Climate Change - General Discussion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-10-2017, 06:34 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(30-09-2017 06:17 PM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(30-09-2017 03:05 PM)Kaneda Wrote:  But just talking this over puts into perspective how resource intensive this country's living arrangement really is. So what I'm asking is, would you or me buying electric be marginally applicable to that WW2-scale climate change effort you were describing a few pages ago, or is it mostly self-defeating enterprise in the face of more practicable solutions?

Those are good questions, and to tell you the truth I'm still researching the alternatives. Lithium is not the only material with which we can make car batteries, so no doubt specialists are working the materials issue. And you should try to charge your electric vehicle from a renewable source, although even without it you get better energy efficiency with an electric vehicle because of all the energy dissipated as heat from internal combustion engines.

I've presented read and taken notes from 36 of 55 books I own on climate change and associated subjects. The one which best details all the different alternatives to present technologies and methods, which in combination could get us to where we need to be, is Drawdown: The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed To Reverse Global Warming written by a team of specialists and edited by Paul Hawken. They even do the math, so that their implementation strategies are both timely and economical.

So the bottom line is that climate change is so complex, and CO2 emissions so embedded in everything we do, that to tackle the problem we must act on multiple fronts simultaneously. Electric cars and on-shore wind turbines to charge them are part of the solution, but there's no silver bullet. They rate as #26 and #2 in terms of their impact, respectively.

What's important to remember is that we have a certain carbon budget of fossil fuels we can burn and still keep below 2 degrees C. We should be spending that amount to do the work necessary to change over to a renewable economy, because it will take time and energy to build.

I think that lithium ion batteries are going to be replaced by zinc-air batteries in the near future. There appears to have been a recent breakthrough in making them easily rechargeable. Zinc-air batteries are more environmentally friendly, cheaper, and potentially have an energy density of up to 5 times that of lithium ion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Yonadav Kenyon's post
03-10-2017, 07:01 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(03-10-2017 06:22 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  Over population currently has very little impact on climate change. Americans are responsible for the majority of greenhouse emissions. Per capita, Americans are responsible for about 10 times the emissions of the average Chinese person. And that is not fully taking into account that a vast amount of Chinese emissions are from producing western consumer goods. A fraction of the world's population is responsible for the majority of greenhouse emissions. Global warming is a very serious problem, and we won't be able to crack it until we are honest about how us westerners are responsible for most of it.

Population will become more of a problem, as more of the world's population tries to live like westerners. But up to this point, the problem has overwhelmingly been caused by westerners. If we were to get our per capita energy use down to that of the average Chinese person, the problem will mostly be solved.

China per capita CO2 emissions are 7.5 tonnes per year. United States per capita CO2 emissions are 16.2 tonnes.

But yes, we have exported our CO2 emissions to produce our consumer goods elsewhere.

Countries that belch out the most CO2 per capita:
Qatar - 35.73 tonnes
Curacao - 30.43
Latvia - 22.94
Bahrain - 21.8
United Arab Emirates - 19.31
Trinidad and Tobago - 17.15
Malaysia - 16.57
Saudi Arabia - 16.4
Guatemala - 16.25
United States - 16.22

Countries that belch out the least CO2 per capita:
Denmark - 0.06 tonnes
Finland - 0.09
Nigeria - 0.1
Estonia - 0.11
South Sudan - 0.13
Myanmar - 0.14
Tanzania - 0.2
Zambia - 0.2
Netherlands - 0.21
Togo - 0.24

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/maps-a...a-ranking/

Impact equals population times affluence times technology.

I = P x A x T

Vary population, and you change the total equation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_%3D_PAT

See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaya_identity
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2017, 07:21 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
Let's give those numbers a little context. Between 1980 and 2013, Chinese carbon emissions per capita more that quadrupled. During that same time, American carbon emissions per capita dropped by about 20 percent. The drop in American carbon per capita is almost entirely due to the shift of manufacturing from America to China.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2017, 08:04 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(03-10-2017 07:21 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  Let's give those numbers a little context. Between 1980 and 2013, Chinese carbon emissions per capita more that quadrupled. During that same time, American carbon emissions per capita dropped by about 20 percent. The drop in American carbon per capita is almost entirely due to the shift of manufacturing from America to China.

Yes, and if you look at the historical emitters of the CO2 which has already accumulated in the atmosphere, they were America and Europe primarily. That's why many poorer countries argue that western countries should pay to help them adapt to a problem they did little to cause, especially since they now can't develop to the same level using the same technologies. That's what Trump ignores when he says the Paris Agreement puts the U.S. at an economic disadvantage. He doesn't understand the historical perspective.

However, population will never decrease in time to solve climate change, nor will people abandon much if any of the affluence they have worked so hard to achieve, at least now willingly. Since both are contributing factors, what is left to change to get global warming under control? What is left in the equation I = P x A x T is technology. We need to turn to sustainable technologies and renewable energies in a big way, and soon, to replace our CO2 intensive methods.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2017, 08:53 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(03-10-2017 08:04 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(03-10-2017 07:21 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  Let's give those numbers a little context. Between 1980 and 2013, Chinese carbon emissions per capita more that quadrupled. During that same time, American carbon emissions per capita dropped by about 20 percent. The drop in American carbon per capita is almost entirely due to the shift of manufacturing from America to China.

Yes, and if you look at the historical emitters of the CO2 which has already accumulated in the atmosphere, they were America and Europe primarily. That's why many poorer countries argue that western countries should pay to help them adapt to a problem they did little to cause, especially since they now can't develop to the same level using the same technologies. That's what Trump ignores when he says the Paris Agreement puts the U.S. at an economic disadvantage. He doesn't understand the historical perspective.

However, population will never decrease in time to solve climate change, nor will people abandon much if any of the affluence they have worked so hard to achieve, at least now willingly. Since both are contributing factors, what is left to change to get global warming under control? What is left in the equation I = P x A x T is technology. We need to turn to sustainable technologies and renewable energies in a big way, and soon, to replace our CO2 intensive methods.

OK, I agree about the need to develop sustainable technologies and renewable energies. But I think that conservation needs to be part of the solution as well. After all, conservation is something that individuals can do to make a difference right now. Ideally, we should all be striving to reduce our energy use. Obviously, not everyone is going to willingly do this. But those of us who believe that global warming is a real threat should willing to do this. We need to recognize how fortunate we are to be able to squander energy, but be mature enough to try not to. We need to be willing to pay for rapid replacement of fossil fuel plants with sustainable energy plants, and we need to be willing to pay for a smarter grid. Energy use needs to be treated like the vice that it is, and needs to be taxed accordingly. Paying more for energy will encourage conservation, and it will pay for sustainable development.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Yonadav Kenyon's post
03-10-2017, 10:25 AM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2017 10:40 AM by Thoreauvian.)
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(03-10-2017 08:53 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  OK, I agree about the need to develop sustainable technologies and renewable energies. But I think that conservation needs to be part of the solution as well. After all, conservation is something that individuals can do to make a difference right now. Ideally, we should all be striving to reduce our energy use. Obviously, not everyone is going to willingly do this. But those of us who believe that global warming is a real threat should willing to do this. We need to recognize how fortunate we are to be able to squander energy, but be mature enough to try not to. We need to be willing to pay for rapid replacement of fossil fuel plants with sustainable energy plants, and we need to be willing to pay for a smarter grid. Energy use needs to be treated like the vice that it is, and needs to be taxed accordingly. Paying more for energy will encourage conservation, and it will pay for sustainable development.

Yes, I think people who already understand that climate change is real and due to our own impacts should be willing to conserve energy as well as embrace technological solutions. We should lead by example or no one on the fence will take us seriously. This includes some climate scientists who presently don't seem to mind flying all over the planet to spread the message. They could arrange such meetings through communications technologies.

Since I retired, I have bought more energy-efficient appliances (refrigerator, water heater, and furnace), swapped out our lightbulbs with LEDs, cut my driving in my Prius by 75%, and declined to take 5 long-distance trips. We are presently looking into changing our electricity supplier, since we can choose renewables in Pennsylvania. Other changes will depend on my future income and convincing my wife they are necessary.

However, I don't think the political will in the U.S. is where it needs to be to legislate a carbon tax or cap and trade system, at least not yet. More education is required, I guess, but it doesn't help that Republicans and fossil fuel industries have engaged in a campaign of disinformation. My sister and her husband, for instance, believe what news sources like the Wall Street Journal tell them -- that anthropogenic climate change either isn't real or isn't a big deal, and is mostly about left-wing politics.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thoreauvian's post
04-10-2017, 02:55 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
Motherfucker -

NOAA is forecasting a fucking Cat 1 to hit the panhandle on Sunday
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-10-2017, 03:20 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(04-10-2017 02:55 PM)ImFred Wrote:  Motherfucker -

NOAA is forecasting a fucking Cat 1 to hit the panhandle on Sunday

While interesting and unfortunate, this is the wrong thread for that kind of thing. Here's a more appropriate place http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ad?page=46

Thanks for understanding and helping to keep the discussion on topic.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-10-2017, 04:16 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
The upsurge in hurricanes is a result of warmer water which is a matter of climate not weather. We know that rising sea levels will leave Florida underwater but this is also part of the process. My gripe isn't about the weather; it's about living in the wake of a global catastrophe.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-10-2017, 05:00 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(03-10-2017 07:01 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  China per capita CO2 emissions are 7.5 tonnes per year. United States per capita CO2 emissions are 16.2 tonnes.

But yes, we have exported our CO2 emissions to produce our consumer goods elsewhere.

Countries that belch out the most CO2 per capita:
Qatar - 35.73 tonnes
Curacao - 30.43
Latvia - 22.94
Bahrain - 21.8
United Arab Emirates - 19.31
Trinidad and Tobago - 17.15
Malaysia - 16.57
Saudi Arabia - 16.4
Guatemala - 16.25
United States - 16.22

Countries that belch out the least CO2 per capita:
Denmark - 0.06 tonnes
Finland - 0.09
Nigeria - 0.1
Estonia - 0.11
South Sudan - 0.13
Myanmar - 0.14
Tanzania - 0.2
Zambia - 0.2
Netherlands - 0.21
Togo - 0.24

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/maps-a...a-ranking/

Impact equals population times affluence times technology.

I = P x A x T

Vary population, and you change the total equation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_%3D_PAT

See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaya_identity

To add some perspective, there are 1,400,000,000 Chinese and about 1,000,000,000 Westerners.

The impact is pretty much equal. All in all, there are just too many humans on the planet.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: