Bad Dog [at joined Dec 2012 #posts 2,156]
---
08-15-2013, 10:53 AM #3665
Join Date
Dec 2012
Posts
2,156








Post#3666 at 08-15-2013 11:10 AM by Bad Dog [at joined Dec 2012 #posts 2,156]
---
08-15-2013, 11:10 AM #3666
Join Date
Dec 2012
Posts
2,156

Environmental changes do not have consequences:

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/downf...ght-6C10921795







Post#3667 at 08-15-2013 12:59 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
08-15-2013, 12:59 PM #3667
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by Bad Dog View Post
Sobering facts from the article:

"If we look at the near-term, up to 2040, we see that this increase will continue and that by 2040 we will see about 20 percent of the land area affected, so about another fourfold increase compared to today," Coumou said.

If levels of carbon dioxide continue to increase in the atmosphere as they are today, the researchers find heat extremes might cover 85 percent of the planet's land area by 2100.

What's more, even hotter — so called five-sigma events, which are virtually non-existent today — would affect 60 percent of the global land area, according to the research.

"Possibly even a more important message from this study is that a further increase during the second half of the 21st century can be stopped if we reduce CO2 emissions fairly soon," Coumou said.

However, the impact of such reductions will not be felt for several decades given an inherent time lag in the climate system "and this is, of course, something that we have to deal with," he said.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#3668 at 08-15-2013 03:11 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
08-15-2013, 03:11 PM #3668
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Heat waves will change the ways in which we play. Americans in hot places may do what some people do in hot places -- they become almost nocturnal, at least in the hot season. Of course "hot places" could include such cities as Chicago and New York City... excuse me, Scranton, which will not be inundated. Just imagine baseball games with starting times of 1:00... am.

Alligators in the Potomac, the Ohio, and the lower Missouri? How wonderful!
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#3669 at 08-16-2013 05:43 AM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-16-2013, 05:43 AM #3669
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow Timing a Rise in Sea Level

The New York Times questions Timing a Rise in Sea Level.

It is relatively easy to find old beaches significantly inland, and pair the sea level rise at a given time and place with a temperature rise. It is harder to say how quick the transition was. Do such sea level changes take centuries or millennia? While there are suggestions that Greenland or Antarctica might melt very quickly, it just isn't known how quickly.

The Times article references a number of recent papers exploring the subject.







Post#3670 at 08-16-2013 06:59 PM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
08-16-2013, 06:59 PM #3670
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
I agree 100%. Still, intermittant sources are inherently intermittant.
Not a problem, if all we are measuring is the amount of power available. Even with inefficient storage, there remains a super-abundance. Now, that said, I personally favor a mix of technologies rather than reliance on solar alone. Wind and solar are both intermittent but their peaks don't coincide, so they balance each other rather well. What I was really saying, though, was simply that the argument "we can't do this because there isn't enough capacity" is bollox. In the past, it hasn't been economically feasible to switch to solar given the existing pro-fossil fuel political climate plus the inherent relative costs, but that's increasingly changing, and that argument shouldn't be confused with a claim that there just ISN'T enough solar power available. The latter is sheer nonsense.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"

My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/

The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903







Post#3671 at 08-17-2013 08:46 AM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
08-17-2013, 08:46 AM #3671
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Rush View Post
Not a problem, if all we are measuring is the amount of power available. Even with inefficient storage, there remains a super-abundance. Now, that said, I personally favor a mix of technologies rather than reliance on solar alone. Wind and solar are both intermittent but their peaks don't coincide, so they balance each other rather well. What I was really saying, though, was simply that the argument "we can't do this because there isn't enough capacity" is bollox. In the past, it hasn't been economically feasible to switch to solar given the existing pro-fossil fuel political climate plus the inherent relative costs, but that's increasingly changing, and that argument shouldn't be confused with a claim that there just ISN'T enough solar power available. The latter is sheer nonsense.
I myself favor a mix of technologies, and I also favor having a lot of them adopted on the smallest scale possible for several reasons. The first is that it takes local conditions into account. The second is that it's more resilient.

The third is that with distances what they are out here in the Wild West, the ranch with a windmill or three (not to even get started on Old Man Yazzie's hogan way out on Lost Mesa) is better off than the ranch with a long power line hooked up to a wind farm a thousand miles away. Cheaper, for one thing. More reliable, for another.

OTH, some solutions people propose, especially about gasoline use, work very, very well in places with a great population density, but not out here. And then the proposers get all self-righteous about the American Addiction to Oil, and why can't we conserve like Europeans do? Because, silly wabbits ....

And every region demands a different mix of technologies for greatest effectiveness! In fact, in some places, every neighborhood is different!
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#3672 at 08-17-2013 09:45 AM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
08-17-2013, 09:45 AM #3672
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

Quote Originally Posted by The Grey Badger View Post
I myself favor a mix of technologies, and I also favor having a lot of them adopted on the smallest scale possible for several reasons. The first is that it takes local conditions into account. The second is that it's more resilient.

The third is that with distances what they are out here in the Wild West, the ranch with a windmill or three (not to even get started on Old Man Yazzie's hogan way out on Lost Mesa) is better off than the ranch with a long power line hooked up to a wind farm a thousand miles away. Cheaper, for one thing. More reliable, for another.

OTH, some solutions people propose, especially about gasoline use, work very, very well in places with a great population density, but not out here. And then the proposers get all self-righteous about the American Addiction to Oil, and why can't we conserve like Europeans do? Because, silly wabbits ....

And every region demands a different mix of technologies for greatest effectiveness! In fact, in some places, every neighborhood is different!
Indeed. A mix of technology is the smart way to move forward. I also like Germany's idea of a strident campaign to encourage efficiency and conserving energy. Americans may need to cut back on their huge homes, SUVs, and endless consumption of stuff. It takes tons of energy to make and maintain all of the things in which our culture says we need. Maybe we will even need to learn to make home made soup grown from a community garden and knit warm hats for those exceptionally cold evenings.

You would be a good teacher of living simply.
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#3673 at 08-17-2013 12:36 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
08-17-2013, 12:36 PM #3673
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by The Grey Badger View Post
I myself favor a mix of technologies, and I also favor having a lot of them adopted on the smallest scale possible for several reasons. The first is that it takes local conditions into account. The second is that it's more resilient.

The third is that with distances what they are out here in the Wild West, the ranch with a windmill or three (not to even get started on Old Man Yazzie's hogan way out on Lost Mesa) is better off than the ranch with a long power line hooked up to a wind farm a thousand miles away. Cheaper, for one thing. More reliable, for another.

OTH, some solutions people propose, especially about gasoline use, work very, very well in places with a great population density, but not out here. And then the proposers get all self-righteous about the American Addiction to Oil, and why can't we conserve like Europeans do? Because, silly wabbits ....

And every region demands a different mix of technologies for greatest effectiveness! In fact, in some places, every neighborhood is different!
Yes, every region needs to pursue different strategies to end its addiction to oil. We wabbits all need to be cured though. I like the idea of every home having solar panels and windmills. It will take a while, but putting them all up will create a lot of jobs. I like big solar energy plants too, although your point is good about reliability of local sources. Imagine a windmill at your house generating electricity for your electric plug-in car. It may need to be a hybrid now, in case there's no outlet to plug into where you drive, way out in the sticks. I imagine you carry some gasoline with you in a portable gas can. But eventually, nobody will be using gasoline at all. We'll be carrying on-board generators instead for emergencies. We might as well begin the shift.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#3674 at 08-17-2013 01:11 PM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
08-17-2013, 01:11 PM #3674
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Yes, every region needs to pursue different strategies to end its addiction to oil. We wabbits all need to be cured though. I like the idea of every home having solar panels and windmills. It will take a while, but putting them all up will create a lot of jobs. I like big solar energy plants too, although your point is good about reliability of local sources. Imagine a windmill at your house generating electricity for your electric plug-in car. It may need to be a hybrid now, in case there's no outlet to plug into where you drive, way out in the sticks. I imagine you carry some gasoline with you in a portable gas can. But eventually, nobody will be using gasoline at all. We'll be carrying on-board generators instead for emergencies. We might as well begin the shift.
But, Eric, when you do all that for your own house, if you haven't already, don't forget - ***Weatherize before you solarize!*** Amazing the gains in both comfort and efficiency you'll get.

Pat, whose California daughter and Denver niece-in-law both have electric cars.
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#3675 at 08-17-2013 01:28 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
08-17-2013, 01:28 PM #3675
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by The Grey Badger View Post
But, Eric, when you do all that for your own house, if you haven't already, don't forget - ***Weatherize before you solarize!*** Amazing the gains in both comfort and efficiency you'll get.
Yes, I have. I haven't solarized yet because I need to fix my roof first. All in good time, my pretty. All in good time.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece
-----------------------------------------