Climate Change - a poll

[leicsmac]

https://phys.org/news/2025-04-world-trigger-multiple-climate-action.html

 

https://phys.org/news/2025-04-atmospheric-shifts-patagonian-glacier-loss.html

 

https://phys.org/news/2025-04-hot-cold-sudden-flips-temperature.html

 

Signor, play "I Don't Want To Set The World On Fire" by The Ink Spots, please.

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

https://phys.org/news/2025-04-world-trigger-multiple-climate-action.html

 

https://phys.org/news/2025-04-atmospheric-shifts-patagonian-glacier-loss.html

 

https://phys.org/news/2025-04-hot-cold-sudden-flips-temperature.html

 

Signor, play "I Don't Want To Set The World On Fire" by The Ink Spots, please.

I think you should change your username to Doomwatch! 

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

I think you should change your username to Doomwatch! 

I know

 

I really wish that I had better news to report, but these are apparently the times we live in...

[SpacedX]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Signor, play "I Don't Want To Set The World On Fire" by The Ink Spots, please.

Fallout IV

[blabyboy]

https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/04/a-grim-signal-atmospheric-co2-soared-in-2024/

 

A grim title and start but a positive sounding conclusion for a change.

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, blabyboy said:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/04/a-grim-signal-atmospheric-co2-soared-in-2024/

 

A grim title and start but a positive sounding conclusion for a change.

Well rounded article.

 

Darkly interesting that the NOAA didn't publish the findings because they weren't what Felon#47 wanted to hear, though. I wish I could say that I was surprised.

 

You would have thought there was enough disaster movies where those with power ignore the scientific warnings and then everything goes Pete Tong because, oddly enough, the laws of the Universe don't really care about politics.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Well rounded article.

 

Darkly interesting that the NOAA didn't publish the findings because they weren't what Felon#47 wanted to hear, though. I wish I could say that I was surprised.

 

You would have thought there was enough disaster movies where those with power ignore the scientific warnings and then everything goes Pete Tong because, oddly enough, the laws of the Universe don't really care about politics.

And it doesn't matter that the NOAA hasn't published it either, apparently.

 

Fairly solid insider information says that this administration is gutting the entire organisation anyway.

 

The betrayal of future generations to their fate is absolutely unreal - except that it is happening. Anyone want to say that it isn't really going to be that bad?

[blabyboy]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

And it doesn't matter that the NOAA hasn't published it either, apparently.

 

Fairly solid insider information says that this administration is gutting the entire organisation anyway.

 

The betrayal of future generations to their fate is absolutely unreal - except that it is happening. Anyone want to say that it isn't really going to be that bad?

They did publish, but then unpublished it, so it's out there, but not, if you weren't quick enough.

 

One might say that the scientific method is being stymied by politics and funding removal at many institutions.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, blabyboy said:

They did publish, but then unpublished it, so it's out there, but not, if you weren't quick enough.

 

One might say that the scientific method is being stymied by politics and funding removal at many institutions.

Yes, it is.

 

And the lean of the politics doing the stymieing is entirely lopsided in one direction for ideological purposes of short-term self-interest, with potentially disastrous consequences. Let's not beat about the bush.

 

The future of our species and civilisation should not be political but the current US administration, along with others of similar ideological bias, is making it so to the detriment of that future.

Edited Sunday at 14:05 by leicsmac

[leicsmac]

On the above:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/future/article/20250422-usa-scientists-race-to-save-climate-data-before-its-deleted-by-the-trump-administration

 

This is unconscionable.

[FoxesDeb]

Over here it is being suggested that yesterday's outage may have been caused by an over reliance on renewable energy, albeit not yet confirmed 

 

https://www.elconfidencial.com/economia/2025-04-29/el-sistema-electrico-espanol-salto-por-los-aires-por-un-exceso-de-confianza-en-la-energia-solar_4118613/

[leicsmac]

12 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Over here it is being suggested that yesterday's outage may have been caused by an over reliance on renewable energy, albeit not yet confirmed 

 

https://www.elconfidencial.com/economia/2025-04-29/el-sistema-electrico-espanol-salto-por-los-aires-por-un-exceso-de-confianza-en-la-energia-solar_4118613/

Unfortunately renewables are like any other generation system in that if there is a single point of failure, they are as vulnerable to that failure as anything else. Including any kind of fossil fuel generation that someone might suggest instead.

Edited Tuesday at 16:49 by leicsmac

[FoxesDeb]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

Unfortunately renewables are like any other generation system in that if there is a single point of failure, they are as vulnerable as anything else. Including any kind of fossil fuel generation that someone might suggest instead.

Indeed, and the most important thing will be for us to learn from yesterday, if this is proven to be the cause, in the hope that it doesn't happen again.

 

Of course the thousands of people over here who already self rely on renewables were ironically the ones who fared the best. There are people who live full time off grid who didn't even notice the outage, especially if they are using Starlink 

[leicsmac]

14 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Indeed, and the most important thing will be for us to learn from yesterday, if this is proven to be the cause, in the hope that it doesn't happen again.

 

Of course the thousands of people over here who already self rely on renewables were ironically the ones who fared the best. There are people who live full time off grid who didn't even notice the outage, especially if they are using Starlink 

There's definitely something in that.

 

To be honest, in the suite of solutions necessary to guarantee the future, the best fit for me has for a long time, been independent off-grid renewables on small scale for towns and villages, and Gen III/IV fission etc for large scale infrastructure.

[Dahnsouff]

Agree @leicsmac and community generation is the answer and there are several companies that support this desire by communities in the UK, so sure plenty exist globally.  Although I admit I am more and more unconvinced by nuclear from a cost/time perspective.

Edited Tuesday at 17:20 by Dahnsouff

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Agree @leicsmac and community generation is the answer and there are several companies that support this desire by communities in the UK, so sure plenty exist globally.  Although I admit I am more and more unconvinced by nuclear from a cost/time perspective.

I certainly don't disagree about both the cost and time elements of fission power. That being said, I'm struggling to think of a better option that will fill a gap in large and intensive that perhaps renewables aren't able to fill yet in various parts of the world.

[Dahnsouff]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I certainly don't disagree about both the cost and time elements of fission power. That being said, I'm struggling to think of a better option that will fill a gap in large and intensive that perhaps renewables aren't able to fill yet in various parts of the world.

Yes, renewables are only a really viable solution globally if we all play nice. 
 

This video is interesting, some good, some bad, and sorry it’s fairly UK Centric

 

 

But good climate news of any form is never unwelcome.

[leicsmac]

A bit of this and that today:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpvrwyp0jx3o

 

Mr Blair, ever the political pragmatist. He should be listened to in terms of actually working a problem...

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgpey03pnno

 

... but I'm not sure it's "alarmist" for people to present the facts as they are and to say the UK, among other places, is both laughably unprepared and not doing enough to face the future that will be coming if decisive action isn't taken.

[blabyboy]

People are always going to disagree in how something gets done, but I think it's the fact that something does get done which is important here.

 

We have to walk the walk, if we are to have credibility in persuading others to change as well.

 

If we have the target date then we have something to aim for and check against on the way to that date. If we don't, we drift, able to throttle back on schemes and projects as suits.

 

Imo, successive governments like the big grandiose announcements of large projects which tend to fall away, when we could be fixing the things that have real world impact immediately like loft and cavity wall insulation, heat pump migration and having smart meters that are actually smart regardless of the supplier. These are things that tangible in the everyday to people. Fix the things that they can see and touch and you have them onboard for the larger ambitious stuff.

[WigstonWanderer]

On 30/04/2025 at 01:17, Dahnsouff said:

Agree @leicsmac and community generation is the answer and there are several companies that support this desire by communities in the UK, so sure plenty exist globally.  Although I admit I am more and more unconvinced by nuclear from a cost/time perspective.

I’m starting to believe that even in suburbia here in Perth it might soon be possible to go off grid without the need for a generator. With a suitably sized solar array and battery a household can be arbitrarily self sufficient. In the rare event that there is insufficient sunshine, an electric vehicle and Vehicle to Home (V2H) could be used to import KWhrs from a nearby EV charger if required. I’ll certainly be looking into the economics of this in a few years time when the tech is a little more settled.

 

Totally convinced now that Australia really doesn’t need nuclear for the foreseeable future to transition away from fossil fuels. All that is required is the political will, and a rejection of the fossil lobby lies and propaganda.

Edited 19 hours ago by WigstonWanderer

[Dahnsouff]

13 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I’m starting to believe that even in suburbia here in Perth it might soon be possible to go off grid without the need for a generator. With a suitably sized solar array and battery a household can be arbitrarily self sufficient. In the rare event that there is insufficient sunshine, an electric vehicle and Vehicle to Home (V2H) could be used to import KWhrs from a nearby EV charger if required. I’ll certainly be looking into the economics of this in a few years time when the tech is a little more settled.

 

Totally convinced now that Australia really doesn’t need nuclear for the foreseeable future to transition away from fossil fuels. All that is required is the political will, and a rejection of the fossil lobby lies and propaganda.

We have finally got a date for a battery only system (We cannot have Solar due to roof structure) and the aim is to keep enough overnight to power the day and necessary EV charging. Its certainly not ideal, but with ASHP we had 2 years ago, the low overnight rate and it being limited to renewables, it really is our only option. One we are lucky enough and happy enough to self fund.

 

Fed up with nuclear tbh, it feels like an ethical and political football.

[leicsmac]

49 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I’m starting to believe that even in suburbia here in Perth it might soon be possible to go off grid without the need for a generator. With a suitably sized solar array and battery a household can be arbitrarily self sufficient. In the rare event that there is insufficient sunshine, an electric vehicle and Vehicle to Home (V2H) could be used to import KWhrs from a nearby EV charger if required. I’ll certainly be looking into the economics of this in a few years time when the tech is a little more settled.

 

Totally convinced now that Australia really doesn’t need nuclear for the foreseeable future to transition away from fossil fuels. All that is required is the political will, and a rejection of the fossil lobby lies and propaganda.

 

32 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

We have finally got a date for a battery only system (We cannot have Solar due to roof structure) and the aim is to keep enough overnight to power the day and necessary EV charging. Its certainly not ideal, but with ASHP we had 2 years ago, the low overnight rate and it being limited to renewables, it really is our only option. One we are lucky enough and happy enough to self fund.

 

Fed up with nuclear tbh, it feels like an ethical and political football.

If we can do without fission power as a species, then we should, for all the reasons given.

 

However, I'm yet to be convinced that we can everywhere while maintaining and developing quality of life.

[WigstonWanderer]

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

If we can do without fission power as a species, then we should, for all the reasons given.

 

However, I'm yet to be convinced that we can everywhere while maintaining and developing quality of life.

Yes, I was referring to Australia, and for the foreseeable future. Perhaps when technologies have matured elsewhere to the point of becoming economic and something more than vapourware they could be used here. But there is so much sunshine here I just don’t think it’s required yet.

Edited 14 hours ago by WigstonWanderer