Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - crandles

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 36
The rest / Re: Russiagate
« on: October 19, 2017, 12:32:06 AM »
I couldn't get the video not to post

Does code tags around it work? Seems so (but then it isn't a link and I cannot see a way to make it a link without it displaying maybe tinyurl but that seems going a bit far).

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: October 18, 2017, 02:50:03 PM »
Next step, Musk to do a box batteries included?

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: October 16, 2017, 11:51:59 AM »
Time to get Sir James Dyson working on a vacuum cleaner mounted on a rocket....

 ;D :o ;D ;D ;D vacuum cleaner in space  ;D

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: October 15, 2017, 01:56:30 PM »

limits on area forecast or some other issue.

North East corner of Wales here so on the 40% chance of TS force winds.

Policy and solutions / Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« on: October 15, 2017, 12:47:20 PM »
Saudi Aramco has insisted that its plans for what is likely to be the world's biggest stock market listing remain on track.

There are reports Aramco might shelve the initial public offering (IPO) in favour of private share placings.

But the state-owned oil giant said the timing for a £1.5 trillion dual listing on the Saudi and an international stock market was still scheduled for 2018.

The London Stock Exchange is wooing Aramco, but the move is controversial.

Over the weekend the Financial Times reported that Aramco was considering halting a flotation in favour of selling shares privately to the world's biggest sovereign wealth funds and institutional investors.

The sale of a 5% stake in Aramco is central to the Saudi government's economic reform plans. But a share listing would open the company to greater international regulation and scrutiny.

So still on track and was never being shelved just considering alternative route.


Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: October 13, 2017, 08:10:19 PM »
Depends how you do the maths: - extending this to give numbers of TS, Hurricanes and majors

First 30 years averages 62.67 7.0 5.1 1.0
2000-2017 124.8 15.1 7.3 3.3
which gives increases of 99% 114% 44.7% and 245%

First 50 years average 79.4 7.6 5.2 1.2
last 50 years inc 2017 98.76 11.9 6.3 2.5
so increases of 24.3% 57.4% 21.6% 105%

ACE includes longevity as well as number and strength of storms

So major hurricanes showing much bigger increase in numbers than ACE, but hurricanes showing lower increases than ACE and perhaps peculiarly TS showing larger increases than ACE. Maybe explanation for that is I would suspect higher proportion of TS were missed in the early periods than hurricanes or majors.

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: October 13, 2017, 07:58:38 PM »
No.  Considering the oscillating nature of the curve, I would estimate about a 10-15% increase over the 1900 value.

Depends how you do the maths:

First 30 years averages 62.67
2000-2017 124.8
which gives a 99% increase

First 50 years average 79.4
last 50 years inc 2017 98.76
so increase only 24.3%

Science / Re: Trump Administration Assaults on Science
« on: October 12, 2017, 08:54:14 PM »
Nominee has a business background, not weather.  Or science.

President Trump has nominated Accuweather CEO Barry Myers to post of NOAA Administrator.

… and my response, (written in 2013) when Accuwx started selling snake oil 45-day weather forecasts.

Policy and solutions / Re: Solar Roadways
« on: October 06, 2017, 11:14:32 AM »
Replies to every comment it seems. Almost as if they are more interested in getting an internet presence/following than getting on with doing things?? Or is that too harsh?

Arctic sea ice / Re: Arctic Image of the Day
« on: October 04, 2017, 04:15:07 PM »
Is that a whale they are devouring?

Seems likely

(Or translate page linked by Pavel above which suggests it is a bowhead whale.)

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: October 04, 2017, 04:11:51 PM »
If you don't agree with my point of view, I'd be very happy if you would explain me what's wrong in my way of thinking because many people are surprised by my point of view, find it interesting but prefer to use their power in order to be sure that they don't use "greened" electricity.

I have no problem with your POV.

Different countries may have different rules creating different incentives. E.g. in UK, I get paid for generating Electricity by solar PV and a small fee for selling surplus back to grid but this is estimated as half of generation regardless of how much I use and how much sent back so in reality it is only for generating electricity. Thus, there is financial incentive to use what I generate rather than send it back. While generation is excellent investment, demand management to try to use what I generate seems pretty small beer and I do very little to change demand times.

If/when I get electric vehicle, I would want it charging only with surplus power i.e. normally very slowly during day, faster when sunny (and perhaps if I still haven't got any house battery system discharging at night to power house while keeping a minimum charge for 30 miles unless long trip planned).

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: October 04, 2017, 03:43:10 PM »
The UK was ahead of the game, but, as usual.....


“Between 21 June and 22 September, the carbon intensity of the grid – as measured in grammes of C02 emitted per KWh of power generated – was more than halved from its level over the same period four years ago.”

Second half obviously much much more difficult than first half, but still, just four years, wow!

Would be nice if IEA continues to be wrong a little while longer as it has been for so long.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: October 04, 2017, 02:46:38 PM »
One energy expert said that the IEA report was, if anything, underestimating the speed of renewables’ growth and the impact of them becoming so cheap.

Tim Buckley, director of energy finance studies at Australia-based analysts IEEFA, said: “2016 was another record high year of renewable installs and unexpectedly large renewable energy cost deflation, again highlighting the IEA’s continued underestimation of both these two trends driving the increasingly global market transformation.”

That does sound like it continues to be the case when you read things like
Despite the recent opening of the UK’s first subsidy-free solar farm, the prospects for British solar are fairly gloomy: the amount of solar forecast to be installed by 2022 is a fifth of the amount installed over the last five years.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: October 03, 2017, 07:15:35 PM »
What does 'paid off nuclear' mean? Surely a lot of the costs are decommissioning and they are not paid off until a long time after generation ceases?

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: October 02, 2017, 02:38:44 PM »
Roll-up solar panels power Flat Holm island

but perhaps should be in hurricanes thread:
Roll-up solar panels are being used to help power an island off the coast of Cardiff.
The Rapid Roll system allows flexible solar panels to be unrolled like a carpet from a trailer in two minutes.
The pioneering technology aims to meet demands from increased tourism and environmental and logistical challenges on Flat Holm.
The hope is for the technology in future to offer a solution in areas hit by natural disasters like hurricanes.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: October 01, 2017, 04:19:37 PM »
The curve looks differently from what I have seen from California, maybe Switzerland has more industrial activity.

California AC for cooling versus need for heating provided by oil/gas in Switzerland?

Science / Science Events
« on: September 27, 2017, 01:33:18 AM »

In Washington DC Wednesday,   September   27,   2017:

Global   Lessons   from   the   Thawing   Arctic

3:00-3:45   pm:      Panel   Presentation
▪ Introductory   comments   
▪ Opening   of   a   new   ocean:   Rising   stakes   for   security,   economies,   and   conservation   
    Dr.   Henry   Huntington,   Huntington   Consulting      
▪ Threats   to   local   Arctic   communities:   Lessons   for   a   global   audience   
    Dr.   Elizabeth   Marino,   Oregon   State   University      
▪ Global   greenhouse   gas   releases   from   thawing   permafrost      
    Dr.   Christina   Schädel,   Northern   Arizona   University
▪ Sea-level   rise   from   the   melting   Greenland   Ice   Sheet   
    Dr.   Ted   Scambos,   National   Snow   and   Ice   Data   Center
▪ The   Arctic   Meltdown   and   Unruly   Tropical   Storms:   Are   They   Connected?   
    Dr.   Jennifer   Francis,   Rutgers   University      
▪ Imagining   the   Arctic   of   2050   to   inform   actions   today   
    Dr.   Amy   Lauren   Lovecraft,   University   of   Alaska   Fairbanks
3:45-4:30   pm:   Questions   from   journalists   and   audience
4:30-5:00   pm:   Informal   light   reception

Antarctica / Re: Rift in Larsen C
« on: September 22, 2017, 08:04:41 PM »
Big Antarctic iceberg edges out to sea

But the latest satellite imagery now indicates the near-6,000 sq km block is swinging out into the Weddell Sea.

Policy and solutions / Re: Solar Roadways
« on: September 20, 2017, 12:37:23 AM »
So ideal would be: driveway slope facing south with house at top north end so as not to shade the driveway and/or top of a long driveway with house at bottom South end. Slope should ideally be fairly steep and few trees around shading it. I wonder how much area that works out as taking into account only those driveways that are already in need of resurfacing or likely to need to be in next 20 years.

Even if it doesn't make economic sense now, why wouldn't it after solar panels fall in cost a bit further and the development cost of such panels has been paid for? OK maybe if they are making them really expensive all singing and dancing, snow melting and different displays being possible, maybe they never will make sense. But make them cheap and restrict use to only suitable driveways, I am not sure I see a killer argument as to why not.

Roof space may be better, but if they can be made cheap enough why not use both roof space and driveway area when suitable.

Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: September 18, 2017, 01:54:08 AM »
I predict a successful running back that makes it all the way to day 365 endzone. ;)

Arctic sea ice / Re: IJIS
« on: September 17, 2017, 12:40:45 PM »
Only following 2005 path would get to a new minimum, so it is getting close to being able to call we are past minimum on IJIS.

Policy and solutions / Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« on: September 13, 2017, 01:28:47 PM »
Maybe we need a 'carbon capture and/or use' thread?
Researchers make alcohol out of thin air

TU Delft PhD student Ming Ma has found a way to produce alcohol out of thin air. Or to be more precise, he has found how to effectively and precisely control the process of electroreduction of CO2 to produce a wide range of useful products, including alcohol.

In this process, the captured CO2 is used as a resource and converted into carbon monoxide (CO), methane (CH4), ethylene (C2H4), and even liquid products such as formic acid (HCOOH), methanol (CH3OH) and ethanol (C2H5OH). The high energy density hydrocarbons can be directly and conveniently utilized as fuels within the current energy infrastructure.

Now that these processes have been charted, the next steps for the team at the Smith Lab for Solar Energy Conversion and Storage at TU Delft, (Ma is the first PhD student to graduate from Wilson Smiths lab) is to look for ways to improve the selectivity of single products and to begin designing ways to scale up this process.
Smith just received an ERC Starting Grant to do just that: 'improve our understanding of the complicated reaction mechanisms in order to gain better control of the CO2 electrocatalytic process'.

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 12, 2017, 06:18:06 PM »

That link may still be showing August 8 data? 

Oops yes thanks

2017 world production now showing 98.26 down from 98.42 for 2017.

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 12, 2017, 05:30:26 PM »
The way you have presented this data likely understates the increase that has occurred since 1950. I would think that if the numbers were broken out in decades, the trend upwards would be more obvious although there might be some fluctuations, decade to decade.

I wanted to compare data after 2007 report (which probably didn't use 2005/2006? data). Not sure whether data prior to satelites ~1979 is consistent data so that was broken off.

But if you want it a different way:

Pacific Typoon basin is much more consistent with IPCC predictions.

Season   ACE_____ TS______ HU____ MH
1971-79   110.89   14.56   8.89     4.00
1980-89   137.70   18.70   10.00  4.60
1990-99   164.80   15.70   9.90     5.50
2000-09   94.70   15.90   7.20  2.90
2010-16   144.00   18.00   11.00  5.71

East Pacific
Season   ACE   TS   HU   MH
1971-79   110.89   14.56   8.89   4.00
1980-89   137.70   18.70   10.00   4.60
1990-99   164.80   15.70   9.90   5.50
2000-09   94.70   15.90   7.20   2.90
2010-16   144.00   18.00   11.00   5.71

Pacific Typhoon
Season   TD   TS   Ty   STy
1970-79   35.30   26.10   15.30   3.10
1980-89   44.80   27.10   15.50   2.80
1990-99   42.00   27.40   13.80   4.90
2000-09   41.80   24.00   14.30   5.10
2010-16   39.29   23.86   12.00   5.29

All above basins:
Season   TS   H/Ty
1971-79   50.33   29.44
1980-89   55.00   30.70
1990-99   54.00   30.10
2000-09   55.00   28.90
2010-16   56.86   29.86

Basically more variabilty shown (no surprise) and not much trend apart perhaps in Super Typhoons but there the numbers are low.

These numbers don't mean much. But so far it is not looking like a resounding success for these 2 IPCC predictions.

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 12, 2017, 04:18:02 PM »

We need more violent and devastating events to occur on a regular basis.

Be careful what you wish for .....

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 12, 2017, 03:49:05 PM »
Maybe it is too soon to assess effects of Harvey on oil production and consumption, but latest short term Energy outlook, doesn't seem to be showing any effects from Harvey.

Too soon to tell or no significant effect?

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 11, 2017, 11:37:58 PM »

Could this be true? In 2007 IPCC predicted fewer but more powerful hurricanes but now the jet stream weakness allows more to start.  I suppose the next few years will tell - or climate science a bit beyond me.

Season_______ ACE______TS_____HU____MH
1950-2016___ 101.16____ 11.25___ 6.22__ 2.66
1979-2016___ 103.32____ 12.26___ 6.39__ 2.61
2006-2016____ 98.09____ 14.09___ 6.36__ 2.73
2005-2016___ 110.75____ 15.25___ 7.08__ 3.08

East Pacific:
Season   ACE   TS   HU   MH
1971-2016   129.96   16.52   9.30   4.48
1979-2016   132.55   16.82   9.32   4.58
2006-2016   129.36   17.55   9.73   4.91
2005-2016   126.58   17.33   9.50   4.67

If anything the numbers seem to be higher after 2005. Note that inclusion or exclusion of a single year (such as 2005) can have quite a large effect on the numbers.

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 11, 2017, 09:47:52 PM »
Is the prediction, "fewer mid-latitude storms", from 2007 still valid or have the changes in the jet stream due to Arctic warming changed the story?

Could this be true? In 2007 IPCC predicted fewer but more powerful hurricanes but now the jet stream weakness allows more to start.  I suppose the next few years will tell - or climate science a bit beyond me.

If you are going to talk hurricanes and tropical storms as opposed to mid latitude storms, then may as well quote the relevant bit:

Tropical Cyclones (Hurricanes and Typhoons)
Results from embedded high-resolution models and global models, ranging in grid spacing from 100 km to 9 km, project a likely increase of peak wind intensities and notably, where analysed, increased near-storm precipitation in future tropical cyclones. Most recent published modelling studies investigating tropical storm frequency simulate a decrease in the overall number of storms, though there is less confidence in these projections and in the projected decrease of relatively weak storms in most basins, with an increase in the numbers of the most intense tropical cyclones.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: September 11, 2017, 02:35:50 PM »
I didn't quite understand what the subsidy price means -- is it just a PPA, or are they getting this plus whatever the market offers?

Not sure if this helps but

The subsidies, paid from a levy on consumer bills, will run for 15 years - unlike nuclear subsidies for Hinkley C which run for 35 years.

Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« on: September 06, 2017, 07:24:01 PM »
Wondering if it would be worthwhile for insurance companies to give them out free in areas that seem likely to be hit with flooding. Maybe only for expensive cars in low lying areas?

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 06, 2017, 12:31:03 PM »

Pressure down to 916...which should correspond to sustained winds at around 225 mph! But official wind speed is still 185. Thoughts?

Highest sustained windspeed measured in Atlantic is 190mph with pressure of 899. There have been 5 with pressure below 900. Irma is equal second strongest for sustained windspeed but nowhere near top 11 for pressure/intensity. That rule of thumb seems wrong for intense hurricanes.

The question is how the windspeed was so high for the pressure not why the windspeed isn't higher.

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: September 05, 2017, 05:02:53 PM »
Irma is now one of the strongest hurricanes in history.

#Irma is the 17th hurricane in the Atlantic on record to have max winds >= 175 mph. Atlantic max wind record is Allen (1980) at 190 mph.

Now 180 mph making 7th strongest Edit 7th to reach that strength 5th= strongest
Allen___ 1980   190   305
"Labor Day" 1935 185 295
Gilbert__ 1988   185   295
Wilma__  2005   185   295
Mitch___ 1998   180   285
Rita____ 2005   180   285
Irma___ 2017   180   285
Janet___ 1955   175   280

(Table there only lists 16 storms including Irma to reach 175mph so is there a missing storm in list or was Irma 16th to reach >= 175? )

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: September 04, 2017, 06:28:42 PM »

The cool weather is why the melt season was slow.

Are you sure it isn't a case of:

Area was low so more area had air temp pegged to Sea freezing temp as to normally being more ice so air temp pegged to FYI/melt pond melting point?

Then the melt season might well have been slow due to low energy flux perhaps because of clouds?

If these are dominant effects, then I am unsure, but perhaps there doesn't seem much reason to think high temperature is a good measure of high heat flux into the ice. But I am no expert and maybe others think differently?

If the ice is all in small pieces, would that mean that heat flux into ice can occur efficiently without temperature being raised much?

To avoid doubt, I agree melt season appears to have been slow, I am just not sure about attributing this to air temperatures.


If landfalls appear to be decreasing (are they?), but the intensity of landfalling hurricanes is increasing, then hurricanes should be used as an added reason for needing more action to deal with GW.

Good question. I think US landfalls may (debatably possibly depending on timeframe) have become less frequent, but I am pretty clueless about worldwide stats.

Greater intensity but less frequent: Is that a valid reason? Comparing thousands of deaths in Bangladesh and other less developed regions to about 40? even if that increases quite a bit, the lesson seems to be industrialise as fast as you can to save deaths. If you don't want to talk deaths and instead damage, then there being more infrastructure and human wealth to damage seems the prime reason for Harvey being expensive. Yes if there is more intensity you might expect more damage but is it rising faster than the more industrialised becomes more resilient effect?

If the argument is difficult to make perhaps we should stick to to Neven's 'Added reasons not needed'?

To what extent, if any, would people agree with the statement

If landfalls appear to be decreasing, then hurricanes should not be used as an added reason for needing more action to deal with GW.

Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: September 02, 2017, 04:29:15 PM »
Those two downspikes stick out, but I'm expecting more.  Also expecting some statistically relevant data as was the case post 9/11 when the airlines shut down.

What is the timeframe for shut down of refining in Houston to reach Mauna Loa?  ???

There is likely enough emergency stores of gasoline to cope with the outage? Some higher prices may reduce usage a little but significant enough to notice? Prevailing winds to Mauna Loa come from direction of mainland USA?

Seems unlikely to me but maybe I am misunderstanding what you mean.

Science / Re: 2017 Mauna Loa CO2
« on: September 02, 2017, 03:04:02 PM »
Hourly reading (or is that two?) below 400 on 31 Aug.

Will that be the last time for decades and probably hundreds or/of thousands of years?

Saved here in case it is

The Earth only needs about 50 to 100 years to fully reverse man-made emissions, because if you actually paid attention to the annual down cycle of the keeling curve, the plant life absorbs around 12ppm per year worth of CO2, but humans currently produce around 14 to 15ppm per year, making a 2ppm or 3ppm excess.

You greatly deceive yourself, kid. Just look at the raw data.

I promise you the next Glacial maximum kills 90% to 95% of all humans on the planet when it happens.

I thought Ghoti was wrong to call you as a denialist troll.

However, you are not doing yourself any good with an attitude of I know it all.

Just because I think Ghoti was wrong does not mean I call him a liar, I think that was an honest mistake.

Just because the biosphere is absorbing 12ppm doesn't mean it will continue to do so until back to preindustrial levels. Baring major new experimentation with carbon cycle, about 25% will remain in the atmosphere declining at only a very slow rate due to rock weathering is the current scientific opinion. That could be wrong but given your know-it-all attitude I would definitely prefer to believe the scientific opinion than what you tell me.

Not nice to wrongly be called a denialist troll, but your response isn't good either. How about a bit more humility?

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: August 29, 2017, 03:08:30 PM »
Perhaps the only attribute that can linked is the very warm gulf temperatures.  This tends to increase the potential for tropical formation. 

I agree that we should not overstate these cases.

I think sea level rise is a very solid contributing factor. Air containing more moisture due to higher air temperature is also pretty solid.

Perhaps we should also count subsidence due to oil extraction as fairly solid? Obviously this relates to ff a source of CC rather than climate change itself.

I think these are a lot more solid than higher gulf water temperature leading to more hurricanes because the number of hurricanes have not risen much and competing effects, if any, are difficult to verify/attribute.

Consequences / Re: Hurricane season 2017
« on: August 29, 2017, 01:37:17 PM »
Believe it or not, Category 4 and 5 hurricanes apparently don't hit the U.S. as often today as they did 100 to 200 years or so ago.

But is this a potential effect of climate change? More blocking and more stalling so hurricanes don't travel as far makes crossing a coast less likely. So some benefit to this climate change reducing number of landfalls but also an increased chance of most severe effects of stalling having just crossed a coast?

Similarly, similar numbers of hurricanes but an increase in proportion of the most powerful hurricanes could also be competing effects: Increase in sea surface temperatures encourages tropical storm formation and strengthening but increased shear reducing chances of tropical storms forming.

With such competing effects potentially going on, how do you arrive at a fair assessment of the role climate change has played?

Having said this, generally I agree with you that it is a bad idea to overstate the case when there is inadequate data to fully support such a position.

Policy and solutions / Re: Boring, boring ol' Elon Musk...
« on: August 27, 2017, 09:03:35 PM »
Does power cut causing stuck in train problem count as an issue.

The area/volume of tunnels that have experienced strong quakes is very small compared with areas above ground where damage could occur. This might make where you would prefer to be a difficult comparison to make. Also rather than a simple above ground / tunnel it might be better to have several categories

1 Open field, no trees, no buildings, no landslip risk, no tsunami risk
2 Field some nearby trees, no buildings, no landslip risk, no tsunami risk
3 Wood, no buildings, no landslip risk, no tsunami risk
4 Tunnel, no items that could fall, no landslip risk, no tsunami risk
5 Hill some landslip risk, no buildings, no tsunami risk
6 Beach/lakeside, no buildings, no landslip risk
7 In/near building, no landslip risk, no tsunami risk
8 In/near building, some tsunami risk

Obviously could make lots more categories and above might not be right order. More people in 7 and 8 than in all other categories combined so a switch to 4th best place might be sensible?

Policy and solutions / Re: Boring, boring ol' Elon Musk...
« on: August 27, 2017, 07:32:42 PM »
Perhaps there isn't any subway or other tunnels anywhere that have been subjected to an 8?

Tokyo has an extensive subway that was hit by at least a magnitude 8 earthquake.

2011 9.1 quake was something like 220 miles away. Not sure how much the strength decays with distance though.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: August 27, 2017, 07:04:55 PM »

Probably cheaper to put an inverter in every EV rather than every outlet where an EV might plug in.

Inverters are getting a lot smaller and lighter.

Maybe, but I am thinking if a family has 2 electric cars, one inverter and two sockets would be better than paying twice for the inverter. Even one electric car followed by owning another might not outlast such an inverter. Can't imagine many people having set up for charging EV in more than one location in their house. If out at restaurant/supermarket/wherever and need a charge to get home then I wouldn't want it discharging instead. So what would be the point in having that possibility other than at normal charging point for the car?

Any weight the car doesn't have to carry seems like better not to carry it to me.

Policy and solutions / Re: Boring, boring ol' Elon Musk...
« on: August 27, 2017, 06:51:51 PM »
In general, it's safer below ground, in a well constructed tunnel, than above ground in an earthquake. 

An 8.0 and all bets are off.
Can I ask for a source on the 8.0 figure?

I wasn't sure what was being asked by this question. Perhaps as answered by Bob but perhaps also:

USA hasn't suffered an 8, (or only 317? years ago when modern infrastructure didn't exist). But is this a good reason for saying all bets are off?

Perhaps there isn't any subway or other tunnels anywhere that have been subjected to an 8?

Policy and solutions / Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« on: August 27, 2017, 06:41:16 PM »
And to add to one of Bob Wallace's points.....the continuing drop in the cost of power as the world continues the change to renewable power has created what amounts to a tax cut to the world. 

A tax cut puts more money in people pockets, but less in government coffers.

So a drop in cost of power is rather better than 'a tax cut'. Of course, you can find effects that perhaps make it more like a tax cut. E.g. self driving cars might reduce unexpected deaths and cut inheritance tax revenues, but perhaps this seems more like further gains for people at the expense of further income inequality.

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: August 27, 2017, 06:27:01 PM »
EVs would have to have a built in inverter so that battery DC electricity is changed to grid voltage AC.  And there would have to be some sort of smart metering (built into the EV?) that would collect the data needed for car owner reimbursement.

Why should the car carry that around? Why not connected to socket EV is usually plugged into?

The rest / Re: Russiagate
« on: August 25, 2017, 05:02:46 PM »
And he has nobody to blame but himself....although he sees that quite differently than I do.

A bad workman blames his tools, but a really really bad president blames the media?  :-\ :o

Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2017 melting season
« on: August 24, 2017, 03:13:43 PM »
SIPN 2017: August Report is out

the median Outlook value for September 2017 Arctic sea ice extent of 4.5 million square kilometers with quartiles of 4.2 and 4.8 million square kilometers (See Figure 1 in the Overview section, below). These values are unchanged from the July Report, which is consistent with the moderating impact of summer 2017 Arctic weather.

Method 2017___Med   Q1   Q2   N
Heuristic_______4.3   3.7   4.7   4
Statistical______4.8   4.5   5.0   16
Mixed_________4.6   4   4.6   3
Dynamical_____4.4   4.0   4.7   14
All___________4.5   4.2   4.8   37

Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: August 22, 2017, 02:18:25 PM »
'Cyborg' bacteria deliver green fuel source from sunlight

"It's all very simple, mix-in-a-pot-chemistry."

These newly boosted bacteria produce acetic acid, essentially vinegar, from CO2, water and light. They have an efficiency of around 80%, which is four times the level of commercial solar panels, and more than six times the level of chlorophyll.

"We prize these cyborg bacteria and their ability to make acetate because they produce a substrate that we can already use to produce more valuable and more interesting products," said Dr Sakimoto.

"We have collaborators who have a number of strands of E. coli that are genetically engineered to take acetic acid as their food source and they can upgrade it into butanol and a polymer called polyhydroxybutyrate."

probably some way off if ever:

"We are now looking for more benign light absorbers than cadmium sulphide to provide bacteria with energy from light."

The researchers believe that while their approach has taken an important new step, it might not ultimately be the technology that prevails.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 36