Can Solar & Wind Fix Everything (e.g., Climate Change) with a battery break-through?

12VoltInstalls said:

...I didn’t call you a liar.

Click to expand...

12VoltInstalls said:

...That’s an outright lie...

Click to expand...

12VoltInstalls said:

... make it appear that I’m fringy-nuts; lumping me in with the wack jobs....

Click to expand...

I agree that posts that make unsubstantiated claims or attack others do cast a negative light on the poster.

12VoltInstalls said:

As far as lazy:
Unmotivated to look up and saying that you ‘can’t’ find divergence from other scientists - well either it’s no effort = unmotivated or you didn’t put any effort in because you don’t want to. So it is what it is.

Click to expand...

You said it was easy to find them, yet you can't be bothered. Again you attack rather than discuss by assigning hypothetical motivations to another's actions (and certainly don't apply them to yourself). If they were easy to find and real, why not just post one to prove your point? Oh right, you're to busy to prove your point, but have time to post it.

Even if I did find one and then debunk it; you'd probably just claim that I cherry-picked a bad example proving I was biased. If anything, your conversational methods are not particularly trustworthy, remember saying:

12VoltInstalls said:

...I set you up and you responded expectedly. You don't want a conversation...

Click to expand...

To which Leo responded for me:

LeoThomson said:

You got a thought out response....Why would you want to switch the conversation...

Click to expand...

And Leo's right, shifting the conversation away from the topic with labels and imaginary traps is disingenuous. Who exactly is it that doesn't want to have a conversation on the topic?

12VoltInstalls said:

...I do it for entertainment value...

Click to expand...

Go to the humor forums for that. But even there it's unwise to just insult people for your amusement.
In a serious thread, it just detracts from the conversation and as you've said makes the poster look bad.

12VoltInstalls said:

... You don’t want to accept or evaluate alternative opinions- the conversation is fruitless.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Opinions are worthless for this topic without some corroborating proof. The topic is very polarized and emotional for some. The Hysteria generated by the media provides imaginary proof that Corbett uses as "proof" it can't be real because hysterical claims never come true. None of that is real or useful.

Discussion in the thread can and does happen: e.g., wobbles, currents, and accuracy. But it happens when people honestly want to discuss them.

aenyc said:

What i really meant is the the usual NYC vibe is gone.
Half of good restaurants have closed down for good. Many areas that were fun to be at are fenced/boarded. The streets are dirty (even by NYC standards, there are literally piles of garbage all over the place, even in Manhattan "good areas". The amount of homeless and other "asocial elements" are off the scale. I mean there were always things like that in NYC, but never ever in this amount. Even the 90s. Its kinda a whole brave new world NYC now.
And people are still wearing face muzzles. Very depressing.

Click to expand...

Dude! Did you ever visit times square back in the 70s! Its like any city, has some ups and downs. Going through some paradigm shifts for shore. Homeless issue is nowhere near as bad as it was. Though perhaps thats simply the have moved folks around. There are more good areas. Even the NYCHA projects are turning around for the most part. It is a big city and has some less than nice areas, but the doom and gloom comes from folks that dont spend much time there.

A startup claims it has launched weather balloons that may have released reflective sulfur particles in the stratosphere, potentially crossing a controversial barrier in the field of solar geoengineering. [ref]

Click to expand...

I might be a believer, but this sort of stunt sounds like it is driven more by climate hysterics. But, AFAIK there are no international laws to stop them from doing crazy things. In this instance, it doesn't sound concerning (sounds like the equivalent of a tenth of a snowflake in a blizzard (Volcanos typically spew more anti-GHGs annually)). I bet they drove it to the launch point using diesel. ; -)

svetz said:

I might be a believer, but this sort of stunt sounds like it is driven more by climate hysterics. But, AFAIK there are no international laws to stop them from doing crazy things. In this instance, it doesn't sound concerning (sounds like the equivalent of a tenth of a snowflake in a blizzard (Volcanos typically spew more anti-GHGs annually)). I bet they drove it to the launch point using diesel. ; -)

Click to expand...

It is unlikely that they will have enough money to do this at a scale that is required to drop the temperature. But it is a really dumb idea as it might convince a state like India, to do that. And they might even lower it a couple of degrees more, just to make it more comfortable to their population. The nationalist would argue, "why should we care about the rest of the world?" and "India first"...

AndyRonLI said:

Dude! Did you ever visit times square back in the 70s! Its like any city, has some ups and downs. Going through some paradigm shifts for shore. Homeless issue is nowhere near as bad as it was. Though perhaps thats simply the have moved folks around. There are more good areas. Even the NYCHA projects are turning around for the most part. It is a big city and has some less than nice areas, but the doom and gloom comes from folks that dont spend much time there.

Click to expand...

I don't know man, i only visit every week, my parents are still in Queens (Where i lived for 25 years). I have NEVER (even in the 90's) have see a homeless encampment under pretty much EVERY bridge and overpass, along with literal moutains of garbage next to them. I will admit that I do not know how the city was in the 70s, but i can tell your FOR SURE, that its is MUCH, MUCH worse than the 90's. And idiots in face muzzles only make it even more depressing.

svetz said:

there are no international laws to stop them from doing crazy things.

Click to expand...

This kind of stuff always bothers me. Why would anyone have blind faith in a bunch of high level international bureaucrats, who are ALWAYS under influence of special interest, to come up with ANY laws that benefits the general populace, especially when this populace is thousands of miles away.

If anything, there should be local laws (but who writes those? Even in my small town it seems people have very little real influence even against the petty tyrants that run the town (of 7000 people).

LeoThomson said:

It is unlikely that they will have enough money to do this at a scale that is required to drop the temperature. But it is a really dumb idea as it might convince a state like India, to do that. And they might even lower it a couple of degrees more, just to make it more comfortable to their population. The nationalist would argue, "why should we care about the rest of the world?" and "India first"...

Click to expand...

Uncoordinated events around the world might add up over time; it'll probably make the modeling harder too.

At least their idea isn't as frightening as some. There are a few about putzing with the oceans, mainly around nutrients (either adding them or bringing them to the surface) causing a bloom that would absorb gigatons of CO2, except it's a one-time thing that would probably also oxygen starve the ocean and they're hard to control. Aerosol ships are sort of intriguing and somewhat safer in they can be turned off, might be good as a stopgap, but like carbon capture we need to address the actual problem at some point). Space reflectors might be better as some of the designs can also add energy to the earth.

aenyc said:

...Why would anyone have blind faith in a bunch of high level international bureaucrats...

Click to expand...

Blind faith might be demanded by religions. A government that demands it is ludicrous as government should only exist to serve the people.

All government employees in the U.S. take an oath to defend the Constitution that they take with true faith, without obligation, and without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. Most of them are honest hard working Americans and not only mean it but take pride in their service.
That said, power and corruption do exist, which is why transparency is important.

The UN has a similar oath and similar transparency, I believe that most of them have the same pride in doing what they can to make the world a better place. But the ones that rise to power have a poor track record. The systemic abuses involving humanitarian and development activities in the UN’s Funds and Programs gave rise to the Transparency and Accountability Initiative just after the turn of the 21st century. Now that the $ are more carefully audited, the scandals have moved more towards sexual predation, but there are still plenty of scandals. Personally, I believe a 3 legged balance system like the U.S. would serve them better, but I'm biased. They do have watchdog groups, but most have political agendas. So yes, that's a long way of saying I agree it's something we wouldn't want to blindly follow.

svetz said:

Uncoordinated events around the world might add up over time; it'll probably make the modeling harder too.

At least their idea isn't as frightening as some. There's a few about putzing with the oceans, mainly around nutrients (either adding them or bringing them to the surface) causing a bloom that would absorb gigatons of CO2, except it's a one-time thing that would probably also oxygen starve the ocean and they're hard to control. Aerosol ships are sort of intriguing and somewhat safer in they can be turned off, might be good as a stopgap, but like carbon capture we need to address the actual problem at some point).

Click to expand...

Ocean fertilization was tried, from what I can tell it didn't have the effect they hoped for either.

Lets hope the economics for renewables continues to improve because I have little faith in politicians doing enough of the simple things that need to be done, let allone the hard ones. But at least fossil fuel subsidies are going down a little.

svetz said:

Opinions are worthless for this topic without some corroborating proof.

Click to expand...

The whole thread is based on a theory with no corroborating proof.
Ostriching Syndrome

svetz said:

In a serious thread, it just detracts from the conversation

Click to expand...

sometimes when the hyperbole door gets left open I wander in on the way back from the bathroom

svetz said:

And Leo's right, shifting the conversation away from the topic with labels and imaginary traps is disingenuous. Who exactly is it that doesn't want to have a conversation on the topic?

Click to expand...

Both of you are smoking something or put things in the koolaid

I’ve given up on this thread being interesting- it’s just a platform for rehashing predispositions. And so I don’t care anymore. It’s silly how you guys read what I posted and then come out with spin gibberish. Like the following which gives as an example a fabricated fictional situation that didn’t and won’t occur:

svetz said:

Even if I did find one and then debunk it; you'd probably just claim that I cherry-picked a bad example proving I was biased. If anything, your conversational methods are not particularly trustworthy, remember saying:

Click to expand...

I give up.

svetz said:

You said it was easy to find them, yet you can't be bothered. Again you attack rather than discuss by assigning hypothetical motivations to another's actions (and certainly don't apply them to yourself). If they were easy to find and real, why not just post one to prove your point? Oh right, you're to busy to prove your point, but have time to post it.

Click to expand...

I have nothing to prove to you, and I have not ambiguously. And voice to text while driving or whatever is a great opportunity to post thoughts. I don’t have time. I’ve been moving 3000 square feet of shop equipment and storage.

But I don’t need to explain myself to you or respond to infantile egging. I set you up twice- for fun and a litmus- and the colors glowed in the dark.

I’m not educated with degrees in philosophy or had to take debate to get a degree. So I can’t recite the names of those 11 fallacies that are to be avoided as the hallmarks of incongruous or of poor form in debate. If exposed to them I recognize them without needing to be told what they are. And I’m neither interested in nor willing to submit myself to the frustration of wading through failures in logic.

I don’t know if any, all, or some of global warning or opinions contrary are correct or incorrect. That is my stance. All the other popcorn-worthy metaphorical street fighting over that’s occurred in the last few days in this thread has not made me more skeptical or less skeptical. But it sure has frustrated me to death.
Have a Coke and a Smile

aenyc said:

This kind of stuff always bothers me. Why would anyone have blind faith in a bunch of high level international bureaucrats, who are ALWAYS under influence of special interest, to come up with ANY laws that benefits the general populace, especially when this populace is thousands of miles away.

Click to expand...

If you look at the EU, there the decisions have been mostly beneficial for the general population. But if you look at the US, any policy that is beneficial for the general population, is denounced as socialism. Just look at single payer health care, it is both more efficient than the current for profit system there and has better outcomes.

aenyc said:

If anything, there should be local laws (but who writes those? Even in my small town it seems people have very little real influence even against the petty tyrants that run the town (of 7000 people).

Click to expand...

If you can convince people to vote for you, they will, regardless if you are sticking with facts or conspiracy theories. Would be nice if the candidates ran on facts only, but that won't happen.

svetz said:

All government employees in the U.S. take an oath to defend the Constitution that they take with true faith, without obligation, and without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. Most of them are honest hard working Americans and not only mean it but take pride in their service.

Click to expand...

svetz said:

The UN has a similar oath and similar transparency, I believe that most of them have the same pride in doing what they can to make the world a better place. But the ones that rise to power have a poor track record.

Click to expand...

You seriously believe these things? This is a very naïve thing to believe. While some "rank and file" may feel that way, the vast majority are "grey mice" that will simply do what they are told (And will say "I was just following orders if questioned"). And the ones that give orders never have benefit of humankind on their agenda. At best, they are lining their own pockets, at worst, they are control freaks with "god" complex. I have been observing it on Federal Government (and local government) projects over the last 20 years in the industry. The system is so corrupt, that when we as contractors are attempting to save taxpayer money, govt officials say in the open that they are NOT interested in saving money. They want to spend the maximum amount, because this guarantees funds for the following year! They are not even hiding it in front of dozens of contractors. Contractor management loves it! Govt Bosses love it! And not one person is listening to the tech (some of whom) genuinely try to do what's best.
This is true for FedGov, DoD, State of NY, State of NJ, and NYC (just the ones i have personal experience working with).

The ones at the top have been caught lying under oath time and time again, and they feel absolutely no shame and no remorse. They often double and triple down on their lies. The 3 branch system (like the US one) is broken when all 3 parts have been corrupted and paid off by special interest, which anyone not blind will see.

Its eerie to see how similar the systems are now to the system of mid-late USSR, with corruption totally and completely envelop all layers of government, from the town clerk to the supreme court judge. They have all been absolutely bought and paid for by special interest.

NOAA's January report: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/global-climate-202301

I would not trust anything that these organizations are publishing. After the last 3 years every single government scientific think tank (NOAA, CDC, FDA, the list is endless) has been severely compromised and politicized. Almost all top officials in these organizations are through the revolving door with the very corporations they are supposed to monitor. Its disgusting. It is going to be next to impossible for them to regain any trust that they have lost.

aenyc said:

I would not trust anything that these organizations are publishing. After the last 3 years every single government scientific think tank (NOAA, CDC, FDA, the list is endless) has been severely compromised and politicized. Almost all top officials in these organizations are through the revolving door with the very corporations they are supposed to monitor. Its disgusting. It is going to be next to impossible for them to regain any trust that they have lost.

Click to expand...

The conspiracy nutters will reject all evidence that contradicts the conspiracy theory as being part of the conspiracy.

The idea that thousands of climate scientist all over the world are somehow secretly working together for over a century to create evil governments that control every one, including those scientists and their families, is insane...

One of the key problems that Manning cites is that though these ponds may look dense like pea soup, the algae only makes up one percent of the total volume of the pond. The rest of the floating biomass is water. This presents one of the primary challenges in large-scale cultivation of algae: To produce a high density, a lot of water needs to be removed from the equation (much of which is eventually reused in the system). From Manning’s estimate, the harvesting and dewatering process can take up 70 percent of capital costs. [ref]

Click to expand...

Well, congress's composition will change a lot before then so fingers crossed we can get some fiscally responsible members.

I did see a 2022 paper on the economics of algae and duckweed, but all it really says is it's in it's infancy and needs work. If you're curious about the conversion process, I found a paper from 2012. Essentially they make methanol which is then converted to gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel.

One of the biggest idiocies of our time is using literal food (corn ethanol) as fuel.
Keep dreaming about responsible politicians. They do not exist (and will never exist due to the very nature of high power - it attracts the worst of the kind, always, forever. Because to achieve high power you are simply required to step on people and abandon any kind of morals. There is no high power otherwise.

aenyc said:

Keep dreaming about responsible politicians. They do not exist ...

Click to expand...

They can exist and do a good job, but we do need some changes. For example, if you want to fix public health care all you need do is have a mandate that the congressional health care system must use the public system. What's good enough for the people is good enough for congress. That's what I meant about checks and balances, when they do a crappy job some liberal lawyer needs to take it to the supreme court or the president needs to deal with it. If neither happens, time for recalls.

aenyc said:

One of the biggest idiocies of our time is using literal food (corn ethanol) as fuel.

Click to expand...

Agree, politicians did not think it through, the idea was to use the wast products but the free market uses whatever gives the best returns.

aenyc said:

Keep dreaming about responsible politicians. They do not exist (and will never exist due to the very nature of high power - it attracts the worst of the kind, always, forever. Because to achieve high power you are simply required to step on people and abandon any kind of morals. There is no high power otherwise.

Click to expand...

And that is just utter nonsense, there are plenty of politicians who try to be responsible, but in countries like the US, they do not stand much of a chance when such large amounts of corporate money and hostile nations, led by corrupt dictators, influence elections. What do you propose as the alternative? Dictatorships? Anarchy?

svetz said:

They can exist and do a good job, but we do need some changes. For example, if you want to fix public health care all you need do is have a mandate that the congressional health care system must use the public system. What's good enough for the people is good enough for congress. That's what I meant about checks and balances, when they do a crappy job some liberal lawyer needs to take it to the supreme court or the president needs to deal with it. If neither happens, time for recalls.

Click to expand...

This is very very naive viewpoint, one that ignores hundreds of years of human history.
While i fully agree that congress critters must use public system, that will never ever happen, because, as we can proverbially speak its "bugs for you, and angus steak for them". It has always been that way and will always be that way. They are all bought and paid for. All of them, no exception. Why do you think people get into power?
As was said 'The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."

Excellent new presentation on IPCC
The whole thing is basically made up scam - they made an assumption from the very beginning that "Climate chage" is DE FACTO "Man made climate change". Then they just went from there.

Here is the official doc from 1992



He does a great job explaining ALL the little details with ALL the links to OFFICIAL documents