Global warming err Climate change HOAX

[Orlando Tim]

On 8/24/2022 at 7:59 AM, ALF said:

The world's first hydrogen-powered passenger trains are here

The future of environmentally friendly travel might just be here -- and it's Germany that's leading the charge, with the first ever rail line to be entirely run on hydrogen-powered trains, starting from Wednesday.

 

The trains are emissions-free and low-noise, with only steam and condensed water issuing from the exhaust. They have a range of 1,000 kilometers (621 miles), meaning they can run for an entire day on the network on a single tank of hydrogen. A hydrogen filling station has already been established on the route. The trains can go at a maximum of 140 kph, or 87mph, though regular speeds on the line are much less, between 80-120 kph.

 

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/coradia-ilint-hydrogen-trains/index.html

Hydrogen power would be superior but part of the issue is the cost to convert the infrastructure and other elements. If we all agreed that hydrogen was the future and committed to it the cost of the entire transformation would be recouped eventually but it would take decades at a minimum. I will be very interested in how this whole things works and whether it is on budget or not. I hope it runs well because more options would be good.

[ALF]

Grim story if true for the future.

 

The World’s Energy Problem Is Far Worse Than We’re Being Told

No politician wants to tell us the real story of fossil fuel depletion. The real story is that we are already running short of oil, coal and natural gas because the direct and indirect costs of extraction are reaching a point where the selling price of food and other basic necessities needs to be unacceptably high to make the overall economic system work. At the same time, wind and solar and other “clean energy” sources are nowhere nearly able to substitute for the quantity of fossil fuels being lost.

 

This unfortunate energy story is essentially a physics problem. Energy per capita and, in fact, resources per capita, must stay high enough for an economy’s growing population. When this does not happen, history shows that civilizations tend to collapse.

 

Politicians cannot possibly admit that today’s world economy is headed for collapse, in a way similar to that of prior civilizations. Instead, they need to provide the illusion that they are in charge. The self-organizing system somehow leads politicians to put forward reasons why the changes ahead might be desirable (to avert climate change), or at least temporary (because of sanctions against Russia).

 

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/The-Worlds-Energy-Problem-Is-Far-Worse-Than-Were-Being-Told.html

 

Texas, home of Eagle Ford, Permian and Barnett shale oil plays, holds more than 60 billion barrels of shale oil alone, Rystad estimates. That is more than the untapped oil in all of China. There are also vast sums of oil beneath the ground in North Dakota, where the Bakken shale oil play sits. Plus oil in Alaska
 

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, ALF said:

Grim story if true for the future.

 

The World’s Energy Problem Is Far Worse Than We’re Being Told

No politician wants to tell us the real story of fossil fuel depletion. The real story is that we are already running short of oil, coal and natural gas because the direct and indirect costs of extraction are reaching a point where the selling price of food and other basic necessities needs to be unacceptably high to make the overall economic system work. At the same time, wind and solar and other “clean energy” sources are nowhere nearly able to substitute for the quantity of fossil fuels being lost.

 

This unfortunate energy story is essentially a physics problem. Energy per capita and, in fact, resources per capita, must stay high enough for an economy’s growing population. When this does not happen, history shows that civilizations tend to collapse.

 

Politicians cannot possibly admit that today’s world economy is headed for collapse, in a way similar to that of prior civilizations. Instead, they need to provide the illusion that they are in charge. The self-organizing system somehow leads politicians to put forward reasons why the changes ahead might be desirable (to avert climate change), or at least temporary (because of sanctions against Russia).

 

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/The-Worlds-Energy-Problem-Is-Far-Worse-Than-Were-Being-Told.html

 

Texas, home of Eagle Ford, Permian and Barnett shale oil plays, holds more than 60 billion barrels of shale oil alone, Rystad estimates. That is more than the untapped oil in all of China. There are also vast sums of oil beneath the ground in North Dakota, where the Bakken shale oil play sits. Plus oil in Alaska
 

Thanks for sharing. I’ve often surmised the same thing. The problem isn’t going to be ‘climate change’. The problem is going to be a flat out energy shortage. I’m certainly no expert in the field but I always thought they should’ve invested way more research into nuclear. 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

On 9/1/2022 at 9:21 AM, SoCal Deek said:

Thanks for sharing. I’ve often surmised the same thing. The problem isn’t going to be ‘climate change’. The problem is going to be a flat out energy shortage. I’m certainly no expert in the field but I always thought they should’ve invested way more research into nuclear. 

I see the issue boiling down to one concept: Productivity.  The ability to produce greater output at lower costs and higher efficiency.   Technology has reached the point of demising returns and renewable sources that are less efficient and more costly have western civilization headed in the other direction.  The implication is a lower standard of living and a general social and economic decline.  Big jumps in energy output and efficiency from the fields of physics and advanced technology like fusion are still decades, if at all, away,    

[aristocrat]

Get ***** Greta 

[yall]

On 9/1/2022 at 9:21 AM, SoCal Deek said:

Thanks for sharing. I’ve often surmised the same thing. The problem isn’t going to be ‘climate change’. The problem is going to be a flat out energy shortage. I’m certainly no expert in the field but I always thought they should’ve invested way more research into nuclear. 

The very people that have been preaching climate doom will be the same ones who bear some responsibility in bringing it about by being so wholly opposed to nuclear.

[aristocrat]

 

[TH3]

2 hours ago, yall said:

The very people that have been preaching climate doom will be the same ones who bear some responsibility in bringing it about by being so wholly opposed to nuclear.

It was 116 degrees in Sacramento yesterday

[SoCal Deek]

23 minutes ago, TH3 said:

It was 116 degrees in Sacramento yesterday

And? 

[Tiberius]

55 minutes ago, TH3 said:

It was 116 degrees in Sacramento yesterday

These heat waves are outrageous 

[aristocrat]

1 hour ago, TH3 said:

It was 116 degrees in Sacramento yesterday

 

Broke the previous high of 114 which was set in...1925.  Have we decided what was happening back then?

[Chef Jim]

42 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

These heat waves are outrageous 

And we must do something!!  
 

Superman!!  Move the earth father from the sun!!

 

Nothing can be done. So enjoy the wonderful warm weather.  

10 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

 

Broke the previous high of 114 which was set in...1925.  Have we decided what was happening back then?

The hottest temp ever recorded on earth was 134 in Death Valley in…….1913. 

[Tiberius]

20 minutes ago, Bandito said:

Crops grow better in hot climates. So in theory this is better for society. More food for us all around the world!

 

It is also called SUMMMMMMMMMERRRRRR

Which crops? 

[The Frankish Reich]

1 hour ago, Bandito said:

Crops grow better in hot climates.

Tell that to my spring peas that withered and died when May brought July like temps. 
 I assume that this is not 100% serious. But you do have a point - climate change is extending growing seasons in areas that were previously pretty marginal for agriculture. That partially offsets the loss of other agricultural production in lower latitudes. But I don’t think you’ll find anyone arguing that this is a net gain. 

[The Frankish Reich]

On 9/1/2022 at 7:21 AM, SoCal Deek said:

I always thought they should’ve invested way more research into nuclear

Agreed. If only we could turn back the clock to about 1980 to start all over again. That was the age of “no nukes” that really took off after Three Mile Island. When nuclear was largely abandoned, the US (and then the world) turned sharply toward fossil fuels again. The risks of nuclear failure were immediate and obvious: potential meltdowns (really only one - Chernobyl - has ever happened), problems storing waste, etc. The risks of fossil fuels were distant and diffuse, but potentially much greater in impact. 
 

[aristocrat]

6 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Agreed. If only we could turn back the clock to about 1980 to start all over again. That was the age of “no nukes” that really took off after Three Mile Island. When nuclear was largely abandoned, the US (and then the world) turned sharply toward fossil fuels again. The risks of nuclear failure were immediate and obvious: potential meltdowns (really only one - Chernobyl - has ever happened), problems storing waste, etc. The risks of fossil fuels were distant and diffuse, but potentially much greater in impact. 
 

 

It's not too late. Gates has a company called Terrapower that have some real advanced tech where they have the ability to use spent rods so no storage. They also dont need any power to keep the nuke cool which lowers the risk of meltdown and they are much cheaper to build. Also, need to go with waste to power plants which can be built quick and create half the pollution a waste dump uses plus you dont have to ship the waste to china to just bury 

[Precision]

7 hours ago, aristocrat said:

 

It's not too late. Gates has a company called Terrapower that have some real advanced tech where they have the ability to use spent rods so no storage. They also dont need any power to keep the nuke cool which lowers the risk of meltdown and they are much cheaper to build. Also, need to go with waste to power plants which can be built quick and create half the pollution a waste dump uses plus you dont have to ship the waste to china to just bury 

In addition to Terrapower there are a number of initiatives in the US and internationally to deploy Molten Salt/Molten Sodium Reactors.  The underlying technology is mature and dates back to experiments in the 50's/60's.  Everyone gets excited about incremental improvements in Fusion, but this technology is mature and is the near-term future for nuclear.  Will be interesting to see how this is deployed and the impact between it and renewables.  If this technology was cheap and safe enough, would we even go to the trouble of renewables? 

 

Some interesting reading.....

Molten salt reactor

[B-Man]

 

 

“CLIMATE CHANGE” ISN’T TURNING OUT AS ADVERTISED: 

 

This should be the absolute peak of hurricane season—but it’s dead quiet out there. “Everyone from the US agency devoted to studying weather, oceans, and the atmosphere—the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration—to the most highly regarded hurricane professionals predicted a season with above-normal to well above-normal activity. . . .

 

Perhaps what is most striking about this season is that we are now at the absolute peak of hurricane season, and there is simply nothing happening.”

 

 

 

Now eventually there will be a storm or two, but doomsday narrative has been disproven.

 

.  https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/09/this-should-be-the-absolute-peak-of-hurricane-season-but-its-dead-quiet-out-there/

 

 

.

Edited September 12, 2022 by B-Man

[B-Man]