Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Rods2 on 08 September 2013, 13:32:24
-
In 2007 climate change scientists as reported by the BBC was that by the summer of 2013 that their computer models showed that all of the Arctic ice would have melted for the first time in 1.6 million years.
So how close were they? :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[
Well the amount of ice has certainly changed from 2012 which had a warmer than average Arctic summer, with more ice melting than normal. But this year it has been much colder with almost 1 million square miles more ice and the Northwest Passage totally blocked with pack ice all summer. ::) ::) ::) ::)
Independent climatologists with their computer modelling are claiming that we are at the start of at least a 15 year cold period like we had from 1960 to 1975, when there was talk of another ice age. In all since the last very cold period that ended in 1880, global temperatures have risen by just 0.8degC.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html)
I am looking forward to the next major IPCC report in October to see how much they acknowledge that the climate has got it all wrong where it is not following their computer modelling. :o :o :o :o
This is not to say I'm burying my head in the sand over the pending energy crisis, where we are beggining to see demand outstipping supply for oil and gas. Yes, we need to do something about this and the answer is not expensive, unreliable windmills but cheap Thorium nuclear power. What many countries are working on at the moment is being able to mass produce these at much lower prices than the current nuclear power stations where each nuclear power station is essentially an individual bespoke design. There are enough proven Thorium reserves to provide all of the world's power needs for the next 1000 years. :y :y :y :y
-
You will certainly be on old Nick's christmas card list this year, Mr Rods. ;) ::) ::) ::)
-
"The volume of sea ice in the Arctic hit a new low this past winter, according to observations from the European Space Agency's (Esa) Cryosat mission."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23964372 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23964372)
-
"The volume of sea ice in the Arctic hit a new low this past winter, according to observations from the European Space Agency's (Esa) Cryosat mission."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23964372 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23964372)
Which is precisely what Rods third paragraph says ::)
Better fix the thermostat and heater matrix before November if I want to stay warm... :-\
-
I saw on the news this morning that the wolly mamouth became extinct due to global warming.
Those pesky cavemen with their bloody Landrovers.....
-
I saw on the news this morning that the wolly mamouth became extinct due to global warming.
Those pesky cavemen with their bloody Landrovers.....
+1 ;D
must have been using real leaded petrol in them. :y
-
"The volume of sea ice in the Arctic hit a new low this past winter, according to observations from the European Space Agency's (Esa) Cryosat mission."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23964372 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23964372)
Which is precisely what Rods third paragraph says ::)
gets out highlighter pen... ::) ::)
Well the amount of ice has certainly changed from 2012 which had a warmer than average Arctic summer, with more ice melting than normal. But this year it has been much colder with almost 1 million square miles more ice and the Northwest Passage totally blocked with pack ice all summer. ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
The Polar Bears will be pleased! 8)
-
Who gives a toss? It's completely out of our (ordinary folk) hands. Governments will decide what's best according to their own political agenda and, of course, for tax-raising. Until we find a new source of power, which has to be cheap and plentiful, they will tinker with all sorts of madcap ideas. Men in Brussels are, at this very moment, plotting how to screw you in order to save you from yourself. ;D
-
And all these stupid, pathetic windmills are killing off the Golden Eagles now, so they have just discovered.
No shit, Sherlock. I'm just the stupid kid from the local comprehensive, but even I could see that coming....
-
It seems that windows kill up to 100,000 times more birds than wind turbines. http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm)
About 1,000 wind turbines output the same as 1 Fukushima, seems like a good deal to me.
-
It seems that windows kill up to 100,000 times more birds than wind turbines. http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm)
About 1,000 wind turbines output the same as 1 Fukushima, seems like a good deal to me.
1 Fukushima is far better than 10,000,000 pouncy windmills.
-
It seems that windows kill up to 100,000 times more birds than wind turbines. http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm)
About 1,000 wind turbines output the same as 1 Fukushima, seems like a good deal to me.
False statistic. There are billions more windows than wind turbines. ::)
-
The past winter was 2012 ::) and aboot the only detail not highlighted ;D
While were at it Nickbat, it isn't a false statistic, it just doesn't help the argument ::)
I would have credited eagles with being brighter than that though :-\
-
The past winter was 2012 ::) and aboot the only detail not highlighted ;D
While were at it Nickbat, it isn't a false statistic, it just doesn't help the argument ::)
I would have credited eagles with being brighter than that though :-\
I meant false comparison (not like-for-like). My bad. :-[
-
If Windows are killing thousand of birds, I'm going to use Linux from now on :o
-
If Windows are killing thousand of birds, I'm going to use Linux from now on :o
You forgot your coat
-
I don't need my coat, with this Global warming .
-
The past winter was 2012 ::) and aboot the only detail not highlighted ;D
While were at it Nickbat, it isn't a false statistic, it just doesn't help the argument ::)
I would have credited eagles with being brighter than that though :-\
I meant false comparison (not like-for-like). My bad. :-[
How about "Collisions with wind turbines account for about 0.1% of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year" then (from my link (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm))?
-
The problem with wind turbines is that they are not a reliable constant source of power so you have to have constant backup as Germany have found to their cost with grid instability. They are building 6 new coal fired power stations after an ultimatum from industry, keep the power on and the machines turning or we will relocate to where they will, with Poland already the destination of choice to lower costs. In the UK grid local stability has got so bad that they are implementing as fast as possible backup diesel generators as vast expense to us the customer. The last and current governments high price energy is doing immense damage to this country with fuel poverty and industry relocating to cheaper cost bases.
Australia have just voted with their feet with their Conservative party winning the election on the pledge of scrapping their carbon tax and tightening immigration policy. There is increasing debate and pressure in this country for the amending or scrapping the climate change law.
There is going to be an increasing energy gap as oil and gas production falls. The only credible available technology to fill the energy gap is nuclear and preferably Thorium nuclear as it is much safer and produces far safer nuclear waste, with Cesium 137 the biggest byproduct which has a half life of 30 years.
-
The problem with wind turbines is that they are not a reliable source of power
Hoiw reliable is this?
(http://www.jonathanfun.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Japan-tsunamiJapan-Earthquake-No.-1-reactor-of-the-first-nuclear-power-plant-in-Fukushima-exploded-764298.jpg)
(http://www.popularresistance.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/2fukushima.jpg)
-
The only credible available technology to fill the energy gap is nuclear and preferably Thorium nuclear as it is much safer and produces far safer nuclear waste, with Cesium 137 the biggest byproduct which has a half life of 30 years.
Just looked this up.
1) Caesium 137 "is among the most problematic of the short-to-medium-lifetime fission products because it easily moves and spreads in nature due to the high water solubility of caesium's most common chemical compounds, which are salts."
2) "Thorium cannot in itself power a reactor; unlike natural uranium, it does not contain enough fissile material to initiate a nuclear chain reaction. As a result it must first be bombarded with neutrons to produce the highly radioactive isotope uranium-233 – 'so these are really U-233 reactors,' says Karamoskos.This isotope is more hazardous than the U-235 used in conventional reactors, he adds, because it produces U-232 as a side effect (half life: 160,000 years), on top of familiar fission by-products such as technetium-99 (half life: up to 300,000 years) and iodine-129 (half life: 15.7 million years).Add in actinides such as protactinium-231 (half life: 33,000 years) and it soon becomes apparent that thorium's superficial cleanliness will still depend on digging some pretty deep holes to bury the highly radioactive waste.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/jun/23/thorium-nuclear-uranium (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/jun/23/thorium-nuclear-uranium)
15.7 million years! That's just for half of it to disappear. What do you reckon the total salary bill for 3 night watchmen working in shifts for 30 million years is? Plus 3 dogs, some guns and barbed wire. My guess is £40 trillion at todays prices. Which is about 30 times the entire national debt.
-
Hoiw reliable is this?
(http://www.jonathanfun.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Japan-tsunamiJapan-Earthquake-No.-1-reactor-of-the-first-nuclear-power-plant-in-Fukushima-exploded-764298.jpg)
Far more reliable than anything based on wind. As with wind, you need a backup capable of delivering 100% capacity. Same with non-storage based Hydro, although you'd have more warning to be able to fire up alternatives. Storage based hydro is on viable for short term peaks (few hours).
Nuclear, if looked after correctly, is pretty safe now. Take the disaster you mentioned - the station was hit by an earthquake double the intensity it was designed to withstand, and it shut down properly. It was then hit with a wave 3 times the size it's defences where designed to withstand, knocking out its generators, but still the plant remained safe running on its batteries, as designed. It was the poor response afterwards - getting an emergency system brought in to recharge the flattening batteries - where the problem lay. The first set they brought in were incompatible. All the technical safety systems worked exactly as they should have done, despite never being designed for this level of natural disaster.
As per the usual hyped up media 'dangle berries', the quoted picture is of a (expected) hydrogen explosion, rather than the nuclear meltdown armageddon that was portrayed.
As to the aftermath, far more were killed in the natural disaster than the resultant leak. Thats a perspective that keeps getting lost.
Yes, the human element did cock it up in this instance, but nuclear remains safe, reasonably efficient, and ultimately reliable. We just need our politicians to grow some, as the current idea of renewables available to the UK are impractical and wasteful.
-
1. it's always windy somewhere.
2. if an act of nature can cause that damage what would an act of terrorism do?
-
compared to nature, terrorists are puny.
seriously...... "act of nature"
that covers everything from a leaf falling off a tree, to our sun going supernova.
the energy release in even a relatively minor earthquake is orders of magnitude larger than anything man made....
-
twin towers were earthquake resistant
-
but not earthquake proof.
you show me any man made device capable of moving several hundred square miles of the earths crust in a few seconds, not to mention a few billion litres of seawater....
nothing mankind has ever made is anything like the same scale..... if you want proof, look up seismological comparisons of H bomb tests vs real earthquakes.... the US Geo seismograph network was put in place to listen for underground nuke testing in the USSR.
-
I think you miss my point - twin towers are not there anymore and there was no earthquake.
-
Windmills are going to be less earthquake and terrorist resistant than a nuclear power plant
-
Wind power has no future, they just don't generate the constant power we need. Driven through France/Belgium ect, massive Turbines along the A16/E40, driven past plenty of times with them not moving ::)
Nuke power is the most cost effective power and reliable, it's well proven constant power.
-
TB is starting to sound like Nickbat.Who would have thought it. :D ;D
-
but not earthquake proof.
you show me any man made device capable of moving several hundred square miles of the earths crust in a few seconds, not to mention a few billion litres of seawater....
.......
Isn't metrication fantastic. They started us on metric units in about 1970 and here we are 40 odd years later and we're still using both! I even heard MarksDTM talking inches ..... and he says that we live in a completely metric world! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I think you miss my point - twin towers are not there anymore and there was no earthquake.
Earthquakes happen within the ground, which is where the foundations for the WTC (and most every other building) are/were ::) next to no leverage...
They simply weren't designed to withstand the catastrophic effects of being struck by neither 100+ton airliners travelling at speed, nor the ensuing infernos :y a shedload of leverage, especially given the heights at which they were struck...
Besides, everyone Cem knows that they were demolished by the CIA and NSA in order to invoke the Patriot Act and make GWB look less stoopid :-X
-
The past winter was 2012 ::) and aboot the only detail not highlighted ;D
While were at it Nickbat, it isn't a false statistic, it just doesn't help the argument ::)
I would have credited eagles with being brighter than that though :-\
I meant false comparison (not like-for-like). My bad. :-[
How about "Collisions with wind turbines account for about 0.1% of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year" then (from my link (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm))?
What about exploding bats? ;)
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/wildlife/article3868948.ece (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/wildlife/article3868948.ece)
-
The past winter was 2012 ::) and aboot the only detail not highlighted ;D
While were at it Nickbat, it isn't a false statistic, it just doesn't help the argument ::)
I would have credited eagles with being brighter than that though :-\
I meant false comparison (not like-for-like). My bad. :-[
How about "Collisions with wind turbines account for about 0.1% of all "unnatural" bird deaths in the United States each year" then (from my link (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm))?
What about exploding bats? ;)
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/wildlife/article3868948.ece (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/wildlife/article3868948.ece)
Here you go, we can all read this one! ::) ;)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/renewableenergy/10307646/Wind-turbines-may-be-killing-bats-by-exploding-their-lungs.html
-
Thanks, Tiggs.
Didn't know that story was available without a paywall. :y :y
-
Coal fired power stations have killed and injured far more people in the lifetime of nuclear power than all nuclear accidents to date have. They have also blighted many more lives than nuclear power has. This is through coal mining accidents and pollution, especially the release into the air of radioactive particles from coal fired power stations, other nasty chemicals damaging and polluting crops around and downwind of the power station, not to mention producing acid rain that is a major problem in Europe, but the greens seems to be quite happy with this, hence six new ones being built in Germany.
Actinides and other nuclear waste are in much smaller quantities in a Thorium reactor compared to a Uranium. The fact that you have to have a neutron generator makes the shutting down of a Thorium reactor much faster, so you don't get core meltdown plus if molten sodium is used as the conductor you can make it cycle without the use of pumps. These are some of the inherent advantages.
As the energy gap starts to widen from 2015-2020 onwards, then there is no other practical option than nuclear. If people don't want to live in a 21st century industrialised, nuclear powered society, like I do, I don't have problem with that and would suggest that they and like minded people are encouraged to set up communes in low population areas like Greenland, Siberia or the Australian outback and create their utopia with stone age communities as without energy and industry you have to basically go back to hunter gathering with very limited agriculture. Medicine will consist of herbal remedies and the local witch doctor. Using human and animal power for farming means that for most people it is a fulltime occupation, where if they are lucky in a bad year they may be able to grow enough food for themselves and their families and in a good year they may have a small surplus which is why population growth was very slow and populations low before the industrial revolution.
All successful civilizations over 1000's of years have used capitalism and energy from wood, coal, oil, gas, limited hydroelectric and nuclear to advance their societies, it has stood the test of time, whereas all other systems have been failures. IMO relying on intermittent expensive renewable energy is a recipe for a society to fail.