From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of spudboy...@aol.com
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 5:14 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Global warming silliness
>>To perform a fix on the climate, and I am giving the IPCC supporters the
benefit of the doubt, we must have abundant clean sources at the ready. We
need terawatts of clean, because gigawatts are insufficient. Some can be
replaced by higher efficiency homes and devices, and cars-but this will only
takes us so far. Think terawatts, not negawatts, and what tech we are going
to use to replace the dirty? Faster please.
You ignore the potential easily realizable savings that can be achieved by
retro-fitting our existing buildings and homes. Thiis is truly the low
hanging fruit and the scale of potential on-going energy savings is huge.
For example
Read report:
http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/electricpowernaturalgas/US_energy_effi
ciency/
The global consulting firm estimates that $520 billion in investments would
reduce U.S. non-transportation energy usage by 9.1 quadrillion BTUs by 2020
- roughly 23 percent of projected demand. As a result, the U.S. economy
would save more than $1.2 trillion and avoid the release of some 1.1
gigatons of annual greenhouse gases, an amount equal to replacing 1,000
conventional 500-megawatt coal-fired power plants with renewable energy.
Or the comparison given in the report "The reduction in energy use would
also result in the abatement of 1.1 gigatons of greenhouse-gas emissions
annually-the equivalent of taking the entire US fleet of passenger vehicles
and light trucks off the roads."
Achieving this kind of reduction in producing carbon dioxide and in annual
fossil energy consumption is not nibbling at the problem around the edges -
this represents the single largest and most important & immediate thing we
can do to change the picture on the ground. And is something that will need
to be done anyway. Doing this will increase the energy security (and
military and economic security as well) of the US by making our country much
leaner and able to prosper and live in comfort on far less energy - an
carbon footprint impact the equivalent of removing the entire fleet of cars
and light truck from the nation's roads and highways. You cannot get more
major impact than that.
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>
To: everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Nov 14, 2013 7:23 pm
Subject: Re: Global warming silliness
On 11/14/2013 4:20 AM, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
> Yes.
>
> I proposed myself not to argue against sectarian apocalypticists because
that
is a waste
> of time, but honoring those of you that are not seduced by the
> end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it movement, I will say something:
Alas, some people just can't be relied on.
>
> Climatic models are bullshit. if you look at how they adjust parameters
looking at the
> climategate mails you will have no doubt. Starting from that funny way for
manufacturing
> models, it is no surprise that they predict nothing as Telmo said.
First, the general circulation model developed at East Anglia is only one of
a
dozen or
more and they all predict increasing temperature - including the pencil and
paper
calculation of Arhennius. In fact it's trivially easy to see that increased
CO2
will
raise the earth's temperature. CO2 absorbs light energy in infrared bands
that
are
otherwise transparent. Without CO2 the planet would be too cold for human
habitation (as
already realized by Fourier). The difficulty in making accurate predictions
of
how much
the CO2 we're adding will raise temperatures comes from accounting for the
positive
feedback effect of water vapor. Most models assume the world average
relative
humidity
will stay the same. Some try to model ocean circulation from deep to
shallow
and assume
water vapor pressure stays in equilibrium with the ocean surface. But these
don't make
any difference to the long term conclusion.
> There is a model of the earth nucleus. It is very good. Why? Because it
behaves like
> the real nucleus. It invert polarity every 14000 years I believe, dont
want to
fire up
> the wikipedia to get the real digits. That is why it is a good model.
Just like climate models parameter values have been inferred by matching
past
data.
>
> What would be a good test of a climatic model?. We know that at the
glacial
eras started
> when North and South America united by the istmus of Panama closed the
free
water
> movement between the atlantic and pacific. That changed the global water
flow
regimes
> and resulted in the two polar ice caps.
>
> It is easy to configure the continents in the climate models and see what
happens in
> each configuration of the american continents. Why they dont try it?.
Because
they know
> that their models are lacking decades of research to get accurate enough
for
the
> simplest long term prediction.
More obfuscation. If more solar energy is retained by the atmosphere the
planet
will get
hotter until it can radiate as much as received. Moving continents around
can
only affect
the local distribution. This is the same tactic as Creationists who point to
the
clotting
sequence or the flagellum and declare, "Let's see evolution explain THAT."
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
