|
|
Administrator
ID Verified
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber
Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies
Geekzone and Quic social @ DataVault Auckland 18 Oct 2025 11AM - 2:30 PM
Lifetime subscriber
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Moderator ID Verified Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Jarle Dahl Bergersen | Referral Links: Want $50 off when you join Octopus Energy? Use this referral code
Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by making a donation or subscribing.
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Fred99:
tdgeek:
I agree. Im passionate about global warming. And global cooling, although thats not fashionable to discuss.
What global cooling?
Why do you think that something for which there's no evidence should be "fashionable"
My fault. Ive watched a few docos that mention global cooling. And as a potential means to help, but it rarely gets mentioned. Here is what it means.
Greenhouse gases insulate the planet. They do a great job, evidenced by Venus, the hottest planet in the solar system. Pollution includes greenhouse gases and smoke. Water in the atmosphere sits on a dust particle. They attach to that. With higher concentrations of smoke particles which are much much larger, the water that attaches to each smoke article is much larger. Clouds reduce solar heat, and the more smoke particles in the atmosphere the more water to block the sun. That reduces global warming by way of blocking some heat coming in. So, if you have 2 degrees warmth attributable to global warming, that may well be 3 degrees, but reduced to 2 degrees by way of the filtering aspect of smoke particles. Theoretically, if you can reduce greenhouses gases, and increase smoke output, you could reduce the growth in average global temps, artificially, and push out the point of no return, giving more time to reduce the overall problem. Then reign in smoke output. Smoke particles are not gases, they will eventually fall to earth as carbon.
From what I read over the years, and thats anecdotal, the desire to reduce global warming is there, but it does seem to be an issue which we have cheaper polluting alternatives that we would rather use first. China is an example of that. If the coal was running out soon, I would imagine they would be awesome in developing renewables. But right now, not so much. If the world was run by a President, we could just slap taxed on fossil fuels to make them less and less economic, but it doesn't work that way. They will continue to become less economic as it costs more to find and mine them. If this modern world wanted to become near 100% renewable quickly, it could. Solar PV and HW standard. Subsidised. EV's. Wind farm growth. Its all there, but its not really a big deal due to money. But as I posted, there are some great strides made by some countries, but the big ones, its a great idea but Id rather use coal and oil for a while thanks.
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
joker97:
No need I see on stuff that Ruapehu is open
Coz that is a direct comparable with a European ski resort? 
Trusted Lifetime subscriber
|
|
|
