Climate Change - General Discussion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-10-2017, 02:05 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(10-10-2017 10:49 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  Jay, do you have any thoughts on the future of batteries for electric cars?

By what you have written, you know a lot more about the subject than I have read yet. Do you have a book or article to reference on the subject? I would appreciate it, since I'm reading quite a bit about climate change and related issues right now.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thoreauvian's post
10-10-2017, 03:34 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(10-10-2017 02:05 PM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(10-10-2017 10:49 AM)Yonadav Kenyon Wrote:  Jay, do you have any thoughts on the future of batteries for electric cars?

By what you have written, you know a lot more about the subject than I have read yet. Do you have a book or article to reference on the subject? I would appreciate it, since I'm reading quite a bit about climate change and related issues right now.

I wish that I could recommend a book on the subject. But the development of energy storage is moving at a pace that literature can't keep up with. I am fortunate, because I know a couple of guys in the field, one of whom is working a flow battery that seems promising. I can't get him to tell me much about it, but he has dropped a line about his device being able to accept the full charge of a Powerwall in a matter of minutes. When I start asking a bunch of questions, he clams up. He told me that his company is going to initially target small grid applications.

Zinc/air batteries are something that I have wanted for years. I first became aware of them in hearing aids. They have a high energy density and are made of environmentally friendly components. But recharging them has been highly problematic. I am always scanning the news for breakthroughs in energy storage technology, and news of a breakthrough with recharging zinc/airs popped up recently. I was pretty thrilled.

I made a prediction to myself about 10 years back. I told myself that we would all be using electric cars and sustainable energy once three conditions were met-- solar panels with twenty-five percent efficiency, a price of $1 per watt for solar panels, and viable energy storage. We are very close to meeting those conditions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Yonadav Kenyon's post
11-10-2017, 05:06 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
I follow Robert Reich on Facebook. I highly recommend him. Here is what he posted this morning.

"The Trump administration’s formal decision today to roll back the Clean Power Plan, which had been aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants, comes just when wildfires have laid waste to 115,000 acres of California, killing at least 17 people, hospitalizing hundreds, and destroying or damaging some 2,000 buildings; and when 85 percent of Puerto Rico is still without power and 40 percent of the population lacks water three weeks after Hurricane Maria.
Trump and his EPA head Scott Pruitt don’t believe that record-setting wildfires and hurricanes have anything to do with climate change. They’d rather bet on dirty energy than on the overwhelming scientific consensus warning of catastrophic consequences from greater levels of carbon in the atmosphere.
The untrammeled ignorance of these men is putting our lives, and the lives of our children and grand children, at greater and greater risk. History will judge them harshly."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Yonadav Kenyon's post
11-10-2017, 08:25 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
This just in from India:

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2017/10/11/w...-in-india/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Yonadav Kenyon's post
11-10-2017, 08:34 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
Earlier, I mentioned that flow batteries might be a strong contender for powering electric cars. Here is an article describing a recent breakthrough with flow batteries, and how advantageous they might be.

https://futurism.com/new-instantly-recha...sil-fuels/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Yonadav Kenyon's post
11-10-2017, 10:05 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
Believe it or not, Australia's former Prime Minister Tony Abbott said, whilst addressing the Global Warming Policy Foundation in London a couple of days ago [my italics]:

• In Australia the floods are not bigger, the bushfires are not worse, the droughts are not deeper or longer, and the cyclones are not more severe than they were in the 1800s. [government geophysical records repudiate these three absurd claims]

• 100 years of photographs of Manly beach in his electorate on Sydney's northern beaches do not suggest that sea levels have risen. [no consideration for tide levels at unknown, different times of the day]

• In most countries, far more people die in cold snaps than in heatwaves, so a gradual lift in global temperatures, especially if it's accompanied by more prosperity and more capacity to adapt to change, might even be beneficial. [in Australia, far more people are killed by heatstroke than hypothermia]

Our guy Abbott is as bad as your guy Trump—except he's never hosted a TV game show LOL.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SYZ's post
11-10-2017, 10:14 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
Here is an interesting development to follow:

http://www.satprnews.com/2017/07/11/vizn...shed-cost/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Yonadav Kenyon's post
12-10-2017, 04:40 PM (This post was last modified: 12-10-2017 05:02 PM by Kaneda.)
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
This is from the San Diego Union-Tribune this morning. It's kind of refreshing to see such an honest appraisal of our predicament coming from a Mainstream Paper.

I know the prescription the Author gives isn't too well-received here, but I'm foreseeing a lot of support for this over the horizon.


Scared of geoengineering? Rapid Arctic warming is far scarier

By Chris Reed - Contact Reporter

OCTOBER 12 2017, 6:00 AM

The possibility that humans will tinker with nature to try to stop climate change from ravaging the planet has filmmakers projecting their worst fears onto audiences. Next week, Warner Bros. releases “Geostorm,” about the calamity that ensues after world leaders build satellites to manipulate the atmosphere. In 2014, The Weinstein Co. (yes, sorry, that Weinstein) released “Snowpiercer,” about the stratified, train-based society left after an attempt to manipulate the atmosphere kills most of the life on Earth.

But this pop-culture pushiness isn’t constructive. Instead of just focusing on reducing greenhouse-gas emissions in dealing with climate change, what the world needs is an openness to an all-of-the-above approach.

That’s because credible scientists already believe the Paris accord approach — changing what types of energy humans use — ultimately won’t work by itself. Reducing these emissions is important and smart and a crucial long-term strategy, but it doesn’t do nearly enough to stop the steady buildup of carbon in the atmosphere that continues even as emissions stabilize.


And while it’s still difficult to look at individual weather events and assert confidently that they’re a direct result of global warming, there are dramatic changes in parts of the world that scientists say unquestionably reflect a warmer atmosphere — and that may portend catastrophe. In particular, what’s going on in the Arctic suggests that long-feared rapid climate change has begun, at least there.

This is from an April report in The New York Times:

In December, startled scientists revealed that temperatures in some parts of
the Arctic had spiked more than 35 degrees Fahrenheit above their historical
averages. In March, others reported that sea ice in the Arctic had dropped to
its lowest level on record.


In a January interview with Scientific American, Rutgers researcher Jennifer Francis — who has studied the Arctic climate since 1994 — said no one saw this coming:

Even five years ago most models were projecting that we’d see a summer
[in the Arctic] without sea ice probably by end of the century. Now the
estimates or more like 2030 or 2040, and even that might be too far into the
future. The whole ream of records that has been broken in the Arctic in the
past year seems to indicate that we’re seeing things unfold faster.


Why should this worry the rest of the world? This December report in the United Kingdom-based newspaper The Independent carried an explanation that originated close to home:

Climate scientist Dr. Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute in
California, has warned that the rapid warming of the Arctic is “unprecedented”
and could have a “catastrophic” effect on the climate of much of the world.

The jet stream, the usually steady flow of air circling the globe near the Arctic,
has already changed, developing large loops which carry warm air towards the
North Pole and freezing air south.


This is a huge change from the norm. Francis, the Rutgers climate expert, said “dozens of studies” since 2012 indicated that a long-suggested hypothesis — the idea that a hotter atmosphere would lead to more extreme weather events and patterns — “is transitioning to a theory.”

And while it is sometimes asserted that the effects of global warming will be gradual — giving humans time to adjust — no one can be sure. Consider this observation from Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory:

Evidence of abrupt climate change comes from all manners of sources
(glacial deposits, tropical and polar ice caps, pollens, lake and marine
sediments, tree rings, corals, speleothems, etc). Confidence in identifying such
changes rises when more than one data source, and in more than one region,
records the event.


Given what’s happening in the Arctic and our planet’s history — given the evidence the Earth’s atmosphere has passed the “carbon tipping point,” beyond which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts “abrupt and irreversible” effects — shouldn’t it be plain that tinkering on the margins of climate change instead of attacking it directly is an inadequate response?

While much of the media’s coverage of climate change this year has focused on how President Donald Trump and top officials in his administration reject the global scientific and diplomatic consensus that humanity should work together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, isn’t it far more relevant to focus on the evidence that “the planet is screwed with or without Trump,” as Vulture magazine warned earlier this year?

The good news is that a lot of powerful and influential people have figured this out, even if much of the national media fixate on the Paris accord playbook. The New York Times reported that in March, scientists gathered in Washington …

...to discuss approaches like cooling the planet by shooting aerosols into the
stratosphere or whitening clouds to reflect sunlight back into space, which
may prove indispensable to prevent the disastrous consequences of warming.
Aerosols could be loaded into military jets, to be sprayed into the atmosphere
at high altitude. Clouds at sea could be made more reflective by spraying
them with a fine saline mist, drawn from the ocean.


Janos Pasztor, a former United Nations climate adviser who heads the Carnegie Climate Geoengineering Governance Initiative, is only one of several respected, well-connected officials trying to push climate intervention into the mainstream. He argues that hopes to limit atmospheric warning to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit are “practically gone.”

The bad news is that while funding for research into these options is growing, there are immense obstacles to their use. Developing an international consensus on climate intervention measures seems likely to be insanely difficult. Parts of the politically powerful environmental community think it’s an ethical quagmire to use technology to manipulate nature to spare humanity the consequences of its abuse of nature. Plenty of scientists who welcome geoengineering research worry that experimenting with geoengineering could have possibly disastrous unintended consequences.

But the world is already in the middle of an experiment with possibly disastrous unintended consequences. In 1957 — in a scientific paper by Roger Revelle and Hans Suess that arguably launched the debate over the negative effects of mankind on the climate — Revelle made this point: “Human beings are now carrying out a large-scale geophysical experiment of a kind that could not have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future.” (Soon after, Revelle, a legendary oceanographer, played a key role in establishing the University of California San Diego, which is why UCSD has a Revelle College.)

Yes, there would be risks. But shouldn’t humanity try to shape this “large-scale geophysical experiment” so it has less extreme results? Why should we be satisfied with an incomplete response to an existential threat? Why shouldn’t we demand a half-dozen geoengineering research initiatives akin to modern Manhattan Projects? Instead of patting ourselves on the back for buying Priuses and adding bike lanes, why shouldn’t we embrace a bold approach with far greater potential to solve a grave problem?

Good questions all.

But at the least, everyone should start paying more attention to the Arctic. It just might help create a real “Geostorm” sometime soon — with results far scarier than cheesy special effects.

Reed, who plans to deal with his Arctic anxiety by buying NBA League Pass, can be reached at chris.reed@sduniontribune.com. Twitter: @chrisreed99



This is definitely a lot to contemplate, and it's been hanging on my mind a lot these days. If there's one silver lining to all this though, it's that it's stoked the fires for some damn-good storytelling lately. Anyone see Blade Runner 2049 yet?

"Men willingly believe what they wish." -Julius Caesar
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Kaneda's post
12-10-2017, 04:54 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
Deleted. Redundant post.

"Men willingly believe what they wish." -Julius Caesar
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2017, 06:31 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(12-10-2017 04:40 PM)Kaneda Wrote:  And while it’s still difficult to look at individual weather events and assert confidently that they’re a direct result of global warming, there are dramatic changes in parts of the world that scientists say unquestionably reflect a warmer atmosphere — and that may portend catastrophe. In particular, what’s going on in the Arctic suggests that long-feared rapid climate change has begun, at least there.

...

Janos Pasztor, a former United Nations climate adviser who heads the Carnegie Climate Geoengineering Governance Initiative, is only one of several respected, well-connected officials trying to push climate intervention into the mainstream. He argues that hopes to limit atmospheric warning to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit are “practically gone.”

Ice is melting faster than models predicted, but the models are being changed accordingly. That is not proof that the positive feedbacks of runaway climate change have kicked in, as the article suggests (above). The warming of the arctic in general is pretty much as predicted otherwise, since climate change was always going to effect ocean and arctic temperatures faster.

The other statement about 2.7 Fahrenheit is accurate but somewhat misleading, since that is only 1.5 Celsius, a target that most people had already given up on.

So overall, the article was a bit alarmist.

Otherwise, it's good that such ideas are receiving notice in mainstream media.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thoreauvian's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: