Jump to content
davieG

Technology, Science and the Environment.

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, twoleftfeet said:

The same young that go to festivals https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/reading-festival-aftermath-seen-drone-19019189 not all the young are eco warriors.

FFS  does everything need a....  #notall...

 

 

Australian Politicians ... https://www.sbs.com.au/news/everything-you-are-told-is-a-lie-craig-kelly-hits-out-at-climate-strike-students

 

 

Coalition MP Craig Kelly has told the thousands of Australian students planning to join Friday's climate strike that "everything you are told is a lie".

 

"The facts are, there is no link between climate change and drought, polar bears are increasing in number,"

Mr Kelly said during Question Time in Parliament on Thursday.

 

"Today's generation is safer from extreme weather than at any time in human history," he said.



#notalltoriesarecvnts

 

Edited by ozleicester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/09/2019 at 17:35, yorkie1999 said:

And still no-one would take into account russia and america exploding 50 megaton thermo nuclear bombs slap bang in the middle of the ozone layer.

High yield thermonuclear tests undertaken during the 1950s and early 1960s may have had an adverse effect on the ozone layer owing to the lofting of NOx into the stratosphere. The massive heat dissipation associated with a thermonuclear detonation is followed by rapid cooling. This forms a favorable condition for formation of NOx which is one of the chief compounds for ozone depletion. However, there is no causal link demonstrated to any resultant damage to the ozone layer. Ozone levels were not being tracked closely at the time so it has not been possible to quantify the extent of any harm. However, unlike CFCs the nitrogen oxides do not have a long residence time in the stratosphere and so their effects faded away long ago. Given that very few atmospheric nuclear tests have been carried out in several decades now, they no longer present a threat to the ozone anymore. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Line-X said:

High yield thermonuclear tests undertaken during the 1950s and early 1960s may have had an adverse effect on the ozone layer owing to the lofting of NOx into the stratosphere. The massive heat dissipation associated with a thermonuclear detonation is followed by rapid cooling. This forms a favorable condition for formation of NOx which is one of the chief compounds for ozone depletion. However, there is no causal link demonstrated to any resultant damage to the ozone layer. Ozone levels were not being tracked closely at the time so it has not been possible to quantify the extent of any harm. However, unlike CFCs the nitrogen oxides do not have a long residence time in the stratosphere and so their effects faded away long ago. Given that very few atmospheric nuclear tests have been carried out in several decades now, they no longer present a threat to the ozone anymore. 

Which is probably why the hole in the ozone layer is the smallest it's been in decades, bit of a coincidence, but still no-one wants to point the finger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/09/2019 at 04:24, ozleicester said:

In the mid 90s through to the mid 00's Climate change was acknowledged and was being treated seriously, then the fossil fuel industry saw the coming financial disater for them, they simply took the tobacco lobby's play book and adjusted it for climate change.

 

They didnt outright deny (well most) ... they just created "doubt" about the science. They paid millions to dodgy organisations and "scientists" to produce papers that cast doubt and that was it. Game over!

 

https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/climate-deniers/koch-industries/

 

We have a climate strike this Friday in Oz... im tipping this will be HUGE!

 

The young are leading and the old will have to listen

Are they? I've got an idea, lets turn off all the coal, gas and nuclear power stations on friday morning and see where we are come monday. Hazarding a guess, i doubt i'd be writing on foxestalk!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:facepalm:

8 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Are they? I've got an idea, lets turn off all the coal, gas and nuclear power stations on friday morning and see where we are come monday. Hazarding a guess, i doubt i'd be writing on foxestalk!

lol

Edited by ozleicester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Are they? I've got an idea, lets turn off all the coal, gas and nuclear power stations on friday morning and see where we are come monday. Hazarding a guess, i doubt i'd be writing on foxestalk!

i think you might have missed the point.

 

The point isn't that everything needs to be switched off tomorrow and sod the consequences.  The point is that this is a problem that needs addressing and needs taking seriously, and until now almost every government in the world has paid lip service to it.  Now we're at a point where we ARE experiencing the negative effects of climate change and the protests are demanding a coherent, consolidated approach by all governments to start taking action and putting plans in place to negate the impact of CO2 emissions.

 

Thats what the protests are about - they're about taking the problem seriously for all of our good, and working together to find a solution that works.

Edited by Tommo220

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Tommo220 said:

i think you might have missed the point.

 

The point isn't that everything needs to be switched off tomorrow and sod the consequences.  The point is that this is a problem that needs addressing and needs taking seriously, and until now almost every government in the world has paid lip service to it.  Now we're at a point where we ARE experiencing the negative effects of climate change and the protests are demanding a coherent, consolidated approach by all governments to start taking action and putting plans in place to negate the impact of CO2 emissions.

 

Thats what the protests are about - they're about taking the problem seriously for all of our good, and working together to find a solution that works.

They haven't though, governments around the world are already implementing renewable's as best they can, the US produces nearly 30% of global wind power, but considering renewables only satisfy 6% of the world electricity needs, it's going to take an awful lot of time, money and patience to actually get somewhere meaningful. Turning off the worlds current energy supply for a few days will make people realise that biting the hand that feeds you is not such a good idea and also stop the bloody moaning about global warming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

They haven't though, governments around the world are already implementing renewable's as best they can, the US produces nearly 30% of global wind power, but considering renewables only satisfy 6% of the world electricity needs, it's going to take an awful lot of time, money and patience to actually get somewhere meaningful. Turning off the worlds current energy supply for a few days will make people realise that biting the hand that feeds you is not such a good idea and also stop the bloody moaning about global warming.

But it's not enough, they've not done as much as is possible or is needed, and while the argument that it'll take time and resources is solid the whole point is that it is highly possible we don't have that kind of time.

 

No amount of talk about people being ungrateful, accurate or not, is going to change that. The Earth isn't bound by our rules of morality and social niceties, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This climate strike has been another eye-opener into how crazy some of these people really are. Went on the climate strike website, was initially struck by the word reparations and clicked through their link on climate justice to find a manifesto of demands https://www.peoplesdemands.org/#read-the-demands-section having seen it on Robert Colvile's twitter. Wow oh wow. Rejects the use of technology, geo engineering, economics, the market mechanism, and has no grasp of the realities of the challenge that we face. It's distinctly anti-science. It's a classic case of people on the left thinking the only way to solve problems is to engineer societies to be exist at their command.

 

Fair enough to those going on marches and doing as they wish, I'm sure many of them would also reject this nonsense but they'll be used to by these crazies to suggest what they demand is popular because that's the banner they are marching under. If these people seize control of the whole climate change agenda, we're completely ****ed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

This climate strike has been another eye-opener into how crazy some of these people really are. Went on the climate strike website, was initially struck by the word reparations and clicked through their link on climate justice to find a manifesto of demands https://www.peoplesdemands.org/#read-the-demands-section having seen it on Robert Colvile's twitter. Wow oh wow. Rejects the use of technology, geo engineering, economics, the market mechanism, and has no grasp of the realities of the challenge that we face. It's distinctly anti-science. It's a classic case of people on the left thinking the only way to solve problems is to engineer societies to be exist at their command.

 

Fair enough to those going on marches and doing as they wish, I'm sure many of them would also reject this nonsense but they'll be used to by these crazies to suggest what they demand is popular because that's the banner they are marching under. If these people seize control of the whole climate change agenda, we're completely ****ed. 

Yeah, that's stupid in the extreme and I can only speak for myself here, but I totally reject it.

 

Technology is the best way we sort all this out, not neo-Luddism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could go completely reneable energy within ten years, the only losers would be the billionaire fossil fuel owners, but they play the public convincing them that we cant live without them, and the suckers go for it.

Why wouldnt you go renewable?

 

Even if Climate change isnt real ( lol )  Why would anyone not change to a more effective cheaper form of energy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

But it's not enough, they've not done as much as is possible or is needed, and while the argument that it'll take time and resources is solid the whole point is that it is highly possible we don't have that kind of time.

 

No amount of talk about people being ungrateful, accurate or not, is going to change that. The Earth isn't bound by our rules of morality and social niceties, after all.

How about instead of going on strike and just complaining, everyone under 30 be pro-active by refusing to drive a fossil fuelled car, fly in a plane on holiday, only use electricity, and anything that is supplied by electricity, if it has been generated by renewables, only drink water from a natural source such as a river, eat food that has not been cooked using electricity or gas, not wear any clothes, or shoes, or glasses or use toothbrushes that have been manufactured in a factory as well as washing machines, fridges, tv's, bicycles etc etc etc. in fact everything that everyone does in the western world ultimately is powered by fossil fuels. How about, instead of talking about it, do something about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

How about instead of going on strike and just complaining, everyone under 30 be pro-active by refusing to drive a fossil fuelled car, fly in a plane on holiday, only use electricity, and anything that is supplied by electricity, if it has been generated by renewables, only drink water from a natural source such as a river, eat food that has not been cooked using electricity or gas, not wear any clothes, or shoes, or glasses or use toothbrushes that have been manufactured in a factory as well as washing machines, fridges, tv's, bicycles etc etc etc. in fact everything that everyone does in the western world ultimately is powered by fossil fuels. How about, instead of talking about it, do something about it.

...or rather than going for daft neo-Luddism, lobby governments to apply better and greener sources of transportation and energy generation over a reasonable timeframe?

 

You know, just to be a little nuanced.

Edited by leicsmac
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

...or rather than going for daft neo-Luddism, lobby governments to apply better and greener sources of transportation and energy generation over a reasonable timeframe?

 

You know, just to be a little nuanced.

And if they don't, then what? There is a point when someone else can no longer be blamed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

And if they don't, then what? There is a point when someone else can no longer be blamed.

At that point, (hopefully) vote in a new government who will be more receptive.

 

Of course, the citizenry do often tend to get the government they deserve and I totally agree that there is a big level of responsibility there - it's just that embracing new tech rather than regressing to subsistence is the best and probably only way to sort all this, and that kind of change can't be done at an everyday Joe level - it has to come from the top.

Edited by leicsmac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

At that point, (hopefully) vote in a new government who will be more receptive.

 

Of course, the citizenry do often tend to get the government they deserve and I totally agree that there is a big level of responsibility there - it's just that embracing new tech rather than regressing to subsistence is the best and probably only way to sort all this, and that kind of change can't be done at an everyday Joe level - it has to come from the top.

I can't honestly think of one new technology that will replace the worlds energy needs and, although everyone seems against it, nuclear power is the only viable solution, so if you want to be the next multi billionaire, start digging for uranium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

I can't honestly think of one new technology that will replace the worlds energy needs and, although everyone seems against it, nuclear power is the only viable solution, so if you want to be the next multi billionaire, start digging for uranium.

What about molten salt thorium reactors? Seem like a good future prospect. Quite a lot of development going into them in China, India & elsewhere I understand. Certainly seem like a better bet than fusion IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

I can't honestly think of one new technology that will replace the worlds energy needs and, although everyone seems against it, nuclear power is the only viable solution, so if you want to be the next multi billionaire, start digging for uranium.

You'll get precious little disagreement from me there (in the short term, anyhow), and given the infrastructure and single unit costs of fission power, all the more reason for the action to have to come from the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, WigstonWanderer said:

What about molten salt thorium reactors? Seem like a good future prospect. Quite a lot of development going into them in China, India & elsewhere I understand. Certainly seem like a better bet than fusion IMHO.

We can certainly make fission power - like molten salt, as you suggest here - better than it is at the present time, but IMO fusion should always be an objective simply because of the sheer level of reward in terms of safety and output it would give.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

Which is probably why the hole in the ozone layer is the smallest it's been in decades, bit of a coincidence, but still no-one wants to point the finger.

No, really it had nothing to do with it. The receding hole is due to the 1989 Montreal Protocol which banned the use of ozone-depleting chemicals worldwide. The ozone hole is consequently shrinking. Additionally, the ozone layer is blocking more cancer-causing radiation than any time in a decade because its average thickness has increased. Atmospheric levels of ozone-depleting chemicals have reached their lowest levels since peaking in the 1990s, and the hole is reversing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Line-X said:

No, really it had nothing to do with it. The receding hole is due to the 1989 Montreal Protocol which banned the use of ozone-depleting chemicals worldwide. The ozone hole is consequently shrinking. Additionally, the ozone layer is blocking more cancer-causing radiation than any time in a decade because its average thickness has increased. Atmospheric levels of ozone-depleting chemicals have reached their lowest levels since peaking in the 1990s, and the hole is reversing.

You believe what you want to believe and i'll believe what i want to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

You believe what you want to believe and i'll believe what i want to believe.

Known measurable science is not about belief. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Known measurable science is not about belief. 

If the hole in the ozone layer was caused by CFC gasses, why was it in one place? Science sees what it wants to see depending on the funding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...