Climate change wankers

"Blindboy the problem with your view and your mates is that it is complete shit."

Curses, foiled again by Barley's superior reasoning skills!

@velocityj...yes, reality can be a shocking thing. Then add India to the equation. We are a mere drop in the ocean. Tends to put this debate in a different light.

barley wrote:

Blindboy the problem with your view and your mates is that it is complete shit.
What happens lets say,in the next 20yrs and we get blistering cold winters and all that glacier shit refreezes if not rebuilds ?
obviously the scientists went up to greenland 50yrs ago and looked at each other and said..'what happens if this shit melts?'
'Well we shall better think of a plan for that'
You and benski shouldve seen this shit coming 50-60-70-100yrs ago!
the earth has evolved like this for millions of years.
and you still got no fucking idea!!
cant even tell when a volcano can erupt ?
Why doesnt the climate scientist try and stop the melting of ice instead of telling us our emissions are cooked.
do you have kids blindboy ?what do you tell them?

And then you have the balls to accuse other people of dribbling shit!

tonybarber wrote:

@velocityj...yes, reality can be a shocking thing. Then add India to the equation. We are a mere drop in the ocean. Tends to put this debate in a different light.

Lookout, tweedledum late last night and tweedledee early this morning .......

Just what do you stand for Tones? where do you sit on this issue? Its not the fence coz you're comments always have this taint to them ... of yes, you are interested in outcomes but except for dams and nuclear neither of which are likely anytime in the next 10-20 years here in Australia what do you propose? Keep on trashing the joint? coz I'm not reading anything positive in your comments, always the little barbs on the side .... Tony "the barbster"

A few things barley. First Earth is actually billions of years old. Second,while benski and I cannot claim any credit, Svante Arrenhius was the first scientist to identify and investigate this issue in 1895. I first heard about it while studying physics over forty years ago and have taken an interest ever since. Third, we are actually getting pretty good at predicting volcanic eruptions. Fourth, many climate scientist are investigating geoengineering projects to slow or reverse the warming effects. Fifth, I tell my (adult) children, grand children, step children and anyone else who will listen about the risks and what can be done to minimise them. Oh and don't buy property at sea level.

velocityjohnno wrote:

Send it past the NASA scientists as well BB.

...meanwhile in China

http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/2015/11/11/chinas-coal-bubble-155-new-o...

No matter your views on AGW, this one isn't nice. For one it will torpedo any effort Australia makes to reduce its carbon footprint, for the other it looks a massive misallocation of capital. Again.

From the link:

"But they’re unlikely to be used to their maximum since China has practically no need for the energy they would produce.

Coal-fired electricity hasn’t increased for four years, and this year coal plant utilisation fell below 50%.

It looks like this trend will continue, with China committing to renewables, gas and nuclear targets for 2020 — together they will cover any increase in electricity demand.

"Because there’s no room for this much new coal, and because China is sticking to its 15% non-fossil fuel target by 2020, older plants will likely be closed.

Because of that it’s unlikely the new fleet would cause a net increase in carbon emissions, particulate pollution or premature deaths."

tonybarber wrote:

@velocityj...yes, reality can be a shocking thing. Then add India to the equation. We are a mere drop in the ocean. Tends to put this debate in a different light.

Tony, which reality is shocking? Please see the quotes pulled from the article in my prior comment.

As for India
"India, the world’s third biggest greenhouse gas emitter, has pledged to source 40% of its electricity from renewable and other low-carbon sources by 2030."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/02/india-pledges-40-percent-el...

The tech around renewables is improving so fast that a lot of arguments that made sense even 5 years ago don't stack up anymore. There's a long way to go but the economic argument has turned strongly in renewable's favour with wind being the cheapest form of new energy capacity available.

"We are a mere drop in the ocean. Tends to put this debate in a different light" A decrease is a decrease is a decrease, no matter where it comes from, this is even true in Australia!

@mk1...a pledge is the not the same as fact. India and China together have about 800 coal stations. The article velocityj referenced from Greenpeace indicate a possible further growth. What may or may not happen in fifty years from today is another matter. As you may know Dr Finkel has hopeful for total energy sources from renewables in 50 years - hopeful but certainly not for today or the next ten / twenty years. At present renewables just do not satisfy the base load requirements. Realistically the Climate Change issue is global so it does matter what little old Aus does.
You suggest China may not use the extra energy. What's the chance of that happening ? The modernisation of China is far from complete or flat lining.
On a separate note, have a look at how permanent magnets are made for wind power generators.

Tony, it says in the article they won't use the energy. Greenpeace themselves say that as a direct quote so it isn't my optimistic opinion. It's actually the main crux of the article (bubble in coal power investment because the assets won't be used).

Agreed that a pledge is not the same as fact, but watch this space and we may get a surprise. Increasing, unfettered Indian and Chinese pollution is not a done deal, although it all appeared that way 5-10 years ago. China is ahead of India on this one but India are starting to make the same noises China was 4-5 years ago. Whether it will happen remains to be seen but you can't lock it out as an unreasonable possibility.

"As you may know Dr Finkel has hopeful for total energy sources from renewables in 50 years - hopeful but certainly not for today or the next ten / twenty years. At present renewables just do not satisfy the base load requirements." 100% renewables in 50 years leaves a lot of room for marginal renewable adoption between here and there. It'd be a huge shift just to get there within 50 years as existing fossil facilities wind down and are replaced by renewables. Even linearly there is a huge uptake in renewables and reduction in CO2 to get to 50% in 25 years! Germany has 30% renewables now, that is starting to encroach on base power.

"Realistically the Climate Change issue is global so it does matter what little old Aus does." Agreed

Will look at magnets for wind power as you suggest.

Oops...sorry mk1, should have said 'does not matter what little Aus does.' This is enhanced by the fact that India is yet to really hit the straps with respect to modernisation plus of course more of China modernisation. It is becoming clearer that even the US would be less than a quarter of China's use. Long way to go.
Must admit, find it a bit questionable that China either approving coal power stations and building these at such a rate whilst supposedly not requiring them....hmmmm.

Chinese build ghost cities for fun. They want the development more than $USD in the bank.

Electricity consumption in the developed world is declining. We are entering a new age of efficiency and the developing world will get to leap-frog to that.

Ray Kurzweil expects solar to meet the worlds total electricity demand before 2030 based on the technology improvement trend in the field to-date. He's a wacky dude but has a history of being prescient in his predictions.

Lets see which way the wind is blowing after Paris conference in a few weeks anyway. Then we'll know if there is any momentum towards a change.

@sheepy,

watching ABC news (Vicco) tonight and there was a big story on vicco farmers doing it tough, some not having rain for 2-3 years and facing ruin to the point where the government has just chipped in more drought relief.

seems this all differs from your recent observations / comments on vicco rainfall ... i guess it comes down to rain corridors and other areas getting naught.

Climate change and the Australian floods

http://www.whoi.edu/news-release/australia-flood

.....and a significant factor in the Syrian civil war.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/why-a-climate-deal-is-the-best-h...

How to talk to a climate change denier ........

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/how-to-talk-to-a-climate-change-d...

barley, you should watch the above .... might learn something

earth to barley .....

floyd wrote:

earth to barley .....

aah leave him alone, he's probably out doin' farmin' stuff and observing the climate and such.

braudulio wrote:

floyd wrote:

earth to barley .....

aah leave him alone, he's probably out doin' farmin' stuff and observing the climate and such.

yeah, probably right there braudulio, he's most likely whittling out back while pa picks the banjo ....

if that's the case Floyd, maybe him and his old paw can get involved in my mate's project:

http://www.capefarewell.com/about.html

get creative, whittle up a storm, all to a banjo-picking soundtrack.

ah, still they slag each other while others suffer. I think all of you will be getting a big reminder that your petty squabbles meant nothing. the only thing that meant anything was the love and care you had for your family, your relations, your local community, country/culture and the chance to live in a pretty peaceful way.
IN fact, why dont you all think like that now. All things change, some tiny, some monumentaly and we will all have to change to adapt to any new condition, and we will all have to do it together regardless of our points of view,

ah, still they slag each other while others suffer. I think all of you will be getting a big reminder that your petty squabbles meant nothing. the only thing that meant anything was the love and care you had for your family, your relations, your local community, country/culture and the chance to live in a pretty peaceful way.
IN fact, why dont you all think like that now. All things change, some tiny, some monumentaly and we will all have to change to adapt to any new condition, and we will all have to do it together regardless of our points of view,

Good to see you back, jimmy..... How ya been mate?

aaawww dave baby, back to your mung beans, farm boy gotta know wees are pulling his leg

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/foreign-correspondent/NC1502H023S00

Great story this one braudulio.

So, if California which is the eighth largest economy in the world can ditch coal and go for solar, what's everyone else's excuse?
According to Foreign Correspondent, the solar industry in California employs more people than Twitter, Google, Apple and Facebook combined.
Great to see a positive story, a potential solution rather than a problem.

braudulio wrote:

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/foreign-correspondent/NC1502H023S00

Yeah, it was a great positive news story about what is possible now with renewables.

The mostly European model of community ownership is very interesting, decentralising control of energy, now that's a revolution right there.

UN climate change conference in Paris.

So basically, the developed world - us - is supposed to pay the developing world - anyone with a lower GDP - to assist in raising their GDP.

Because the success of the developing world in raising the living standards of its citizens has ruined the world , the developed world must provide money, lots and lots and lots of money to the unfortunate developing world so they can raise the living standards of their citizens and thus ruin the world some more.

But the developed world - us again - must reduce consumption , essentially reducing our GDP.

Then the developing world can attempt to reduce their GDP to save the world.

$136,000,000,000 per year will cover it for starters.

Insane.

And Australia is leading the charge to collect donations from all the rich countries like ourselves.

Even though Australia , like most developed countries, is living so far beyond its means and is so deep in debt it's almost hilarious.

This should work out well.

You take it up the clacker, don't ya Blowie?

Sorry Turkey, im not following you mate.

Maybe you could explain .

Unless of course I'm reading correctly and thinking you're on the prowl for some fresh meat.

I'm flattered mate, really, but it's not my scene.

I'm more into chicks myself, but I'm not judging you on your predilections.

Maybe try grinder.

blindboy wrote:

.....and a significant factor in the Syrian civil war.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/why-a-climate-deal-is-the-best-h...

Here it is nick. Would you like me to link to a dictionary? You might need it as there are long words like "water" and difficult concepts like "up".

Hey Nick, guess what?
Living unsustainably, including our CO2 emissions which are driving AGW, means that there will be more wars caused by drought, failed crops and water issues, and more terrorism.

I have given up on this thread..and forums in general..realised how much of a waste of life it is .what i will say is..based upon a scientific report that read when the greenland glaciers melt it will release more carbon than sea level rise..oh well sure you guys can decifer it or discuss it..stereosonic and tuna season up next..and the ledge..merry christmas everyone (except floyd)

was a big night out on the bayou for nick3 & barley ... on the moonshine again yokels?

oh poor flawd been a naughty boy again this year? your a waste of space mate..trolling forums nothing better to do in life..no friends..no Christmas prezzes for you again not even ya mum wants to give you a cuddle..must suck hey mate?
your probably getting off though with ya comments on here though ay? getting ya jollies?
nice one..only friends ya got is a swellnet forum..i bet you get up early just to check the comments on here? got your alarm set...like an addict..can't wait...probably affects ya sleep

nah you're funnier when you're trying to be serious farm boy, now back to dat whittling or amuse me with one of your more serious personal observations on all things dealing with weather.

blindboy wrote:

blindboy wrote:

.....and a significant factor in the Syrian civil war.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/why-a-climate-deal-is-the-best-h...

Here it is nick. Would you like me to link to a dictionary? You might need it as there are long words like "water" and difficult concepts like "up".

Gold

Ok, I'll bite.
Hey Nick, did you check out the link in the New Yorker article? Takes you to a journal article with real science and everything. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/349/6244/aaa4019

Gents, before you all get too excited. I'm sure you know that IPCC has suggested that extreme weather events are more likely but expected later this century. That's later.... We have our own politicians stating such statements and the IPCC was quick to debunk them as the research is not yet conclusive with respect to extreme events. If you read Kerry's speech, the Syrian crisis is much more complex than caused by a drought.

blindboy wrote:

Climate change and the Australian floods

http://www.whoi.edu/news-release/australia-flood

It helps to at least look at the links.

BB...suggest review IPCC summary on extreme weather events. BTW, at this stage there is no conclusive correlation between El Niño / la Nino and climate change.
Anyway, gents I hope you had a taste of that east swell on the Goldie.

Tones, not sure of your point, are you trying to

- discredit climate change science
- have a shot at politicians (fair game in my books)
- discredit any correlation between any current weather events and climate change
- suggest that because any extreme weather events won't happen until "later this century" we should do nothing in the meantime

Plenty of evidence re attribution of extreme weather events to climate change. This is some Australian information.
http://www.cawcr.gov.au/projects/climatechange/docs/Weather_Extremes_Rep...

Hi Nick3,
Look champ, no offense but I've been following this thread for a 14 pages, I honestly thought it was nice to
read a humorous post by Blindy.
No hard done by any ways.
Keep up the banter by no means.
Cheers
Wellyson.

nick3 wrote:

The last time atmospheric CO2 was this high, global sea levels were at least six metres higher.
I love when they shoot themselves in the foot. Floyd please explain.
Wellymon GOLD

Where did you get that one from nicko? The Old Testament? Speaking about a foot, put yours back in your mouth.

BB...again, please check IPCC. The extremes are not proven. The major problem we have is little data and certainly not accurate.