Things are Starting to Heat Up - Part VIII 9

[dik]

thread1618-496010
thread1618-496614
thread1618-497017
thread1618-497239
thread1618-497988
thread1618-498967
thread1618-501135

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[TugboatEng]

The law will get changed when the timeline becomes untenable.

And you're ok with this?

 

[dik]

Oceans warming, too...

"This month, the global sea surface hit a new record high temperature. It has never warmed this much, this quickly.
Scientists don't fully understand why this has happened.

But they worry that, combined with other weather events, the world's temperature could reach a concerning new level by the end of next year.
Experts believe that a strong El Niño weather event - a weather system that heats the ocean - will also set in over the next months.

Warmer oceans can kill off marine life, lead to more extreme weather and raise sea levels. They are also less efficient at absorbing planet-warming greenhouse gases."

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-65339934

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Experts believe that a strong El Niño weather event - a weather system that heats the ocean - will also set in over the next months.

That's a reasonable, but probably overly simplistic summary.

What I mean by that, is El Niño is related to warming in a specific area of the pacific ocean at specific time of the year that has been associated with certain weather events affecting many countries around the Pacific ocean. My belief is that it's not necessarily associated with increased ocean temperatures overall. But, specifically related to ocean currents that can effect where those warm tropical waters are taken. In California, it is associated with more rain than would normally occur. Around Equador and Peru, it might be more extreme storms. In Alaska, it's associated with a drier winter than normal. I believe (though I'm not certain) it's supposed to also be drier in Hawaii, Polynesia and Australia.

I mention this because, I'm not sure that there the El Nino weather events are related to global warming. I haven't read anything definitive on the subject, but it does seem reasonable to assume that El Nino years would likely increase with an overall increase in overall ocean temperatures.

Note:
This past winter (while one of the wettest years for California in decades) was NOT considered an El Niño year. But, it sounds like the coming one might be....

 

[dik]

We'll have to wait and see how this plays out...

"“We have to think climate change will influence El Niño in some way and will impact its impacts,” said Goddard. “But how El Niño events themselves change because of global warming? It’s hard to say, and harder to observe because there is so much variation in El Niño by itself from decade to decade. It’s a tough question to answer.”"

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[CWB1]

The law will get changed when the timeline becomes untenable.

The politicos say the same thing about every emissions reg, usually while vomiting buzzwords like "industry partners." When the glad-handing stops they dont care if the required technology is expensive, unreliable, or limited-production bc that's the OE and customer's problem, not theirs.

 

[SwinnyGG]

And you're ok with this?

In the same way that you're ok with acting like the problem doesn't exist.

The politicos say the same thing about every emissions reg, usually while vomiting buzzwords like "industry partners." When the glad-handing stops they dont care if the required technology is expensive, unreliable, or limited-production bc that's the OE and customer's problem, not theirs.

....and your point is?

The entire function of setting difficult goals like this is to drive innovation. That may not be the intended purpose in the minds of the lawmakers, but it's the end result - and in the long term it's net positive.

I'm quite sure that if there had been internet forums in the 70s, trolls like Tug would've been bitching and moaning to no end about the end of leaded gas. That was a government regulation passed against the best interest of the market but for the best interest of the public; it made cars more complicated and more expensive to make, and forced oil companies to change their entire product. In the end, the benefits to society far outweighed the negative short term economic impact.

This is a similar situation.

 

[BridgeSmith]

The entire function of setting difficult goals like this is to drive innovation.

So, when it comes to climate policy, laws = goals = useless virtue signaling. Good to know.

 

[SwinnyGG]

Excellent reading comprehension.

You don't have to understand, the world will move on without you.

 

[TugboatEng]

In the same way that you're ok with acting like the problem doesn't exist.

Excellent reading comprehension.

I said rapid decarbonization is going to increase our carbon footprint. That's worse than doing nothing at all!

 

[JoshPlumSE]

The entire function of setting difficult goals like this is to drive innovation. That may not be the intended purpose in the minds of the lawmakers, but it's the end result - and in the long term it's net positive.

That's a really good point. I remember when the first bit of this type of legislation was done in California in the 1990s. Like where they required a certain percentage of cars (2%?) be zero emission cars. The legislation was kinda crazy because it just wasn't practical and it was repealed not long after. But, GM had developed the EV1. It was very innovative with energy capture breaks, very low friction styling, light weight.... anything they could do to extend the range just a little.

Now, one could also argue that the legislation was written in a way that stifled other innovation. Once the market demanded high MPG cars, that led to the Hybrid cars like the Prius that were much more impactful (from a market share standpoint). Though you have to admit that the Prius used a lot of the same innovations that were developed originally by GM for the EV1.

Personally, I think that the legislators who do this type of laws are well intentioned idiots. But, some good came occasionally come from their aspirational idiocy. Then again how is California's "Bullet Train" going?

If we really wanted to use legislation to reduce CO2 emissions from vehicles, then I think we could do exactly that. All we have to do is add a progressive sales tax against cars that have low gas mileage. And, a progressive tax break on the purchase of cars that have gas mileage above a certain point. Oh, and you could "ramp up" the tax over a course of 10 years so that we would have a much more "gentle" transition in our economy.

 

[SwinnyGG]

I said rapid decarbonization is going to increase our carbon footprint. That's worse than doing nothing at all!

Yeah, and you were wrong about that.

The long term is what matters.

 

[rb1957]

whether we should use electric cars (or should want to) is a different discussion (see other never-ending threads).

but we have 400km electric cars now because of R&D and improvement of earlier designs.

to have electric cars as an option for gas powered is IMHO a sensible market choice. People can choose electric because either (or both) ....
1) they want to save the world from CO2, or
2) gas is too expensive and electric is (given it's limitations) still a reasonable option.

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

I said rapid decarbonization is going to increase our carbon footprint. That's worse than doing nothing at all!

I would say it a different way. We want to use our current resources "efficiently" when it comes to decarbonization. Meaning we want to get the most reduction in CO2 emissions per dollar invested in the project.

That's why paying rich people to virtue signal to their friends (by subsidizing their electric cars and rooftop solar units) is probably not a very efficient way to do decarbonize our economy.

Replacing Coal powered plants with nuclear power would be a great way. Honestly, smaller scale nuclear plants would probably be a lot more cost effective (and environmentally friendly) than wind farms.

 

[dik]

This could have far reaching consequences... including an impact on our 'disposable' outlook... things may have to last for years, rather than to end of warranty. Things may have to be repairable.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[TugboatEng]

Emissions rules are forcing me to replace engines in my boats so frequently I'm having to change them out before the warranty experies. Engines that would normally last 30 years are being phased out after 5 years. We recently went from EPA Tier 2 to Tier 3. To go to Tier 4 I will have to replace the brand new Tier 3 engines which are completely identical to the Tier 4. On this engine family Tier 4 is achieved entirely through aftertreatment. The regulatory bodies are stingy about certifying retrofits. The icing on the cake is that there is no DPF included with the Tier 4 package currently and a regulating body is going to require it in 2 years. That likely means another repower.

On top of that, my engines are light loaded. They operate at a 15% lifetime load factor. This means I'm going to have to routinely load bank generators and push on stationary objects to burn fuel to keep the SCRs functioning.

How does any of this make any sense? There needs to be some study of the cost/benefit.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

This could have far reaching consequences... including an impact on our 'disposable' outlook... things may have to last for years, rather than to end of warranty. Things may have to be repairable.

Exactly. I think one of benefits that fossil fuels have now is how established the technology is. The maintenance costs per MegaWatt of power produced is very, very low. Granted, hydro electric is probably even lower.

Solar and wind require a lot of maintenance in comparison.

It's interesting that for cars it's actually the opposite (or should be). Electric cars have a lot less complex parts. Electric motors are a lot simpler than an internal combustion engine and everything that has to support it.

 

[dik]

You can bank on it...

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...nada-begins-disclosing-climate-related-risks/

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[TugboatEng]

I don't understand. Can you clarify the relevance? How is a bank trying to legislate guaranteed income a sign of climate change?

 

[dik]

I dunno... it would be real interesting to see how they and insurance companies are dealing with this... doncha think...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[SwinnyGG]

'I dunno'
'Dontcha think'
your little smoking emoji


None of these are helping change the impression that you're taking an extreme view. If you want to make an argument, make an argument...