Well that can’t be good.
https://twitter.com/extremetemps/sta...85331539820545
It’s happening folks, it’s really happening.
Printable View
Well that can’t be good.
https://twitter.com/extremetemps/sta...85331539820545
It’s happening folks, it’s really happening.
This is interesting. Almost all of the temperature spike this year can be attributed to a decrease in sulfur dioxide from implementing cleaner shipping fuels. Apparently we have been shielding ourselves from the true effects of climate change by just using other pollutants.
https://twitter.com/hankgreen/status...169930241?s=20
So start pumping out the SO2 until we get more CO2 capture plants online?Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermoon
That was actually proposed earlier in the thread. SO2 is acid rain. Perfect example of our dilemma--dealing with climate change without making other things worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by From_the_NEK
Turns out, unintended consequences are consequential.
I'm sure a rake is up to the task. I mean, after all, rakes solved the forest fire problem.
Bigger maybe, but also slower and mushier due to "added ingredients".
The only post you should be making in this thread is to apologize for being so wildly wrong and denying the reality that was right in front of your face.Quote:
Originally Posted by SB
How's that "drill baby drill" working out for Alaska?
https://abcnews.go.com/US/glacial-br...y?id=102056193
Some good newsQuote:
U.S. lab says it repeated fusion energy feat — with higher yield
By Ben Brasch
,
August 6, 2023 at 8:57 p.m. EDT
A group of U.S. scientists say they have repeated their landmark energy feat — a nuclear fusion reaction that produces more energy than is put into it. But this time, they say the experiment produced an even higher energy yield than one in December that got international attention for making a major step forward toward the long elusive goal of producing energy through fusion.
10 steps you can take to lower your carbon footprint
This second achievement by researchers at the federal Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California is another crucial step — albeit in a journey that may still take decades to complete — in the quest for an unlimited source of cheap and clean power. The successful effort was initially reported by the Financial Times on Sunday.
“We have continued to perform experiments to study this exciting new scientific regime. In an experiment conducted on July 30, we repeated ignition at (the National Ignition Facility),” Paul Rhien, a spokesman for the federal laboratory, said in a emailed statement. “Analysis of those results is underway, but we can confirm the experiment produced a higher yield than the December test.”
Rhien said the lab “won’t be discussing further details” of the July experiment until after more analysis. But the team plans to “share the results at scientific conferences and peer-reviewed publications as part of our normal process for communicating scientific results.”
What you need to know about the U.S. fusion energy breakthrough
Right now, nuclear power plants use fission, which creates energy by splitting atoms — the science at the center of the current blockbuster “Oppenheimer.” While nuclear power produces bountiful clean energy, it has long drawn concerns over safety, though it is getting renewed attention amid an international push to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and slow global warming.
Fusion, on the other hand, creates energy by merging atoms together. It’s long been a dream because it could create limitless clean energy without the radioactive byproducts of nuclear power or the risk of meltdown. Plus, the fuel to make fusion happen is simply heavy hydrogen atoms, which can be found in something that Earth has in abundance: seawater. No mining of uranium is required.
Researchers have produced fusion reactions before, but it has taken more energy to cause the reaction than they could get back. The key thing about these last two experiments is that they get more energy back than they put in to create the reaction. That efficiency has been the elusive holy grail of fusion research.
(Still, it is limited in the sense that they are considering the amount of energy required to power lasers that were used to smush the hydrogen atoms together — not the power that’s necessary to make the whole project work.)
The White House praised the work at the time of the first breakthrough in December.
“This is such a wonderful example of a possibility realized, a scientific milestone achieved, and a road ahead to the possibilities for clean energy,” Arati Prabhakar, the White House science adviser, said during a news conference.
U.S. announces milestone on fusion energy, sparking hopes for clean power
Still, scientists are far away from using the energy produced by fusion.
Researchers can only create a fusion reaction about once a day because they have to let the lasers cool and replace the fuel target. But a commercially viable fusion plant would need to be able to do it several times per second, Dennis Whyte, director of the Plasma Science and Fusion Center at MIT, previously told The Washington Post.
Has Project 2025 been mentioned yet? It’s the conservatives attempt
to repeal many non-oil/gas regulations and primarily only support the fossil fuel industry if they prevail in the next presidential election
Fusion and ambient temp/pressure superconductivty...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunion 2020
COME ON, SCIENCE!!
I'm gonna need a much bigger face and palm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peruvian
My friend owned a condo in the brown building, and I know the school teacher that lived in the house that is in the river. I lived in that city for six years. That event, know as a jøkulhlaup, happened a few times in the short six years I lived there. Some years bigger than others. This phenomenon is not unique to Juneau, and happens all over the glaciated world. The Mendenhall has been in retreat since the 1700s, and now is at a point that it is more prone to these events.Quote:
Originally Posted by SumJongGuy
https://youtu.be/zLCJYQoPf50
You should have listened when I said to be skeptical about the ambient superconductivity. This does not look like a state of the art lab.Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
Attachment 466830
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...fice#xj4y7vzkg
https://media.giphy.com/media/YWy8pv...tyY5/giphy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by ghosthop
Yes, here's the rate of decline since the 1700s..Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
https://www.researchgate.net/profile...aximum-and.png
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...lacier_run-off
A teacher owned that house? Wow, Alaska must pay teachers well!Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
I don't know what their spouse did for a living, but all the housing in Juneau is super $$.Quote:
Originally Posted by The AD
Point is, these glacial events, in particular, the Mendenhall event, is something those of us who lived there, have seen before. It's not a one off.Quote:
Originally Posted by SumJongGuy
Kinda begs the question why people would build in a place threatened by a "regular" disaster such as that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
Yeah, I agree with this sentiment, Trackhead. The media likes to portray everything that happens in the natural world right now as a product of climate change, and the reality is significantly more nuanced. Climate change is a very really threat, but it's not doing anyone any favors to overhype it. That's just more potential ammo for the deniers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead
It always blows my mind that people somehow think we can engineer our way out of this. Even if we discovered a magic tech now, it could not be scaled up in time to avoid the worst impacts. Climate change has momentum and feed back loops that cannot be reversed quickly (think permafrost carbon sequestration and likely release). Maybe if humans somehow decide climate change is a priority then maybe we could see some reversal in a few generations. By that time I would expect to see significant collapses of many of the earth's key ecosystems, a significant drop in bio-diversity as well as mass human migration to avoid famine, war, drought, and adverse heat impacts (just starting to happen now).
I believe that the only real way to have a significant impact within my life time, say 30 years, is for a huge sudden change in the 1 st world's standard of living, mobility, and diet as well as total governmental and corporate buy in. None of those is likely to happen until it is too late. Hell, 1/2 of America still thinks the orange, fascist, buffoon would be a good leader, we're fucking doomed. Enjoy it now (burgers, big trucks, exotic surf safaris, and European vacations) for we will be one of last generations to enjoy it for a while.
Damn Ikoners....Quote:
Originally Posted by Redsmurfer
No doubt the glacier is in rapid retreat. In the short time we lived there it was obvious year over year, alarming and sad. But, these events occur all over Alaska and elsewhere. Right now the conditions on the Mendenhall are more prone to it due to the retreat of an adjacent smaller glacier creating a pooling effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by The AD
But yeah, every natural "disaster" these days is always attributable to global warming events, even when some are not. Watch someone predictably put words in my mouth.........
This almost deserves its own thread. I was just reading last week about 1816
The year without a summer they call it.
reports are of frost in New England and Europe in June. Massive crop loss etc.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1257_Samalas_eruption
I’m too old not to have known about this.
Sooooo. Let’s get some volcanic action to get the skiing going. It’s too hot this summer.
You mean like the entire state of Florida?Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
Yeah, I still see people stating things like:Quote:
Originally Posted by Redsmurfer
“this summer is the coldest in _____ city, what the hell is the media talking about? Hottest July on record?’ It’s all fear mongering and all a big nothing.”
“They’ve been saying that for years. Back in the 2000s, they said we’d be burned up by now”
Fucking mind boggling how small people’s world view is. We are so fucked and it’s so depressing.
That's *exactly* what I mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by altacoup
Or, maybe it's both the media jumping on the alarmist hype.. AND things are getting worse faster than most of us realistically expected and we're FUCKED. It could be both..
Well as you stated there’s zero chance of people regressing in their wants. And those not in the 1st world are also looking to improve their lot. So advancing tech is pretty much our only way out. Wind and solar are the cheapest form of electricity currently on the market, but utilities feel they need to continue to use their current generation methods to pay them off. We went from the wright brothers to super sonic flight in 50 years. How? Massive government investment. The climate change issue is largely political and has been since scientists started to alert the world,to the issue. Livermore just repeated it’s fusion test and the output was greater than before. Of course it was minimal energy output, but remember the Wright brothers flew a few hundred yards. There’s way to many people out there throwing up there hands because the solutions aren’t perfect. It’s going to take everything on the table to solve the issue (renewables, nuclear, lifestyle changes, and new technologies) but the key is we need to invest on a governmental scale. Private business is too short sighted to pull the load. And if we could just get the boomers out of the way of progress. A generation handed the golden ticket that has continuously voted to fuck everything up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redsmurfer
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
You mean the planet Earth?Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
These people would sacrifice the future of their children for the pleasure of owning the libs.
https://wapo.st/3rZA1iW
Maybe they'd prefer oil rigs? In any case, opposition will soon wash away, along with the beach and the houses.
That flood disaster in Juneau. Development was probably allowed because it was outside the boundaries of the FEMA-established floodplain. I don’t know if the borough has regs in-place for protecting those developed properties from erosion due to that kind of event.
I guess that's "The Situation" for renewables..
There's a sharp curve downriver of this incident that looks like trouble coming for homeowners. I think it's up to the homeowner, some have mitigation, others do not.Quote:
Originally Posted by bodywhomper
Yeah. I’ve read/seen there’s a mild ox bow configuration to the river there. Good point about whether it’s homeowner responsibility or municipal code. Big riprap ain’t cheap. Sucks to lose part of your property or your home. It’d be interesting to understand what that river would do in absence of home and back protections in that area. The videos of the larger trees falling into the river is interesting. Curious of their age, 50-70 years?Quote:
Originally Posted by Trackhead