Climate Change | UN Report: Code Red for humanity

Buster15 said:
I know not of that although the EU is actively pushing NF development.
But you are right, at the current rate of development, 2040/50 are the projected timescales.
All countries should be intensifying efforts to bring forward commercial NF energy production. That is why I urge you to request your MP takes action to push the UK government to intensify it's efforts.
I would argue that it is never too late to bring NF energy into production. This of course along with significantly increasing renewable energy sources.
Click to expand...

Well, it is never too late depending on how you define "what". If what relates to 2.5 degrees increase in average global temperature. That ship sailed long ago.
What as a 4 degree increase in temperature? Maybe, if the governments showed the same political will and effort as they do when trying to get reelected or filling their own purses as when it comes to climate change/global warming.
 
DFreshKing said:
I mean the cheapest energy. This will propel third world development which in turn will reduce per capita emissions. This will also speed it up the leveling of population growth in the third world as it has in all the developed nations - once you have stability and plenty, the need for destruction of the environment for resources and the need for large families is reduced.

I do not believe it is fair to hold back the developing world nor do I think it will actually work in any case. It will cause more poverty and more destruction of the environment.
Click to expand...

We are far past that point, we do not have the time to delay significant reductions. I do agree there's a responsibility for developed nations to be assisted in their transition but considering our governments are doing feck all domestically then i stand little hope for this assistance.
 
Fosu-Mens said:
Are they not building a cold fusion reactor/test center in France? Expected to be completed: too late. Works in theory, but remains to be seen if it works in practice. Also got thoriumreactors as a potential long term solution. Problem again is that this is too late. And it has been for some time.
Click to expand...
They're building ITER. Which is "just" a fusion reactor. Cold fusion is science fiction.

But as you say, it's too late. ITER was delayed by about 10 years purely by politics as well. The plans were ready in 1995, then it wasn't approved until 2005 and I think work started on it around 2015.
 
Maagge said:
They're building ITER. Which is "just" a fusion reactor. Cold fusion is science fiction.

But as you say, it's too late. ITER was delayed by about 10 years purely by politics as well. The plans were ready in 1995, then it wasn't approved until 2005 and I think work started on it around 2015.
Click to expand...

My mistake. Did not bother to look it.
2025 its when they will start with the first tests.
Best we can do for now regarding energy is to replace all coal with gass while building up infrastructure and battery parks for us to go solar/wind.
 
Anyone watch Attenborough’s new series tonight? He really hits it home. The planet is fooked. I think we’re beyond the point of no return.
 
Maagge said:
They're building ITER. Which is "just" a fusion reactor. Cold fusion is science fiction.

But as you say, it's too late. ITER was delayed by about 10 years purely by politics as well. The plans were ready in 1995, then it wasn't approved until 2005 and I think work started on it around 2015.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't get too excited about ITER. Read this for a gloomier take. ITER is not designed to generate electricity, it's not anywhere near a practical design, and it only shows that fusion could maybe be viable as an engineering project.

However, lots of interesting approaches are appearing in the US partly thanks to recent advances in superconducting magnetic tape, which can make the magnets much smaller, the devices less complex, and the magnetic confinement far more powerful.
 
nickm said:
I wouldn't get too excited about ITER. Read this for a gloomier take. ITER is not designed to generate electricity, it's not anywhere near a practical design, and it only shows that fusion could maybe be viable as an engineering project.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone bar the people studying plasma physics are that excited about ITER. After all ITER is a generation before demo plants if everything goes according to plan (and those wouldn't be until 2050 at the earliest).
 
barros said:
Every year same shit, they need to clean the forests and remove any dead tree, a very dry state with high temperatures mixed with high winds= disaster, how many years would take for them to realize that?
Click to expand...
That wouldn't be enough, you would have to tarmac over the lot, after first agent orangeing it all to make sure no desperate shoots managed to grow again to find a ray of sunlight.
 
barros said:
You must dream about him all the time, any problem in California is Trump's fault not the politicians from California, if the Soviet's still in power they would be proud of you.
Click to expand...

They are in power, at the white house
 
Greta Thunberg turns down green award over Nordic 'bragging'

Greta Thunberg has turned down an environmental award and £40,000 in prize money because "bragging" and "beautiful words" will not cut carbon emissions.

The Swedish campaigner revealed in an Instagram post that she had been awarded the Nordic Council Environment Prize 2019, but had "decided to decline".

While thanking the council for the "huge honour", she said the "climate movement does not need any more awards".
Click to expand...


https://news.sky.com/story/greta-thunberg-turns-down-green-award-over-nordic-bragging-11848720
 
barros said:
Suggestion, same shit happens in Portugal no organization at all and in California loggers can't go and cut down dead trees anymore just adds fuel for the fires.
Click to expand...
barros, it's not just dead trees, it's the living trees that touch the power lines when it's windy.
The humidity right now is approx 3-10% so everything's dried out. We haven't had measurable rainfall for over 5 months. And, last winter was quite wet so everything that was green in March is now dried to a crisp. It's impossible to clear every piece of dried up vegetation but it is possible to trim branches back from near power lines, but the electrical utility hasn't been doing that so that's why they're cutting off the power when it's windy.
And they don't cut power to the entire area so that's why we have some of the fires, cos the tree branches hit live wires. That's what caused the Getty fire on Monday in LA.
The winds can go up to 80 mph and feel like a hand dryer as it's so hot and dry.

Also, I see some are blaming the homeless, some of which hang out in dense underbrush so they can't be seen by the fuzz. One spark from their activities, combined with the high winds, and the place goes up.

Tbf though, it also can be something stupid, like a lawnmower creating a spark, a vehicle's hot exhaust touching the grassy verge, etc.

btw, Trump is an ass so don't be quoting him.
 
wsibgno8yyw31.jpg
 
The sun controls earth's climate.

Not emissions, nor humans.

When 6 most significant solar cycles are combined (red). Plotted against proxies for global temperature anomaly (black) over last 260 years we see lovely correlation. Citation. doi: 10.5194/cpd-8-4493-2012.
 
20 million radiosondes analysed. Plotted molar density against pressure to discover equations of state for troposphere & tropopause.

... The fits for the barometric temperature profiles did not require any consideration of the composition of atmospheric trace gases, such as carbon dioxide, ozone or methane. This contradicts the predictions of current atmospheric models, which assume the temperature profiles are strongly influenced by greenhouse gas concentrations. This suggests that the greenhouse effect plays a much smaller role in barometric temperature profiles than previously assumed ...​

-– M. Connolly, and R. Connolly (2014)
 
Mark Pawelek said:
20 million radiosondes analysed. Plotted molar density against pressure to discover equations of state for troposphere & tropopause.

... The fits for the barometric temperature profiles did not require any consideration of the composition of atmospheric trace gases, such as carbon dioxide, ozone or methane. This contradicts the predictions of current atmospheric models, which assume the temperature profiles are strongly influenced by greenhouse gas concentrations. This suggests that the greenhouse effect plays a much smaller role in barometric temperature profiles than previously assumed ...​

-– M. Connolly, and R. Connolly (2014)
Click to expand...

these lads work for the Heartland institute iirc?
 
Tarrou said:
these lads work for the Heartland institute iirc?
Click to expand...
Are you too lazy or incompetent to check your own facts. Or do you only do smear and defamation?

They are lefties. Michael Connolly is an old school environmentalist from way back before the days when the "green movement" was paid for by fund management billionaires like Tom Steyer and Jeremy Grantham. Connolly's work is entirely self-funded.
 
Last edited:
Tarrou said:
apologies, here you go

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/20/the-heartland-greenpeace-business-report/
Click to expand...
Thank you. I will send them an email and ask them whether the got any funding from Heartland to so their report, or for anything they ever did. I doubt it. I also doubt whether they care who publishes their work, so long as it's published.

Please accept my apologies too.

Their work on atmospheric balloons - 20 million radiosondes - is entirely their own. It completely contradicts the greenhouse gas narrative. There's nothing you can do about that because their equations for the atmosphere were discovered (like scientific laws). Not manufactured as a thought experiment like the greenhouse gas effect.
 
Mark Pawelek said:
Thank you. I will send them an email and ask them whether the got any funding from Heartland to so their report, or for anything they ever did. I doubt it. I also doubt whether they care who publishes their work, so long as it's published.

Please accept my apologies too.

Their work on atmospheric balloons - 20 million radiosondes - is entirely their own. It completely contradicts the greenhouse gas narrative. There's nothing you can do about that because their equations for the atmosphere were discovered (like scientific laws). Not manufactured as a thought experiment like the greenhouse gas effect.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I was being a bit lazy as I remember reading about these guys a few years back, and had a vague notion they were discredited.

Their website looks sketchy af, but I'll have another look at their research.
 
@Mark Pawelek

I took a look at their website. Putting aside the links to the Heartland Institute for one moment.

  • Is your work peer reviewed?
  • (Updated: 22 May 2017)
    We have submitted eight scientific articles summarising our main findings for peer review in the Open Peer Review Journal (OPRJ). This is a new forum we have founded to offer a more rigorous and open peer review system than the conventional “closed” peer review system used until now. See our “Start here” page for links to our papers, and non-technical summaries of them.
Click to expand...
So they've launched their own journal, then submitted their own work to it, and are now making the extremely dubious claim that its peer reviewed.

How can it be a rigorous peer review if they are both editors and publishers of the journal? They can just delete anything they don't like. It makes zero sense if your intention is to have your work independently verified.

There would be no reason for them to not submit the study to a real scientific journal. Have they done that?
 
Tarrou said:
these lads work for the Heartland institute iirc?
Click to expand...

Mark Pawelek said:
Are you too lazy or incompetent to check your own facts. Or do you only do smear and defamation?
Click to expand...

Tarrou said:
apologies, here you go

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/20/the-heartland-greenpeace-business-report/
Click to expand...

Three quick posts perfectly summing up @Mark Pawelek.

I admire your confidence, though. The last time we saw you, you had just professed with absolute certainty that a specific graph proved your point, without any doubt. A graph, as I recall, it turned out you were literally reading backwards. And after all this time, you jump straight into a graph.

Very bold.

@Tarrou, save yourself the trouble. Mark Pawelek has no idea what he's talking about, but no matter how many times you prove him wrong, he'll never stop coming up with new graphs he doesn't understand and new papers he hasn't read, sure that now, he's got you. This time he seems to have changed his tactics though. Last time he posted graphs and papers that directly contradicted his own claims, now he seems to be trying to circumvent that risk by finding papers by "scientists" (i.e. not climate scientists) that also don't believe in global warming.
 
Last edited:
:lol: oh dear.

Mark should really be banned from this thread, by the way, all it takes is one gullible person to read his stuff and lap it up for it to prove effective.
 
Tarrou said:
i think the 'scientists' might actually be a pair of builders :lol:

Click to expand...


The son seems to have some degrees, at least, though not any relevant ones. The "about section" of their own site has this written about the dad:

I qualified as a plasterer in 1969 and as an electrician in 1970.
Click to expand...

It also says this:

Academic qualifications B.Sc., M.Sc., H.D.E., D.E.E., Ph.D.
Click to expand...

Which conveniently does not list his actual qualifications. And considering what it says further down the page, I think it's safe to say that this guy is not any kind of scientist. Which is Mark's favourite kind, incidentally.

Since 1996, we have been carrying out fundamental research in the fields of physics, chemistry and biology, both in Ireland and in USA.
Click to expand...
 
Mark Pawelek said:
The sun controls earth's climate.

Not emissions, nor humans.

When 6 most significant solar cycles are combined (red). Plotted against proxies for global temperature anomaly (black) over last 260 years we see lovely correlation. Citation. doi: 10.5194/cpd-8-4493-2012.
Click to expand...

any data to show 2013 - 2019... would be interesting to see if their prediction matched and the predicted drop off happened or not
 
Mark Pawelek said:
The sun controls earth's climate.

Not emissions, nor humans.

When 6 most significant solar cycles are combined (red). Plotted against proxies for global temperature anomaly (black) over last 260 years we see lovely correlation. Citation. doi: 10.5194/cpd-8-4493-2012.
Click to expand...

We're at solar minimum now yet the global temperature in 2018 was fourth hottest on record. Not my area of research, but all the current science points to the solar cycle having a fairly weak influence on global temperatures. It may be a little more complicated regionally due to changes in overall pressure patterns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.