Climate Change

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

On PBS last night they showed an accelerator the size of a convention center being used to scan an old Roman scroll too fragile to unroll, and then using AI to try to decipher it. It required teams of AI researchers around the world. Finally they were able to read one word. Now I don't feel so guilty about driving a car.

I'm sure the researchers thought they were performing a service for humanity--after all the scroll may or may not have belonged to Julius Caesar's father in law. And I'm sure many of them look down their noses at people driving full sized pickups to work.

---

I have been following this effort for some time now...

I'm not suggesting whether unfurling those old texts is relevant to solving our current environmental circumstances, it won't.

But, there are many well documented writings from the era that are lost...didn't make it through the dark ages, (watch "name of the rose" for context - monks library engulfed in flames, etc..) or read "swerve" which describes dark-ages bibliophiles who rescued last copies of ancient texts...

I, for one, look forward to reading what those "smart folks" from the way way back machine thought about authoritarian rulers, or what wines they preferred, etc etc. We know they were written down, and the herculaneum scrolls very very likely include some of those "lost" texts.....just currently burnt to a crisp, literally ashes, but contain enough ink and pigment for scanners to detect and maybe the AI monster we created in this age can help us to decipher...

also, as an aside the Getty museum in la la land is basically a reproduction of the library in Herculaneum(buried under mt vesuvius eruption) where they discovered all the burnt texts....neat

I haven't watched that PBS coverage OG, but i'Il track it down!

https://www.pbs.org/video/unscrollin...ry-1708982628/

Oh I'm sure there is interesting information to be gathered but the enormous energy expenditure hardly seems worth it. At least they didn't pay for the whole thing with crypto.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

https://www.pbs.org/video/unscrollin...ry-1708982628/

Oh I'm sure there is interesting information to be gathered but the enormous energy expenditure hardly seems worth it. At least they didn't pay for the whole thing with crypto.

---

lol, and thanks for the link!!

I live in Upstate NY. I took kitchen scraps out to the compost heap. The compost heap was swarming with bees. Shits fucked up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnF

I live in Upstate NY. I took kitchen scraps out to the compost heap. The compost heap was swarming with bees. Shits fucked up.

---

are there buds on the trees? .... grew up in rochester...

Not yet, but I wonder if we will have a very early spring. Is 70f today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnF

Not yet, but I wonder if we will have a very early spring. Is 70f today.

---

I live not so far north. My lilac bush has green buds popping out, and the maple trees have their buds ready to pop. Wondering if these warm cycles followed by a blast of sub-zero temps for 24-48 hours will kill everything or not.

Shit is definitely fucked, that's for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulster2626

I live not so far north. My lilac bush has green buds popping out, and the maple trees have their buds ready to pop. Wondering if these warm cycles followed by a blast of sub-zero temps for 24-48 hours will kill everything or not.

Shit is definitely fucked, that's for sure.

---

not sure if a hard frost will kill those buds...got me thinking of the lilac fest in rochester though..."party in the park"

2 part article

(2019)
https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2019/11/...st-Face-Facts/

Attachment 490351

absurdity of entirely man-made skiing in saudi arabia greenwashed as sustainable development
https://archinect.com/firms/project/...neom/150420164

Hopefully they will pay for it with bitcoin and make it extra sustainable. Might singlehandedly fix climate change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ::: :::

Attachment 490351

absurdity of entirely man-made skiing in saudi arabia greenwashed as sustainable development
https://archinect.com/firms/project/...neom/150420164

---

I just want to know where the F that skier in the third artist rendition image down is supposed to be landing? It looks like that homeboy is flying straight to the hospital or morgue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeeLau

This is the "optimistic" fix

According to recent projections by the Canada Energy Regulator, or CER, industry will have to:

scale up wind and solar production by more than 10 times;

increase controversial carbon capture and storage by 34 to 39 times;

beef up direct air capture (a nascent technology) by 4,600 to 5,500 times its current world capacity;

increase hydrogen production to 12 per cent of energy supply from nearly nothing;

nearly triple nuclear power;

reduce per capita energy consumption by up to 40 per cent;

decrease fossil fuel production by up to 70 per cent; and

triple the ability of Canadian forests to sequester carbon.

But the "realistic" fix per the author is per xyzs quote

---

Int'l Energy Agency projections estimate that to be on track towards 2050 net zero by 2030, we can get about 75-80% of the way there with tech that's already market ready/proven (wind/solar/etc). From 2030-2050 the original estimate a few years ago was that 50% of achieving that goal would depend on tech earlier in development/unproven in the market (small scale nuclear, fusion, carbon capture, hydrogen, etc). For some good news, that 50% was recently revised down to 35-40%, which is a huge leap in just a few years.

In both timelines, behavior change was only estimated to contribute 3-5% of the reductions needed to get to net zero. It's very, very hard to get people ot change their behavior, even though it's the knee-jerk solution we all instinctively reach for.

I work in climate tech innovation presently. Two things I'd observe are:
1) The pace of innovation in new solutions is really amazing. Astounding even. America's innovation engine + Europe's (which is 10 years ahead of NA from regulatory/culture perspective re: climate) are operating at full tilt to solve the many solutions to make a lot of different tech market ready and scaleable.

2) A few years ago we had the first instance of GDP growth detaching from growth in emissions for the first time in history. Emissions flattened out (in NA at least), now if you check NYT this morning data centers + new manufacturing (including that for cleantech) are driving those emissions back up.

2) The pace of deployment is the most humbling. Carbon capture basically needs to scale to the size of today's oil industry in the coming decades, along with other tech. And testing the viability of all this new tech at each new order of magnitude scale of deployment (in the carbon capture example, 1 ton v. 100 v. 1,000 v 100,000, etc) yields new challenges.

In a lot of ways we've gotten from 0-10 in the past 20 years with clean tech, and now we need to go from 10-100. And frankly that's without making assumptions about changes in global economic systems, which I have no real insight into (have bet my career on the techno optimistic angle b/c it seems most realistic to making any real dent in the near future).

There's serious cause for hope, dosed with serious humility about the scale of the challenge IMO

I agree that technology is the only real answer. Fear mongering and pointing fingers at lifestyles has gotten us no where. Kinda reminds me of my Peak Oil days, like 20 years ago. I was so depressed about it i could barely function. I felt like Sarah Conor in Terminator. I wanted to scream at everyone that we were all doomed, how can you not see the end of the world coming?! But the doomsday talk was pointless. The solution was technology. In this case, fracking and horizontal drilling. Now we have more oil and gas than ever. :)

Reducing emissions has to go the same way, with technology, not fear and control. But the technology has to be cost competitive, including storage and scalable with fast permitting. Concepts like pumped hydro storage make sense in a laboratory but where is the dam located? What will it cost, how long will it take to construct? Can it be permitted? What is is the pay back period? Same with solar and wind. They work, they are cheap, but they don't work everywhere and storage needs a real world solution that doesn't cost 900 trillion.

Peak oil was a threat to developed countries and their economies (and to a lesser extent undeveloped countries via conflict and agriculture development). Directional drilling was a boon, but also caused the Iraq- Kuwait war. The father of my niece was taught the craft from the driller that built those wells from Kuwait into Iraq.

Climate change is going to affect us from the bottom up. Sure, a few people will suffer sea rise, floods and fires. This is nothing compared to the risks to our food security. Again, the wealthy will be immune for several years from the direct effects, except where we can’t get bananas, olives and olive oil, and local wines. But we are already experiencing the challenges of feedstock for cattle, and just around the corner is collapse of breadbasket crops of wheat, soy, rice, and corn. Couple this with drought and exacerbated loss of clean drinking water, and soon the rich will follow the fate of Ms. Antoinette when the billions of poor lose all patience with the promises of the wealthy.

Technology ‘may’ stave off the worst, but already we are fast approaching significant agricultural stress. Conflict like what’s happening in Ukraine makes it even worse. Ask any cattle farmer in the US or Canada what their projections in the near future for the necessary price increases to their product to offset the cost of feed due to drought and locusts. Water rights in the plains and western America are already having people ready to take up arms.

Please don’t conflate energy challenges of the 70’s and 80’s with the climate driven weather challenges of the next few decades, well before we even hit the ‘critical’ temp rises we are supposed to avoid with our international agreements. If you think your ‘lifestyle’ isn’t at risk, you are an ostrich. Or very very wealthy, Ms Marie. Result is the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BCMtnHound

Please don’t conflate energy challenges of the 70’s and 80’s with the climate driven weather challenges of the next few decades, well before we even hit the ‘critical’ temp rises we are supposed to avoid with our international agreements. If you think your ‘lifestyle’ isn’t at risk, you are an ostrich. Or very very wealthy, Ms Marie. Result is the same.

---

If we are talking about the next few decades, the consequences of rapidly decreasing oil production will f up our lifestyles, food security, destabilize the world etc orders of magnitude beyond climate change. People don’t realize how drenched we are in fossil fuels. It’s in everything we know.

50% of the energy we consume (75% from fossil fuels) is consumed by the top 10% income percentile. That’s most everyone on this forum. Plastics, essential lubricants, and the like make up less than 30% of petroleum products consumption, the rest is burned for energy.
It’s the lifestyle of the fat and privileged that is most at risk. In the near term. We can’t solve a consumption problem by consuming more (tech). But when have the rich ever voluntarily tightened their belts. We have the luxury of choice, the other 90th percentile don’t.

Most everyone on this forum? Top 10% in the US is $173k +. Maybe I’m poor and don’t know it


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MagnificentUnicorn

Most everyone on this forum? Top 10% in the US is $173k +. Maybe I’m poor and don’t know it


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

Top 10th percentile in the world. That’s about $45,000/yr before taxes. Median world income is only about $7k
That’s the problem with this climate issue - it’s a global phenomenon but we are very poor at evaluating such challenges at the personal level. Comparing ourselves to the Jones is much more important to most.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xyz

I agree that technology is the only real answer. Fear mongering and pointing fingers at lifestyles has gotten us no where. Kinda reminds me of my Peak Oil days, like 20 years ago. I was so depressed about it i could barely function. I felt like Sarah Conor in Terminator. I wanted to scream at everyone that we were all doomed, how can you not see the end of the world coming?! But the doomsday talk was pointless. The solution was technology. In this case, fracking and horizontal drilling. Now we have more oil and gas than ever. :)

Reducing emissions has to go the same way, with technology, not fear and control. But the technology has to be cost competitive, including storage and scalable with fast permitting. Concepts like pumped hydro storage make sense in a laboratory but where is the dam located? What will it cost, how long will it take to construct? Can it be permitted? What is is the pay back period? Same with solar and wind. They work, they are cheap, but they don't work everywhere and storage needs a real world solution that doesn't cost 900 trillion.

---

The idea that carbon free energy has to be cost competitive assumes that we will depend on voluntary efforts to reduce greenhouse gases. In CA, towns can enact REACH codes that exceed state standards--requiring retrofits of existing houses for example--but only if they are demonstrated to be cost neutral or negative. This will never get us to carbon neutral. Unfortunately, only expensive technology and (primarily) enforced restrictions--like the impending ban on gas lawn equipment--has any chance of getting us there. The magnitude of restrictions that will be necessary in first world countries will be politically unobtainable until catastrophe makes them unavoidable. The strain the Republican nominee for President is putting on our political system will seem trivial by comparison.

35 minute listen / transcript

How climate-driven migration could change the face of the U.S.

https://mahb.stanford.edu/wp-content...0-20230131.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrantN

https://mahb.stanford.edu/wp-content...0-20230131.pdf

---

A lot of words to state the obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

A lot of words to state the obvious.

---

Yah. The problem is no one talks about this because it's geopolitical suicide, local political suicide, and as a result, we get faster humanity suicide. There are going to have to be some large-scale catastrophes (they will happen) before it becomes socially acceptable to start talking about contracting the human population / economies / consumption / etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jvhowube

Yah. The problem is no one talks about this because it's geopolitical suicide, local political suicide, and as a result, we get faster humanity suicide. There are going to have to be some large-scale catastrophes (they will happen) before it becomes socially acceptable to start talking about contracting the human population / economies / consumption / etc.

---

Cat-6 hurricane wipes out most of Florida?