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 - oren

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 93
1
Policy and solutions / Re: Greta Thunberg's Atlantic crossing
« on: January 24, 2020, 11:52:03 PM »
Quote
Mnuchin said:
Is she the chief economist, or who is she? I’m confused. It’s a joke. After she goes and studies economics in college she can come back and explain that to us.
What a jerk. The idiocy stinks.

2
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: January 23, 2020, 10:34:36 PM »
I expect Model Y to be a big success when it starts shipping. OTOH, I expect a softening in Model 3 demand at the same time, as some folks who prefer a crossover over a sedan were choosing the 3 because it was the only proper EV around (price+specs). Once a proper EV crossover is available, with the same starting price and very similar specs, this is expected to change.

3
Policy and solutions / Re: Batteries: Today's Energy Solution
« on: January 23, 2020, 03:14:25 AM »
Not knowing much about capacitors (yeah, less than even that), I had this idea the moment after I heard that Tesla bought Maxwell - that one could load up a (future 1,000 km range) EV's capacitors really fast (like in 5 minutes - "megacharge"!), then get the car back on the road, and have the capacitors then, at near-optimum rates, charge up the battery.

Probably anybody who actually knows something about capacitors would know my idea is bunk.  Musk said in that long interview that he's hyper-rational - he compares his ideas with known physics before proceeding.  I just don't know the physics.
Ir's an impractical idea for several reasons.
The capacitors add weight and cost but as described do not add total charging capacity. They are just used as a buffer to pass the energy to the batteries. As the main limiting factor for EVs is the high weight and cost of batteries, this is not workable.
An alternative idea is to use capacitors instead of or in addition to the battery. so the charge in the capacitor is used in parallel to the charge in the battery, at times when it is useful to do so (e.g. during sharp acceleration, super-hard regen braking or during short charging).
The problem with using capacitors as a complement to a battery is the physics. A quick look in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercapacitor#Specific_energy_and_specific_power shows that
Quote
As of 2013 commercial specific energies range from around 0.5 to 15 Wh/kg. For comparison, an aluminum electrolytic capacitor stores typically 0.01 to 0.3 Wh/kg, while a conventional lead-acid battery stores typically 30 to 40 Wh/kg and modern lithium-ion batteries 100 to 265 Wh/kg. Supercapacitors can therefore store 10 to 100 times more energy than electrolytic capacitors, but only one tenth as much as batteries.
So for energy storage where weight is a consideration supercapacitors are not very useful. However in applications where a high power is desired and weight is less of an issue supercapacitors have the physical ability to be useful (not sure about cost).
For example, in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercapacitor#Transport it says:
Quote
Maxwell Technologies, an American supercapacitor-maker, claimed that more than 20,000 hybrid buses use the devices to increase acceleration, particularly in China. Guangzhou, In 2014 China began using trams powered with supercapacitors that are recharged in 30 seconds by a device positioned between the rails, storing power to run the tram for up to 4 km — more than enough to reach the next stop, where the cycle can be repeated.
For an E-Semi I don't think supercapacitors can be very useful, as the weight of the battery is a very important consideration (the limiting factor for increasing range). However for buses and trams that have short routes and require rapid charging, supercapacitors could be quite useful.

While writing the above it occurred to me that the original idea could have some use in an imaginary scenario where a car can be charged for a few seconds every few minutes (let's say every intersection in a city) by some wireless method or a flexible contact. The car would take the charge into its capacitors, charge the batteries to empty the capacitors, and be ready for the next rapid burst. However I cannot see this as workable in a real-life scenario.

4
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: January 22, 2020, 10:52:35 PM »
It is indeed a huge short squeeze, but not because some big investor is making it so on purpose. That's not how things work in real life.

5
Consequences / Re: Wildfires
« on: January 22, 2020, 02:40:09 AM »
So, bring it on!
For the record, I strongly disagree with your post.

6
Keep up the good fight VGV.

7
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: January 21, 2020, 10:36:14 PM »
No reason to buy an incumbent. And it would drop the stock.

8
Consequences / Re: World of 2030
« on: January 21, 2020, 06:57:18 PM »
Nicely written PA.

9
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: January 21, 2020, 12:13:22 AM »
This energy storage solution is quite clever!

Energy Vault

Link >> https://energyvault.com
This solution (quite innovative) was posted on the forum in the past. The main worry which seems unaddressed is the risk of earthquakes. Otherwise, great idea. Once the blocks are up kinetic energy is preserved for a very long time.

10
Policy and solutions / Re: Nuclear Power
« on: January 20, 2020, 02:19:10 PM »
You can keep the lights on without nuclear using natgas (and solar). My country does so easily and there are many like it. We have some coal but it would have been shut down long ago if not for the pressure by the utility's union. Solar would have been much higher if there were enough desert-center interconnects. Now they are looking for solar with 4-hour storage so interconnects can be better utilized. Meanwhile more interconnects are being built. This can be ratcheted up endlessly and the lights will still be on. Natgas and its emissions will slowly be phased out over time, without the country bankrupting itself in the process.
No reason to build super-expensive nuclear and to curtail renewables just because nuclear keeps the lights on when the wind and sun are uncooperative. Instead use natgas as your "baseload".

11
Consequences / Re: World of 2030
« on: January 20, 2020, 10:13:06 AM »
Thanks for sharing sidd. The difference between theory and practice is often enlightening.

12
Well, she probably had a difficulty discerning between the two parties...

13
Policy and solutions / Re: Nuclear Power
« on: January 20, 2020, 01:43:24 AM »
Look at the graphs again. I fail to see how nuclear is the complement for wind and solar. When the wind does blow nuclear power is wasted, and need I remind that of the lot nuclear is the most expensive by far? Gas with its dispatchability is the perfect complement, with some storage and hydro to smooth over the sharp transitions and daily fluctuations. Later there will be lots of dispatchable EV charging loads that can further help smooth over rough patches in renewable production. Building a few extra gas plants solves the scheduled maintenance problem.
I wouldn't shut down existing nuclear, but building new nuclear from scratch cannot be justified economically.

14
Policy and solutions / Re: If not Capitalism... then What? And, How?
« on: January 19, 2020, 08:53:34 PM »
I doubt there is anyone with enough power over the system to make a real difference even if they wanted to, which would be a miracle in itself.
I am highly pessimistic, and expect a civilizational collapse before any meaningful systemic change.

15
Science / Re: 2020 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« on: January 19, 2020, 08:43:31 PM »
Thank you for these regular updates Stephan.
Hefaistos I am astounded by your optimism, for which I find no basis in current reality. 10 years is a very short time to turn around the immense ship of the global fossil fuel economy. I estimate the turning time as at least 50 years, of which humanity has barely achieved maybe 10 net. Every year that passes with the wheel only partially turned means more time is lost. 2030 for peak CO2? No way.

16
Blumenkraft, I realize you are a stout Bernie supporter (I am too I guess), but looking at the chart in https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html shows Bernie edging very slightly up, while Biden seems quite stable in his lead. Do you seriously expect Bernie to somehow win the nomination, even before considering the nasty bias of the party itself/DNC against him? I am asking not to piss anyone off, but because I care about the result.

17
Policy and solutions / Re: Greta Thunberg's Atlantic crossing
« on: January 18, 2020, 09:44:17 PM »
I thought the test was actually good. I recognized many of my aspie-like characteristics and many of my non-aspie characteristics. Some few questions were a bit confusing and hard to answer properly but most were spot on. It was interesting to find out I am more neurotypical than I assumed, but I wonder what my score would have been at age 18.

18
Policy and solutions / Re: But, but, but, China....
« on: January 18, 2020, 03:25:49 PM »
Finally some good news, and of course TPTB find it problematic. God forbid that there will ever be even a slight drop in population.

19
Consequences / Re: Places becoming more livable
« on: January 18, 2020, 03:02:20 PM »
Oh dear.

20
Consequences / Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« on: January 18, 2020, 10:54:05 AM »
Quote
Oren, what do you think of the definition of a BOE as the unit of time, during summer, when surface air temperature north of 80 shoots up beyond normal summer variability? I think that will be a climatically momentous occasion. There will be much less than 1 million km2 remaining when that happens, and it will likely happen in August. 
Yes, that is when the climatic shit his the fan IMHO. But when? Hard to guess.

21
Consequences / Re: The Climatic Effects of a Blue Ocean Event
« on: January 18, 2020, 12:58:06 AM »
There is a big diferece between a traditional BOE (1 million km2) in mid-September, and his "zero Arctic sea ice in summer ". (Is that August? July? June?) While I expect the former in 10 years, the latter is still far off, surely not 5 or 10 years.

22
Consequences / Re: Wildfires
« on: January 18, 2020, 12:50:46 AM »
Thank you for sharing this Rodius. Very inspiring.

23
Antarctica / Re: PIG has calved
« on: January 17, 2020, 08:20:02 PM »
Honestly it looks like it's already calved and is not attached in any way to the rest of the ice shelf. Just held by a bit of side pressure.

24
Policy and solutions / Re: Renewable Energy
« on: January 17, 2020, 09:03:58 AM »
Nobody is ignoring this reality, almost everybody realizes renewables don't provide a 100% solution yet, and almost everybody realizes the best backup for their intermittency (besides the various forms of storage) is dispatchable natural gas plants with their low capital costs . Not baseload coal, and not baseload nuclear which is much too expensive. Most of the time - when renewables are installed in higher percentages - these baseload plants will be churning out useless electricity, since the sun is shining and the wind is blowing.

25
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 17, 2020, 08:56:04 AM »
My dear nanning - we are talking about electrifying privately owned cars because there are over a billion of them around the globe, and ~80 million of them sold new every year. Whether you (or me) like it or not, these cars are being churned out of factories and then are emitting CO2 and other pollution over their lifetime. This issue is too large to ignore and just saying private cars are bad will not make it go away anytime soon.
So while measures should be taken to reduce the desirability of these cars for private people - for example, adding more public transport, bike paths, designing walkable cities, etc., as well as taxing pollution and changing the system - this thread discusses specifically about reducing the emissions and pollution of these cars by converting the new cars to electric. So that the private people who don't care much about emissions, pollution and AGW (or who care but really want/need their private cars) and who are going to buy a new car anyway, despite all the science and the fine words by those who have seen the light, will buy cleaner cars.

26
The rest / Re: Good music
« on: January 17, 2020, 03:41:43 AM »
And while on the subject of emotional/vulnerable, here is a gut-wrenching acapella from my favorite artist of the 1990s, Tori Amos, whose fame was a miracle as well.

She was kidnapped and sexually assaulted, and this song (which bubbled up after having watched Thelma and Louise) was the beginning of her healing process.



It was me and a gun
And a man on my back
And I sang "holy holy" as he buttoned down his pants
You can laugh
It's kind of funny things you think
At times like these
Like I haven't seen Barbados
So I must get out of this

Yes I wore a slinky red thing
Does that mean I should spread
For you, your friends, your father, Mr. Ed

27
The rest / Re: Good music
« on: January 17, 2020, 03:17:59 AM »
At the end of the 90s, it was for me the 'bitches', 'hoes', 'gangsta rap', vocoders etc. that ended my connection with and interest in modern music. Glorification of violence and bad behaviour, toxic masculinity. The end of love; the end of trust, kindness and intimacy.

I stopped listening to popular hits, made my own playlists and later started my search for older music. Morality in music sunk to the bottom. What a stark contrast with the 80s and 70s.
I sympathize as I really dislike that type of music/violence. But there is still trust, kindness and intimacy in music even today. There's also sadness and vulnerability. You normally have to look hard for it, but sometimes such music even becomes popular by some miracle.

Billie Eilish - When the Party's Over



Don't you know I'm no good for you?
I've learned to lose you, can't afford to
Tore my shirt to stop you bleedin'
But nothin' ever stops you leavin'
Quiet when I'm coming home and I'm on my own
I could lie, say I like it like that, like it like that

28
Consequences / Re: Places becoming less livable
« on: January 17, 2020, 02:49:47 AM »
Well said Terry.
Sadly I'm afraid the separation between health and wealth is fraying or even breaking down in other parts of the world too.

29
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 17, 2020, 01:57:13 AM »
Wow. That's (literally) highway robbery.

30
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 16, 2020, 11:50:15 AM »
The chargers and EBs is a chicken and egg problem, more EVs will lead to faster buildout, more chargers will lead to faster EV adoption. This is why what Tesla did building its supercharger network was so good. It basically installed a very large chicken with investor funds, and then it started getting the eggs out.
IMHO EV adoption is now with enough momentum that the problem is essentially solved - stakeholders of all sorts already realize the revolution is coming and are making plans to install chargers in many places. Remembering that a lot of charging is done at home and in the workplace, I do not expect charging infrastructure shortage to hit in a major way. Of course it would be better if the government started pushing more strongly in that direction, but I don't think it's a precondition anymore. What I do hope is that governments captive by fossil fuel interests don't put hurdles in the path to EV adoption. We have already seen some signs for this in the US.

31
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: January 16, 2020, 11:19:03 AM »
What does it look like? I care somewhat, but not so much.
How much CO2 does it emit? Choking fumes? Poisonous stink while refueling? I care a lot.

32
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 15, 2020, 09:32:02 PM »
Quote
If we are really serious about EV, every second parking space, paid or free, needs a 100kw, minimum, charger. 
I expect the number of chargers to adapt itself to the number of EVs, perhaps with some delay.
Does your workplace have more than 20 EVs at the moment?
As for the 100kw minimum, I strongly disagree. A 22kw (maybe even 11kw) charger should be more than enough for >95% of cases, and the rest can use a charging station to top up.
BTW in some cars I think 7kwh could get you 25 miles, maybe even 30.

33
Antarctica / Re: PIG has calved
« on: January 15, 2020, 09:17:12 PM »
Thanks for the zoomed out animation over multiple frames. Makes it easier to understand the big picture.
Watching it a few times, it's clear the width of the big crack at its western side (nearer to the cork) has increased significantly over the last week.

34
El Cid, I wonder - did you read the LTG book? Did you read the update? Or are you just going by headlines?
By the way, at least some changes in growth trends were introduced after the original book - for example the Chinese one-child policy was in part affected by the book and the concept of finite limits to growth on a finite planet. So how do you judge the success of the simulations? (Not predictions but never mind).

To all, I strongly recommend reading the "Limits to Growth - the 30-year update" published in 2004, which is freely available online for some reason. You will better understand the concepts of limits, carrying capacity and overshoot and not have to rely on other people's opinions or biased summaries.
http://www.peakoilindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Limits-to-Growth-updated.pdf

35
This is a major and popular misconception

1) Real goods can not be borrowed from the future only nominal assets. Borrowing can temporarily push up the nominal price of stocks, housing, etc but won't change the amount of real goods available
Very much not true. When you overfish the oceans leading to much lower fish output later, you borrow/steal from the future. When you deforest the Amazon for cattle and soy farming, leading to a much smaller carbon sink later, you borrow/steal from the future. When you overfarm leading to topsoil loss and poisoning of the ground with chemicals, leading to lower farming output later, you borrow/steal from the future. When you drain aquifers at much higher rates than their natural refill rates, leading to much lower water output later, you borrow/steal from the future. There are many other examples, too many to list unfortunately.


Quote
3) Forecasting the end of the world is always a very attractive psychological position as it proves me that I am cleverer than everybody else and when they realize their doom I will be standing there, telling everyone: "I told you so"
I am not a psychologist but it seems from reading this forum that "debunking" dire long-term forecasts using a variety of techniques is a very attractive psychological proposition for some members.

36
Policy and solutions / Re: The Most Ambitious Plan of the Human Race
« on: January 14, 2020, 07:29:59 PM »
You are both talking past each other. Buses are a great solution for high and medium population density and/or for people less pressured for time. For areas with a very low population density and for people pressured for time buses are simply not a solution. To think that people avoid the bus because they hate/fear their neighbor is utter nonsense. When the bus goes every few hours and every few days, it is not usable by people pressured for time. And paying a bus driver to drive 3 people between villages and rural farms makes no economic sense, and there is a good reason why governments avoid it.
It is no wonder that the posters advocating the bus as a panacea live in urban/suburban areas and are not pressured for time, while those seeing the bus as useless live in a rural setting and are pressured for time.
I use buses all the time despite being constantly pressured for time, but I live in an urban environment and the bus typically arrives in 10 minutes. If I knew I had to wait an hour or even 30 minutes each direction, I would not be taking the bus despite my best intentions of avoiding unnecessary waste and pollution.

37
Policy and solutions / Re: The Most Ambitious Plan of the Human Race
« on: January 14, 2020, 03:47:25 AM »
I think any ambitious plan should include free electric bikes for anyone who wants them. This will address some of the issues of those who can't afford cars or even shared public transport. And the E-bikes are highly efficient, I wouldn't be surprised if much more so than E-buses, and I've even read somewhere that they are more efficient than pedal bikes (considering the energy it takes to grow the calories needed for the biking human).

38
Antarctica / Re: Antarctic Icebergs
« on: January 14, 2020, 03:33:17 AM »
I think at this stage it's safe from grounding.
Blumenkraft thanks for the animations.

39
I don't think civilisation can collapse now because first the globalized infrastructure (finance, logistics, production, transport, energy) has to be severely damaged. A breakdown of 2 of those 5 will be enough I expect. Globalized infrastructure is a manifold of complex interdependend interconnected systems and I expect that when a tipping point is crossed through breakdowns, it will be a fast global crash. 'Just In Time delivery' cannot go on -> no deliveries.
...
Can the finance and energy infrastructure be 'sandboxed'? I don't think so because the whole system needs to be re-engineered and there will be no time for that. Missing essential resources and parts will stop almost all production. There is no resilience in our current systems and no self sufficiency. Most rich countries can't even produce their own food. Prices will skyrocket.
...
Some richer countries will be able to temporarily soften the blows and continue but not for long.
Yes, yes and yes.
My timeline is around 2050 for the pressures emanating from overpopulation, resource consumption and environmental degradation (including AGW) to finally tip the scales.

In my view, technology and political will could save us, but won't. Rate of deployment of appropriate technology (e.g. solar PV), and the taking of hard decisions (e.g. one-child policy), have to be accelerated 10x, in fact had to be accelerated a couple decades back.

This is the wrong thread so i won't belabor these points any further.

40
Policy and solutions / Re: The Boring Company
« on: January 13, 2020, 10:07:43 PM »
The LVCC needs a people mover between its halls, this is orthogonal to the Las Vegas bus issue.
The Boring Company for now is just a contractor for this people mover, this is indeed not really public transport. Should TBC ever get into public transport as a venture (rather than as contractors) it will be a different story, but for now the responsibility and decision making is with those hiring the contractors.

41
Policy and solutions / Re: Electric cars
« on: January 13, 2020, 10:00:47 PM »
Most charging should be at home/office/streetside at low rates. If your charging is gonna be solely in fast charger stations at such high rates, better skip buying an EV for now.

42
Policy and solutions / Re: Tesla glory/failure
« on: January 13, 2020, 09:11:20 AM »
I agree that on the face of it building GF4 in one year is impossible. I thought the same about GF3 though, and was pleasantly surprised with the result. My gut feeling, GF4 will take longer than GF3 but much shorter than similar factories in Germany. As often with Tesla, I recommend a wait-and-see attitude.

43
Policy and solutions / Re: Greta Thunberg's Atlantic crossing
« on: January 13, 2020, 09:02:57 AM »
The politicians and the corporate elite will of course try to sideline and ignore Greta and her messages, just as they have done to countless other message bearers for decades. But when the silent majority finally rises maybe things will change.
Greta is only a schoolgirl who brought huge awareness to the climate crisis and affected the opinions of (tens? hundreds?) millions of people. She deserves all the praise she can get. If her messages are ignored you should put the blame where it belongs, on the politicians and corporate elite. Have your own messages been received and executed upon? I think not. So why diss her? Have you affected such numbers of people? I think not. At least she did.
She is not a product, she is just one person, lacking the power to make or cause a change by herself.
Maybe she will be beaten and give up later, maybe even sell herself somehow. This is understandable when facing impossible odds. That she hasn't done so yet tells a lot about her.
Praise, not unjustified criticism, is her due.

44
Consequences / Re: Places becoming more livable
« on: January 12, 2020, 11:48:22 PM »
Quote
- human population: this is absolutely true, there are simply too many humans for this planet, but I do not think that any of you would have an IMMEDIATE solution
El cid, on the contrary, the immediate solution is to reduce childbirth to one per woman, this would reduce global population in 2050 (which I estimate will be the crisis point) by about 2.5 billion down from the expected 10 billion.

Quote
Since we had more than that before FF and the Americas were not fully settled, that seems reasonable.
Bear in mind those 1 billion people back in 1800 had much lower levels of resource consumption per capita, resources were more abundant, and the global environment with much less cumulative pollution.
However, barring some extra human-made catastrophe (WW3, nuclear plant meltdowns, pandemic, Mad Max dystopia etc.) I also estimate the Earth post-AGW will be able to support roughly a billion humans.

45
Policy and solutions / Re: Greta Thunberg's Atlantic crossing
« on: January 12, 2020, 11:01:22 PM »
Rboyd, while I highly value your contributions in other threads on this forum, I strongly dislike your very strong negative language about Greta. I think Greta is doing a great service and is actually calling for very drastic measures. If they're not being implemented it's not for her lack of trying.
Calling her a product, throwing in greenwashing as well, is IMHO offensive.

46
Consequences / Re: Places becoming less livable
« on: January 11, 2020, 02:17:53 AM »
So considering the biblical tale about the promise to Abraham to multiply his descendants as the sand on the seashore, maybe this should be a hint to Abraham's alleged progeny to halt this mindless compund multiplying?

47
Science / Re: Water availability
« on: January 10, 2020, 06:07:55 PM »
The world's population is growing rapidly, and by 2100 will exceed 10 billion.

As a result, the shortage of drinking water is increasing.
World population is extrapolated/forecasted to reach 10 billion by 2050 unfortunately. So the issues considered in this thread will be larger and sooner.
By 2100 I can't see how the global population can still be maintained at 10 billion. Too long an overshoot above carrying capacity does not end well.

48
Science / Re: Water availability
« on: January 10, 2020, 06:04:37 PM »
Quote
You can try to fill the deep basins with the ocean to stop the growth of the ocean. There is a project to fill the Dead Sea.
I also heard one to fill a depression in North Africa. I forget the name, but I think it started with 'Q'.
That would be the Qattara depression.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project

49
Science / Re: 2019 Mauna Loa CO2 levels
« on: January 10, 2020, 05:59:13 PM »
I fail to see how the animation showing 2019 over 2018 as mostly larger than 2018 over 2017, with Ken's figures showing 2.86 for 2018 over 2017, and only 2.22 for 2019 over 2018. One of these sources is wrong.

50
The rest / Re: SpaceX
« on: January 10, 2020, 05:55:08 PM »
Thanks gerontocrat and Bernard, that's roughly what I thought, at least for the lower orbits.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 93