This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

Jump to new

Look what they have in the Netherlands.
 
In face of rising sea levels the Netherlands ‘must consider controlled withdrawal’
The Netherlands is famous for its polders and dikes. We are known as that industrious little nation on the North Sea that has successfully kept the sea at bay for centuries. But the sea that we have been fighting for our entire history was not increasing in volume. This situation is now being seriously disrupted by warming seawater and melting glaciers and ice caps, leading to a slow but steady sea level rise.

https://www.vn.nl/rising-sea-levels-netherlands/
 
It's not rocket science
 
You used to teach children, that is frightening
 
Rapid Antarctic Ice Melt in the Past Bodes Ill for the Future
Geological evidence shows glaciers retreated by as much as 6 miles in a year at the end of the last ice age

... Dowdeswell said he believes the circumstances today might be similar to what was going on at the end of the last ice age.

Today, scientists believe that currents of warm ocean water are helping to melt Antarctica's fastest-melting glaciers from the bottom up. The warm water seeps beneath the ice shelves at the edges of the glaciers, causing them to thin and destabilize.

"The circumstances of ice shelf systems thinning were likely to be similar 11,000 or 12,000 years ago," Dowdeswell said.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/...ce-melt-in-the-past-bodes-ill-for-the-future/
 
Maybe this is the core reason why serious action on CC just isn't happening ?


Government climate advisers running scared of change, says leading scientist
...Rapid transformation needed, Kevin Anderson says, particularly in lifestyles of rich

....the models also ignored the fact that it was the lifestyles of a relatively wealthy few that gave rise to the lion’s share of emissions.

“Globally the wealthiest 10% are responsible for half of all emissions, the wealthiest 20% for 70% of emissions. If regulations forced the top 10% to cut their emissions to the level of the average EU citizen, and the other 90% made no change in their lifestyles, that would still cut total emissions by a third.


“If we were serious about this crisis we could do this in a year – if we were really serious we could do it in a month, but we are not and our emissions just keep rising.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ientist-criticises-uk-over-its-climate-record
 
The record temperatures caused by man made global heating in the Arctic is creating a mass thaw of permafrost.

How Thawing Permafrost Is Beginning to Transform the Arctic
The frozen layer of soil that has underlain the Arctic tundra for millennia is now starting to thaw. This thawing, which could release vast amounts of greenhouse gases, is already changing the Arctic landscape by causing landslides, draining lakes, and altering vegetation.

.....What we do know is that if the Arctic continues to warm as quickly as climatologists are predicting, an estimated 2.5 million square miles of permafrost — 40 percent of the world’s total — could disappear by the end of the century, with enormous consequences. The most alarming is expected to be the release of huge stores of greenhouse gases, including methane, carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide that have remained locked in the permafrost for ages. Pathogens will also be released.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-melting-permafrost-is-beginning-to-transform-the-arctic
 
sptrawler said:
I suppose one upside from the virus is the affluence of people will reduce, therefore it should follow on that there will be less money spent on travel and power hungry devices, so it may actually reduce the use of fossil fuel.
Click to expand...
plenty of gasbags still at it, though
 

Why not leave the whole issue of "global warming" to the process of self resolution ? Clearly if it is a problem then the necessary adjustments will be automatically applied to address teh issue.
In that case it is probably just a waste of pixels having the discussion...
 
It will be self resolving, either we can reduce it or we can't, if we can't then we disappear.
After humans have gone, the world returns to balance and the cycle starts again.
See it is self resolving, the only thing that isn't self resolving, is to think that humans can continue with population growth ad infinitum.
 
Another way of looking at it Bas is, if we halve the carbon footprint per capita, but double the population in reality we have gone nowhere.
It certainly wont be solved on this forum.
 
sptrawler said:
Another way of looking at it Bas is, if we halve the carbon footprint per capita, but double the population in reality we have gone nowhere.
It certainly wont be solved on this forum.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If you check out post 3566 some of the biggest savings in carbon footprint will come from the wealthiest people in our societies - and that includes the newly wealthy in China and India of course.

And you right when you say it won't be solved on this forum. But I keep coming back to the principle that this forum is a microcosm of our society albeit more on the conservative older side. In that context the views formulated here could reflect a wider mood.

But as you say on that basis there is no chance of any change of perspective around CC. It looks like we are going to allow our present path a free run to its final consequences.
 
basilio said:
Not necessarily. If you check out post 3566 some of the biggest savings in carbon footprint will come from the wealthiest people in our societies - and that includes the newly wealthy in China and India of course.
Click to expand...
I can't see that happening, going from a mud hut into an air conditioned condo, I would have guessed would increase the carbon footprint. Who knows they may pass wind less on a better diet? But that may be negated by the carbon footprint of the packaging the food comes in, it is complex.
 
Saw an interesting comment from a story on a hydrogen battery from here.
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/...storage-options-20200702-p558dj.html#comments

I understand most people don’t study science, or know enough about science, but it amazes me how many people don’t seem to even read the article.

People commenting about how flammable hydrogen is - and yet the article clearly states the innovation is that it is a solid storage of hydrogen, and that you won’t get the conditions where there is enough hydrogen to cause a sudden burst of ignition.

The article and diagram in the article shows how it is a battery technology to store power - linked to a solar panel system - and people comment that solar would be better than this approach.

The article states that this is consistent with the LNP National Hydrogen Strategy - and people say - no doubt the LNP will try and kill it - or they don’t want technology like this.

For ages I thought our politics has devolved due to the politicians - Reading the comments on articles like this I realise it’s the people that have devolved - into tribes so blinded by their ideology/biases/views that they can’t even read/see information - because anything that doesn’t support their view of the world is simply ignored.

And that is the REAL reason we haven’t solved these big issues.
 

Fascinating...
I read through the comments on the article and frankly I didn't find many critical or off point comments about the proposed technology.
My thoughts are I just cannot see how it will make sense from a household perspective.
The proposal is that each household will have its on mini electrolysis device to turn excess solar power into solid storage hydrogen and then use a fuel cell to reuse the hydrogen as electricity.

And this extended convoluted process is supposed to cost 2cKhr ? WTF

The current alternative is a battery bank which stores excess solar energy and then releases it back to the household.

Firstly using electricity to create hydrogen from electrolysis is wasteful. Breaking the hydrogen-Oxygen bonds uses a ton of energy which is lost in the process. In any case the proposed new system has three separate devices to construct and maintain versus one battery bank. There is all informed talk of imminent 20 year life batteries coming from Tesla and others Suddenly batteries look very cost effective.

The big deal for this process IMO is the successful cost effective development of solid storage hydrogen. The application for the development would be with large scale wind/solar operations which want to use surplus power ie no cost and save it for later transmission. The principle is there but suggesting it become a household project seems unrealistic.

Another option might be to use the solar/electrolyser/hydrogen process to replace current natural gas use in a home. Can work but the cost effectiveness seems puzzling.
 


The driving force behind hydrogen seems to be the export market. Use our ample natural supply of solar energy to turn water into hydrogen, then ammonia which can be transported overseas and turned back into electricity via fuel cells and the CSIRO membrane.

I doubt if the process is suitable for households when you can just charge batteries, but the ammonia process is great for exporting electricity.
 
Apparently 30 year life which is a massive improvement on batteries at this time.
 
This article should put fear into everyone. Earth for our survival is stuffed.

https://www.thecut.com/2020/07/the-...Pt4LAeAk1toeAhSd4aL76Os3rwREFAoCC7j8_xuua74O0

"We always expected the Arctic to change faster than the rest of the globe,” one researcher told the Washington Post. “But I don’t think anyone expected the changes to happen as fast as we are seeing them happen.” Siberian towns are experiencing a heat wave throughout the region, with many smashing centuries-old temperature records, records that are now being broken year after year. Scientists say that the area is warming at three times the rate of the rest of the world, due to a phenomenon called “Arctic amplification,” in which melting ice exposes more dark sea and lake waters, turning zones that were once net heat-reflecting into heat-absorbing. And temperatures rise even more."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Electricity investments
Replies
8
Views
605
Smurf1976
February 2025
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
6K
ducati916
Fake News - Global Warming Consensus
40 41 42
Replies
831
Views
46K
SirRumpole
What does Lloyds think is happening?
2
Replies
22
Views
6K
springhill
M
Rothschild Australia, leaders in carbon trading market
Replies
2
Views
5K
So_Cynical
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...