Global Warming/Climate Change Discussion Thread

[Dotini]

... not solar activity!!

Dear Touring Mars,
I too deplore the politicization of science, and continue to hold my previous position that global warming is real and man's activities have something to do with it, maybe more than 50%). But I could be wrong.

With regard to the planets heating up, it is understood that at least one of them is cooling down. I also think that Earth has occasionally been warmer in the last 10,000 years than it is now.

We should continue to look into these questions.

Highest regards,
Dotini

 

[Interpol-007]

Global Warming is due to all the nuclear bombs that have been tested on earth.

 

[livemusic]

I see.

 

[Stevisiov]

Glad you've cleared that all up for us.

 

[DK]

Global Warming is due to all the nuclear bombs that have been tested on earth.

I've definitely nominating this guy for a "Darwin award".

 

[FoolKiller]

Global Warming is due to all the nuclear bombs that have been tested on earth.

I thought that just created Godzilla.

 

[Tired Tyres]

It's Godzilla breaking wind that causing global warming!

 

[Dotini]

Global Warming is due to all the nuclear bombs that have been tested on earth.

Well, this might qualify as a plausible opinion, but maybe hard to find evidence for. On the other hand, nuclear bomb manufacture, testing, use and accidents at various facilities have not done the globe any environmental favors.

For instance, it is a curious coincidence that almost all the top 50 forms of cancer have skyrocketed since WWII. I'm not claiming any cause and effect, just that the simultaneous development of nuclear technology and skyrocketing cancer rates are both facts.

Whistling past the graveyard,
Dotini

 

[FoolKiller]

Well, this might qualify as a plausible opinion, but maybe hard to find evidence for. On the other hand, nuclear bomb manufacture, testing, use and accidents at various facilities have not done the globe any environmental favors.

Yet, I am still convinced that nuclear energy, especially considering its current safeguards, is the best way to go for energy at the moment if we wish to have minimal impact on the environment.

For instance, it is a curious coincidence that almost all the top 50 forms of cancer have skyrocketed since WWII.

As has the availability of better cancer detection techniques.

I'm not claiming any cause and effect, just that the simultaneous development of nuclear technology and skyrocketing cancer rates are both facts.

There are too many things that we have found could be a cause of cancer these days to pinpoint any one thing, but pointing at just one does make for a great headline and talking point during legislative debate.

 

[Dotini]

Yet, I am still convinced that nuclear energy, especially considering its current safeguards, is the best way to go for energy at the moment if we wish to have minimal impact on the environment.

Yeah, not too much doubt about that. Advanced and "fool-proof" third generation designs are currently in the approval phase, and waste will be stored on-site in solid form in casks.

 

[homeforsummer]

It's Godzilla breaking wind that causing global warming!

No, but there are earthquakes when he has a tantrum.

 

[niky]

There are too many things that we have found could be a cause of cancer these days to pinpoint any one thing, but pointing at just one does make for a great headline and talking point during legislative debate.

Only a great headline if the utilization of nuclear power stations went up concommitally with cancer rates... but they don't.

Radiation exposure from nuclear power facilities and waste may cause cancer and birth defects, but it's interesting to note that some of our most powerful anti-cancer treatments involve technology derived from nuclear research and development.

 

[DK]

It's Godzilla breaking wind that causing global warming!

Well, the RB26DETT-powered GT-Rs did around 20-25mpg. So I'd say they do emit lots of CO2 (i.e. car farts ). But because there's way less GT-Rs than Imprezas and Evos (which consume around the same amount of fuel) their impact is less notable than their rivals.

 

[FoolKiller]

Now, here is someone looking to do something that 1) makes sense and 2) could actually have an impact on helping the environment.

http://green.autoblog.com/2010/03/19/solar-roadways-completes-prototype-becomes-ace-award-finalist/

Solar Roadways completes prototype, becomes ACE award finalist
by Domenick Yoney (RSS feed) on Mar 19th 2010 at 2:57PM

The day when the roads we drive on are as smooth as glass and replace our coal-fueled power plants is officially twelve feet closer. Solar Roadways has made good use of the cash they were awarded by the Department of Energy (DOE) and completed the first prototype of a panel they would like to see supporting the nation's traffic and electrical grid. The mockup module, which doesn't include the use of custom hardened glass with embedded heating element, solar panels or capacitors, is profiled in a series of photos on their new and improved website, and features micro-circuit controlled LEDs to "paint" situation-appropriate lines and messages. If the DOE deems the project fund-worthy after going through the Phase I reports and looking over the polycarbonate-protected prototype, Phase II will involve a "commercialization plan to begin the manufacturing process" and hopefully beget a more advanced product.

The DOE isn't the only group who's taken a fancy to the concept of having an intelligent, self-healing, decentralized power grid for a highway system. Solar Roadways also made the finalists list for the EE Times Sixth Annual Creativity in Electronics Awards for Most Promising Renewable Energy Award. The winner will be made known on April 27th. We wish them luck.

This is similar to an idea I had when they first introduced OLED TVs, which can be thin enough to roll. I was looking at my office building, which was a huge tinted glass building. So the entire outside is black glass, even though the inside only has actual windows every 10-15 feet. I wondered why not, assuming it wasn't too cost prohibitive, replace all the excess, non-window glass with solar panels? Or cover the entire outside with solar panels, windows too, and on the inside where the windows are use OLEDs to show what the window would show by using small cameras in the center of the solar panels. It would eliminate perspective viewing (where I can lean close and look to the sides) but it would be nice. But even if you left the windows in place that many solar panels could possibly reduce the energy costs of an office couldn't it?

But I do like this article's concept. Solar panels built into our roads that power our electrical grid and can have built in electric signs to warn drivers of upcoming construction, speed limits, lane mergers, zombie attacks, and school zones. Also talk about using this on parking lots or sidewalks and cities become giant solar power grids. And it seems like this would have built-in heating elements? So, that would mean an end to salting roads where it snows and gets cold regularly?

If they can do this and make it not cost too much more than pavement in the long run I would like to see this.

Consider me intrigued.

 

[Danoff]

And it seems like this would have built-in heating elements? So, that would mean an end to salting roads where it snows and gets cold regularly?

Well... you're not gonna plow it that's for sure. I'm sitting here wondering what kind of grip you can get on that surface. One tricky aspect of this is that not all roads are the same width. So either the panels get a custom width for each road or they get filled in on the sides with asphalt. Seems like just laying the electrical conduit could be prohibitive. We've already got a grid - this requires a new one. And probably not a replacement, probably an additional grid that pumps electricity when it's sunny and not when it's dark.

Dunno, I think I like people buying their own solar grids on their rooftops better.

 

[FoolKiller]

Well... you're not gonna plow it that's for sure. I'm sitting here wondering what kind of grip you can get on that surface. One tricky aspect of this is that not all roads are the same width. So either the panels get a custom width for each road or they get filled in on the sides with asphalt. Seems like just laying the electrical conduit could be prohibitive. We've already got a grid - this requires a new one. And probably not a replacement, probably an additional grid that pumps electricity when it's sunny and not when it's dark.

I would have to assume that it wouldn't have gotten this far if it is not a proper gripping surface. And being a prototype I am guessing they went with the size they did just to show that it can be done on a road width scale. I would guess that they can make it whatever width they choose within a few inches. And if not, any that have more than an emergency lane's worth of extra width get bike lanes.

As for the grid, locally all our powerlines tend to follow roads, so I kind of imagined this as either tapping into major points along the way or having a large connection near the transformer towers.

I just saw what we have here in this article, so I don't know much about the technology, but if we are looking for clean energy this seemed kind of interesting.

Dunno, I think I like people buying their own solar grids on their rooftops better.

I imagined it as a way to privatize roads without worrying people about tolls on every road. But it is likely naive of me to think that the government would allow that to happen.

But private businesses could use it for parking lots and whatnot in order to help offset their utility costs more than just covering the roof would. I could see malls using the built in lights to help direct traffic during busy times like Christmas without having to pay for part-time employees. Similar things for places like convention centers and arenas/stadiums for large events.

 

[Danoff]

I would have to assume that it wouldn't have gotten this far if it is not a proper gripping surface.

I can totally see it getting this far without having been well tested for gripping surface... especially in the rain.

And being a prototype I am guessing they went with the size they did just to show that it can be done on a road width scale. I would guess that they can make it whatever width they choose within a few inches. And if not, any that have more than an emergency lane's worth of extra width get bike lanes.

Can't necessarily just widen any road without demolishing buildings - especially here in California. I too imagine that they can make it any size. I'm just imagining the difficulties of manufacturing road sections specific to a set of dimensions and then transporting them from the manufacturing plant out to the location where they will be laid down. This is instead of just pouring some asphalt. Seems hugely more complex and expensive.

As for the grid, locally all our powerlines tend to follow roads, so I kind of imagined this as either tapping into major points along the way or having a large connection near the transformer towers.

I doubt that they could tap into the grid along the way. They'd have to have specific input points if they were going to use the existing grid, and getting all of the juice to those points requires a secondary grid either within the panels themselves of beneath them. I'm envisioning the hardware for this being large enough that it requires a separate conduit below the road surface.

But private businesses could use it for parking lots and whatnot in order to help offset their utility costs more than just covering the roof would. I could see malls using the built in lights to help direct traffic during busy times like Christmas without having to pay for part-time employees. Similar things for places like convention centers and arenas/stadiums for large events.

I think it would be far easier (and possibly more desirable) for businesses to just put a raised covering of solar panels over their parking lots. The covering would keep cars and people out of the rain and sun while providing electricity. the posts required to raise the panels off the ground would probably cost less than jackhammering away the existing parking lot.

I'm very skeptical of this concept. Not to say it can't work, but I'm seeing about a million technical problems with it.

 

[niky]

I think it would be far easier (and possibly more desirable) for businesses to just put a raised covering of solar panels over their parking lots. The covering would keep cars and people out of the rain and sun while providing electricity. the posts required to raise the panels off the ground would probably cost less than jackhammering away the existing parking lot.

I'm very skeptical of this concept. Not to say it can't work, but I'm seeing about a million technical problems with it.

More to the point... spending possible billions on converting roadway to energy generating roadway that will need an incredible amount of maintenance... when you could just put solar panels over the road (say, twenty or thirty feet up). Protects the road from the weather, too... and I imagine you could hang streetlights on the underside of solar panels (run by solar power). Not only would you be generating power... protecting roads from erosion and keeping motorists dry and cool... you'd be minimizing light pollution from cities at night, as all the street lights and car lights would be under wraps.

Hmmm... translucent or double-sided panels... to recover energy from streetlights and headlights?

 

[DK]

Chances are that stuff will end up in Japan before the States gets it implemented full-scale.

 

[AGBarry]

One thing, and one thing only is causing the world to heat up, a pretty major one as well....you've guessed it, the sun. The sun goes through its own cycles of hot and cold (relatively speaking of course) and at the moment, we're living in a time when the sun is heating up. While I do agree that toxic pollution harms the environment to some degree, I don't believe that we are the reason for the world heating up, its just more scaremongering like usual. And for everyone discussing alternative energy methods, there IS such thing as free energy, oil companies know about it, quite a few researchers have discovered how to get this energy, but as you know, oil is money, money is control and power to the few. Plastics and oils can be made from 100% biodegradable hemp and grown fairly cheaply, it used to be widely used until the oil barons muscled their way in.

A few links for free energy:
http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/Final%20Secret%209%20Feb%201993/indexold.html
http://www.icehouse.net/john1/foreward.html
http://www.icehouse.net/john1/tesla.html
http://www.rexresearch.com/evgray/1gray.htm

that's just a few, if anyone is interested, read up on some Edwin Gray, Nikola Tesla, John Bedini, Tom Bearden, Peter Lindemann, etc.
We could easily have hi-performance super cars and even race cars that run on electricity, although they wouldn't sound as nice, do you not think that an uber-multi trillion dollar making industry which penetrates into all walks of life is going to concede so easily when anyone makes (has already made a lot of times before) a free energy device that could revolutionise the way we live...of course not, Tesla even knew how to harness free energy before the 20th Century! Rant Over!

 

[Sam48]

We could easily have hi-performance super cars and even race cars that run on electricity, although they wouldn't sound as nice, do you not think that an uber-multi trillion dollar making industry which penetrates into all walks of life is going to concede so easily when anyone makes (has already made a lot of times before) a free energy device that could revolutionise the way we live...of course not, Tesla even knew how to harness free energy before the 20th Century! Rant Over!

Did you just use the words "race car" and "electric" in the same sentence? Sorry, but electric car racing would be boring, in my opinion. As if the Lemans diesels aren't quiet enough. Another problem would be milage. The farthest an electric production car has ever gone on one charge is, I believe, 300 or so miles, and that was by driving conservatively. So an electric race car still has a way to go in terms of developing ways of getting a higher mpv( lets say miles per volt?) rate out of it.

 

[Stevisiov]

I would watch electric car racing, so long as the performance pertains to exciting racing. The sound of just transmission whirring might take a while to get used to, and endurance racing would be inane without the possibility of switching batteries. That's not to say hybrid-ing couldn't fill the gap while the solo-electric technology catches up.

Oh... and I would probably go with miles per Kilowatt.

 

[AGBarry]

Yeah, I do agree with that, racing would be boring with electric cars, too quiet. But what I'm meaning with this free energy talk is that it can be extracted from any point on Earth. Production electric cars suck, they're really slow and just run out of power quickly, definately because they have been built using our widely accepted and apparently deeply flawed version of electromagnetic physics, they're just wasting power (read up on some of those researchers to find out more), the point is, we wouldn't have to pay for any petrol anymore, or electricity bills, etc... These scientists and inventors should have statues and days named after them (I think Tesla may do but not for free energy) but instead they're ignored, suppressed and ultimately unheard of, for a number of reasons but that would be going off topic completely. My opinion is that we could make 97% of the vehicles in the world run off free, limitless energy, that is, regular road vehicles, and keep petrol for the performance and race vehicles, even though electric cars could be incredibly fast if we used this knowledge. There are some people who have allegedly claimed to have run combustion engines from the very air around us using something known as a 'joe cell', even claiming superior performance than using petrol because the process causes implosions within the engine as opposed to explosions, thereby making the engine run cold and have no chance of overheating.

 

[Famine]

These scientists and inventors should have statues and days named after them (I think Tesla may do but not for free energy) but instead they're ignored, suppressed and ultimately unheard of, for a number of reasons but that would be going off topic completely.

I've heard of all of them and their claims of limitless, free, clean energy are, just like the

'joe cell'

complete and total bollocks. And like all claims of limitless, free, clean energy, none have ever stood up to independant scrutiny. A fundamental tenet of all science is remote repeatability - and no-one but these "inventors" have ever been able to make their machines work. In fact Tesla didn't even manage that some of the time.

In his defence, Tesla did a lot of really cool stuff, right before he went completely mental, spending ten years living in a hotel room being visited by an imaginary pigeon.

 

[AGBarry]

I never said the Joe Cell worked, just that people have claimed it has worked, but the fact that these ideas never gain much attention astounds me, Edwin Gray did actually get a motor to work using nothing but four batteries which did not need recharging...
http://keelynet.com/evgray/evgray1.htm
I do understand peoples skepticism, I don't believe these can work without seeing them with my own eyes but I remain hopeful that they do, I need to look more into it, some of these ideas, maybe even the joe cell, could be red herrings to throw people off the potentially good ideas which may actually work, like a turd in the punchbowl so to speak, understanding that oil and energy companies pretty much have us by the balls is one thing to consider before dismissing this idea all together...

 

[Famine]

understanding that oil and energy companies pretty much have us by the balls is one thing to consider before dismissing this idea all together...

Why? It doesn't change the reality of it.

 

[Dotini]

What is at the center of the Earth? Some folks say there is a solid or molten iron ball at the core which is rotating at a differential velocity to the rest of the Earth, possibly thus creating a dynamo and causing Earth's powerful magnetic fields. Magnetic fields are sometimes related to electric currents. I have also heard it said that there is an atomic reaction taking place at Earth's core. They cite the changing ratios of Helium isotopes as evidence of this. Either way, there is a lot of natural energy loose in the environment.

At the surface, and beginning at the troposphere, stratosphere, ionosphere or even magnetosphere, there are thousands of powerful lightning strokes hitting Earth every hour. Lighting, not completely understood or explained, is still under study by scientists. Lightning is strongly associated with tornadoes, hurricanes, volcanoes and earthquakes. A lot of energy at work here. Ben Franklin experimented with lightning as well as with republics.

In the spirit of independence which motivated Franklin to experiment with electricity and freedom, people ought to be encouraged to think about and investigate nature in order to free ourselves from costly energy dependencies as well as commercial and political exploitation, don't you think?

Respectfully submitted,
Dotini

 

[Famine]

What is at the center of the Earth?

A ball of iron and nickel the size of Mars.

Some folks say there is a solid or molten iron ball at the core which is rotating at a differential velocity to the rest of the Earth, possibly thus creating a dynamo and causing Earth's powerful magnetic fields.

"Rotating" is a bit of a misnomer. It implies that it's spinning in one direction. Moving, yes. Rotating... not so much.

Magnetic fields are sometimes related to electric currents.

They're always related to electric currents.

I have also heard it said that there is an atomic reaction taking place at Earth's core. They cite the changing ratios of Helium isotopes as evidence of this.

Not hot enough. Not by a long, long, long way.

Fissionable materials decay by fission all the time, even forming natural nuclear reactors (Oklo mines), though there's nothing at the Earth's core which is fissionable. Fusion reactions - such as ones resulting in helium isotopes - require massive amounts of heat and pressure, and a confinement mechanism like a colossal gravitational or magnetic field. The Earth's core doesn't reach anywhere near the requirements for any of those criteria - ballpark for fusion is 5m Celsius (Core: 5,500 Celsius) - even if there was any fuel for the reaction, which there isn't.

Either way, there is a lot of natural energy loose in the environment.

And all of it comes from the one thing in the Solar System that actually does undergo nuclear fusion reactions.

At the surface, and beginning at the troposphere, stratosphere, ionosphere or even magnetosphere, there are thousands of powerful lightning strokes hitting Earth every hour. Lightning, not completely understood or explained, is still under study by scientists.

What about it is not understood or explained?

Lightning is strongly associated with tornadoes, hurricanes, volcanoes and earthquakes.

Or indeed anything involving lots of ions moving past each other.

Though... earthquakes? That's the first I've heard of it.

A lot of energy at work here. Ben Franklin experimented with lightning as well as with republics.

In the spirit of independence which motivated Franklin to experiment with electricity and freedom, people ought to be encouraged to think about and investigate nature in order to free ourselves from costly energy dependencies as well as commercial and political exploitation, don't you think?

People ought to be encourage to think and investigate for themselves anyway. Perceived subjugation by evil corporations isn't really relevant to the pioneer spirit.

 

[Dotini]

"Rotating" is a bit of a misnomer. It implies that it's spinning in one direction. Moving, yes. Rotating... not so much.

They're always related to electric currents.

Not hot enough. Not by a long, long, long way.

Fissionable materials decay by fission all the time, even forming natural nuclear reactors (Oklo mines), though there's nothing at the Earth's core which is fissionable. Fusion reactions - such as ones resulting in helium isotopes - require massive amounts of heat and pressure, and a confinement mechanism like a colossal gravitational or magnetic field. The Earth's core doesn't reach anywhere near the requirements for any of those criteria - ballpark for fusion is 5m Celsius (Core: 5,500 Celsius) - even if there was any fuel for the reaction, which there isn't.

And all of it comes from the one thing in the Solar System that actually does undergo nuclear fusion reactions.

What about it is not understood or explained?

Or indeed anything involving lots of ions moving past each other.

Though... earthquakes? That's the first I've heard of it.

People ought to be encourage to think and investigate for themselves anyway. Perceived subjugation by evil corporations isn't really relevant to the pioneer spirit.

Why do Helium isotopes in Earthly mines change ratio over time?
Can the Sun's putative fusion reactions cause magnetic fields and the corona? Why is the surface of the Sun only 5000 K while the corona is in the millions K?

If there are always electric currents where you find magnetic fields, then describe the electric behavior of the Sun, and explain how electric currents in Earth's atmosphere and crust affect geology, climate and how they can be tapped as an energy source.

Don't tell Touring Mars! He doesn't want to believe the Sun's variable activity influences Earth. It's all about the politics of global warming and policy/funding of the Earthly science establishment.

How is the Earth's magnetic field generated if not by dynamo action?

If everything about lightning is known, then what a scandalous waste for scientists and engineers to be studying it on the public dime!

Yes, displays of lightning (including ball lightning,"earthlights" and auroral effects), as well as dramatic coloration of the sky are known to precede earthquakes.

In disinterested curiosity,
Dotini

 

[Famine]

Why do Helium isotopes in Earthly mines change ratio over time?

Because helium isotopes decay by beta emission/capture into Helium 4. There's only two stable helium isotopes - helium 4 (99.99986%) and helium 3 (0.0001%).

Can the Sun's putative fusion reactions cause magnetic fields and the corona? Why is the surface of the Sun only 5000 K while the corona is in the millions K?

There's nothing "putative" about the Sun's fusion reactions. Its magnetic field is caused by the motion of plasma within its body - not the corona. The corona increases temperature with altitude as the helium plasma is ionised, reducing the cooling effect of plasma.

If there are always electric currents where you find magnetic fields, then describe the electric behavior of the Sun, and explain how electric currents in Earth's atmosphere and crust affect geology, climate and how they can be tapped as an energy source.

I don't understand the question. You cannot separate electricity and magnetism - hence the term "electromagnetism". I don't see how this pertains to the Sun, geology or power sources.

Don't tell Touring Mars! He doesn't want to believe the Sun's variable activity influences Earth. It's all about the politics of global warming and policy/funding of the Earthly science establishment.

Please do not misrepresent people in this manner. Mars has clearly stated several times that the Sun does influence the Earth's temperature (it's our primary source of energy - of course it does), but he does not ascribe to the theory that it is the sole influence on the Earth's temperature.

You know this as well as I do and to state otherwise is unfair and unacceptable.

How is the Earth's magnetic field generated if not by dynamo action?

Who said it isn't?

If everything about lightning is known, then what a scandalous waste for scientists and engineers to be studying it on the public dime!

I didn't say everything about lightning is known. I asked what is not known.

Yes, displays of lightning (including ball lightning,"earthlights" and auroral effects), as well as dramatic coloration of the sky are known to precede earthquakes.

I am unfamiliar with this phenomenon, particular as plate tectonics play no role in atmospheric conditions or the Earth's magnetosphere (which causes aurorae).