• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Climate Change Debate

The Bear said:
Just because it's a highly complex long-term system, that doesn't mean we can't be sure that one particular element isn't having a short-term effect we can measure.

It smacks of ignorance and non-committal bet hedging to me to suggest otherwise. Better to act now and make sure, than wait and make a huge mistake that will cost future generations.

Renewable energy sources need to come in to the fore for the good of the planet anyway. Any excuse to get the world to invest in it is a good one.
Click to expand...

That last statement is rather bold given questionable environmental impact and effectiveness. Many argue for a nuclear/gas based electricity grid for least impact. That doesn't cover even half of energy demand when we add in environmental control (heating/cooling) and transport.
The electricity grid is notably inefficient but convenient (note what you pay per kWh vs gas).
 
You're making points by not answering questions?
 
Australia could power the entire country right now through solar and wind if they invested in the extra infrastructure to enable it. So could somewhere much smaller like the UK I'd imagine.

You can bang on about efficiency all you like but that comes with more investment in the technology as a natural course of development.
 
The Bear said:
Australia could power the entire country right now through solar and wind if they invested in the extra infrastructure to enable it. So could somewhere much smaller like the UK I'd imagine.

You can bang on about efficiency all you like but that comes with more investment in the technology as a natural course of development.
Click to expand...

Tell me about the 50GW of electricity supply you intend to magic up. Tell me more about heating and transport.
 
Germany has done just that in less than a decade.
 
Visage said:
You're making points by not answering questions?
Click to expand...

You know my position on the evidence that there is poor correlation with carbon dioxide emissions and temperature by all datasets. Maybe you should consider solar (beyond simply a narrow band of irradiance), multi-decadal ocean cycles (heat capacity of the oceans far exceeding the atmosphere) and last but not least the lithosphere.
The widely accepted 'pause' is explained by a multitude of theories, few of which might hold credence.
 
Visage said:
Germany has done just that in less than a decade.
Click to expand...

What? By closing nuclear and increasing lignite coal? The highest domestic costs in Europe. They have a nightmare grid that has to dump to neighbours when they get lucky.
I'm not aware that the Germans stopped driving cars, transporting goods or abstained from heating their homes.
How do you propose to find 50GW of electricity for use in the UK, remember demand would have to necessarily increase if we had to move over to the fantasy 'zero emission' electric transport of the future?

Probably not the best source but this link shows that renewables in Germany net a very small amount of the total annually:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Germany
 
Careful, you're going to pull a muscle with all that goalpost shifting....
 
HAzelGroveWolf said:
You know my position on the evidence that there is poor correlation with carbon dioxide emissions and temperature by all datasets.
Click to expand...

Then your position is wrong.

co2_temp_1964_2008.gif


Source data:

Temperatures: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
CO2: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
 
In fairness, he has already dismissed the legitimacy of both NASA and NOAA (rightly or wrongly) so I'm not sure it's useful to cite their data here.
 
He's entitled to his own opinion. He's not entitled to his own facts.
 
Not really a surprise, that.
 
Visage said:
Then your position is wrong.

co2_temp_1964_2008.gif


Source data:

Temperatures: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
CO2: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
Click to expand...

Ah great you cherry picked a timescale that suggested correlation. There has been pretty much no correlation for the past 15-18 years. Few, even those involved with the IPCC, disagree with this. All of HadCrut, GISS, UAH and RSS show the trend, or lack of, It is what cyclical things in nature do.
I noticed that you posted another John Cook cartoon.
 
Only if you ignore the 90+% of heating that goes into the oceans.
 
No, it's very measurable. And very problematic, because 2/3rds of sea level rise is down to thermal expansion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top