Climate change: What can you do to help halt global warming and when will you do it?

Forums › Off topic › Climate change: What can you do to help halt global warming and when will you do it?

1 | ... | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | ... | 70

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2259226 16-Jun-2019 19:03

frednz:

Fred, Ill look forward to reading this in detail.

I get the feeling that we are at odds. Im all for CC improvements, so are you

Time for tea, then a read :-)

Cheers

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2259237 16-Jun-2019 19:39

frednz:

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/392131/greenhouse-gas-emissions-climate-scientist-warns-of-dangers-ahead

From the above:

If the world continues to emit greenhouse gasses it will lock in a further 3C of global warming and 10m of sea level rise, according to a professor.

Victoria University professor James Renwick was a keynote speaker at the Just Transition Community Conference in New Plymouth today.

He said the situation was dire.

"There's been a lot of talk about a climate emergency lately and it really is an emergency situation.

The article is well worth reading and it really does paint a very gloomy picture of what's likely to happen to us!

It does.

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 429
Inactive user

#2259241 16-Jun-2019 19:52

tdgeek:

The numbers you quoted re GG are misleading though. Are you implying that water vapour is the problem ?

I gave the link to Wikipedia as I find the site provides a very comprehensive treatment of the issues concerned with global warming and I particularly like all the detailed references to source material.

Sure, a simple Google / Bing search may turn up additional material to what's on Wikipedia, but I generally start with Wikipedia when I want to research a topic that is new to me.

I don't find the quote to be misleading, and if anyone did find this to be the case, I'm sure that further reading of relevant material on Wikipedia would clarify things for them.

gzt

18694 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7830

Lifetime subscriber

#2259242 16-Jun-2019 19:53

kingdragonfly: governments are more willing to fund EV battery research than fuel cell research; there's a finite amount of research dollars.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/fuel-cells-in-2017-are-where-solar-was-in-2002#gs.jacwpd

Your link does not support your point at all. It says H2 is where solar was at in 2002. It's implying similar price drops can be expected with H2 production as research and investment continues as it did for solar. In fact the government of Japan has set H2 infrastructure as a strategic national objective:

CNBC: In 2016, Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), decided that by 2020 there would be some 40,000 hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles (FCVs) on Japan's roads, along with 160 fueling stations and 1.4 million residential fuel cells, known as Ene-Farms. METI is expected to spend at least 108 billion yen (US$975 million) on hydrogen projects over a two-year period ending March 2020.

CO2 reduction is a large factor in that objective. Having said that it's also a key plank in an energy diversification and energy independence strategy. New Zealand's strategic approach to hydrogen is likely to be a bit different.

kingdragonfly

11996 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12893

Subscriber

#2259243 16-Jun-2019 19:57

I've read that burial is bad for the environment and even cremation is bad for climate change.

Perhaps this is a good third alternate

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2259246 16-Jun-2019 20:10

frednz:

I don't find the quote to be misleading, and if anyone did find this to be the case, I'm sure that further reading of relevant material on Wikipedia would clarify things for them.

What I read is that water vapour is HUGE. It is. Circa 95%. But its natural as is CO2. Pre industrial Revolution, these and other GG are fine, they are natural, there is an equalbrium. A balance.

Since then we have global warming. Thats not caused by water vapour, water vapour is not the forcer. CO2 is the forcer, solely as its there for decades or more, and it was added by us. Assessing water vapour as the inciter is incorrect.

Geekzone

Want to support Geekzone and browse the site without the ads? Subscribe to Geekzone now (monthly, annual and lifetime options).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2259247 16-Jun-2019 20:16

gzt:
kingdragonfly: governments are more willing to fund EV battery research than fuel cell research; there's a finite amount of research dollars.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/fuel-cells-in-2017-are-where-solar-was-in-2002#gs.jacwpd

Your link does not support your point at all. It says H2 is where solar was at in 2002. It's implying similar price drops can be expected with H2 production as research and investment continues as it did for solar. In fact the government of Japan has set H2 infrastructure as a strategic national objective:

CNBC: In 2016, Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), decided that by 2020 there would be some 40,000 hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles (FCVs) on Japan's roads, along with 160 fueling stations and 1.4 million residential fuel cells, known as Ene-Farms. METI is expected to spend at least 108 billion yen (US$975 million) on hydrogen projects over a two-year period ending March 2020.

CO2 reduction is a large factor in that objective. Having said that it's also a key plank in an energy diversification and energy independence strategy. New Zealand's strategic approach to hydrogen is likely to be a bit different.

With all the bagging here of Hydrogen (what appears to be pro EV based), I googled Hydrogen, and Hydrogen Gas. It is in commercial production. Its being looked at as the replacement for reticulated gas in the UK. A place in the US allows another business to convert its waste to H2, then thats used commercially. I was not aware its in that wide a use. They also looking at other metals that allow electrolysis to be faster and cheaper.

Its plentiful

Its green

Its costly.

Fix the last and its viable

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2259253 16-Jun-2019 20:18

gzt:
kingdragonfly: governments are more willing to fund EV battery research than fuel cell research; there's a finite amount of research dollars.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/fuel-cells-in-2017-are-where-solar-was-in-2002#gs.jacwpd

Your link does not support your point at all. It says H2 is where solar was at in 2002. It's implying similar price drops can be expected with H2 production as research and investment continues as it did for solar. In fact the government of Japan has set H2 infrastructure as a strategic national objective:

CNBC: In 2016, Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), decided that by 2020 there would be some 40,000 hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles (FCVs) on Japan's roads, along with 160 fueling stations and 1.4 million residential fuel cells, known as Ene-Farms. METI is expected to spend at least 108 billion yen (US$975 million) on hydrogen projects over a two-year period ending March 2020.

CO2 reduction is a large factor in that objective. Having said that it's also a key plank in an energy diversification and energy independence strategy. New Zealand's strategic approach to hydrogen is likely to be a bit different.

But its here as per JA article the other day. Whatever anyone's bias is, we need to look at EVERYTHING

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2259284 17-Jun-2019 06:52

tdgeek:

If you feed vapour into the air, if its is saturated it will fall as rain or snow.

Clouds tell me that this is untrue.

Ge0rge

2114 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2060

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2259286 17-Jun-2019 06:59

frankv:
tdgeek:

If you feed vapour into the air, if its is saturated it will fall as rain or snow.

Clouds tell me that this is untrue.

Clouds are condensed water that has yet to reach saturation point.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2259288 17-Jun-2019 07:10

frankv:

tdgeek:

If you feed vapour into the air, if its is saturated it will fall as rain or snow.

Clouds tell me that this is untrue.

Where is the rest of my post that states that water vapour content in the air is determined by temperature? Clearly if clouds are in the air they are not saturated. Note dark clouds

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2259296 17-Jun-2019 08:30

Ge0rge:
frankv:

tdgeek:

If you feed vapour into the air, if its is saturated it will fall as rain or snow.

Clouds tell me that this is untrue.

Clouds are condensed water that has yet to reach saturation point.

From Wikipedia:

On Earth, clouds are formed as a result of saturation of the air when it is cooled to its dew point, or when it gains sufficient moisture (usually in the form of water vapor) from an adjacent source to raise the dew point to the ambient temperature.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2259298 17-Jun-2019 08:34

tdgeek:

frankv:

tdgeek:

If you feed vapour into the air, if its is saturated it will fall as rain or snow.

Clouds tell me that this is untrue.

Where is the rest of my post that states that water vapour content in the air is determined by temperature? Clearly if clouds are in the air they are not saturated. Note dark clouds

I'm not disputing that water vapour content of air is proportional to temperature. Clouds are formed when the air becomes saturated, and the water droplets do not fall.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2259299 17-Jun-2019 08:46

frankv:

tdgeek:

frankv:

tdgeek:

If you feed vapour into the air, if its is saturated it will fall as rain or snow.

Clouds tell me that this is untrue.

Where is the rest of my post that states that water vapour content in the air is determined by temperature? Clearly if clouds are in the air they are not saturated. Note dark clouds

I'm not disputing that water vapour content of air is proportional to temperature. Clouds are formed when the air becomes saturated, and the water droplets do not fall.

As they are too light. If they turn to ice they will fall and usually end up as rain, or if the temp falls, the water will exceed what the cloud can hold so it falls. Or it can just build up and gravity will take over

Ge0rge

2114 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2060

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2259300 17-Jun-2019 08:46

frankv:
Ge0rge:
frankv:

tdgeek:

If you feed vapour into the air, if its is saturated it will fall as rain or snow.

Clouds tell me that this is untrue.

Clouds are condensed water that has yet to reach saturation point.

From Wikipedia:

On Earth, clouds are formed as a result of saturation of the air when it is cooled to its dew point, or when it gains sufficient moisture (usually in the form of water vapor) from an adjacent source to raise the dew point to the ambient temperature.

From the Smithsonian Science Education website:

"It’s only when that water vapor cools and condenses into liquid water droplets or solid ice crystals that visible clouds form"

I too can cherry-pick information to suit my argument.

1 | ... | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | ... | 70