Energy Discussion

[Griz882]

Ok, now adjust that graph for population.

You won’t get what you want. Adjusted to per capita Qatar is by far the worse with the evil old USA way down at 15 or 16 with even the Falklands and Canada being “dirtier.” If you drill down to actual “per person” then Australia and New Zealand make the US look kind of clean. Lastly there is the type of emissions…the high sulfur content in Chinese burnt coal is far worse than much of the western unleaded gasoline pumped into the air.

Put simply, don’t fall for the tyranny of statistics because anyone with a calculator can make them say whatever they want. China is the worst polluter on this planet and looks to stay there.

 

[sevenhelmet]

Ok, now adjust that graph for population.

The operative word is population.

People = pollution. You can outsource, convert, redefine, or even deny it, but the pollution will still be there somewhere.

 

[number9]

Put simply, don’t fall for the tyranny of statistics because anyone with a calculator can make them say whatever they want. China is the worst polluter on this planet and looks to stay there.

That was actually the point I was making.

 

[robav8r]

The operative word is population.

People = pollution. You can outsource, convert, redefine, or even deny it, but the pollution will still be there somewhere.

This world does not have a CO2 or global climate change problem . . . . . it does, however, have a HUGE global pollution problem. We will lose more people to disease caused by pollution, by a very wide margin, than to the changes in climate, a climate that has endured billions of years of change, despite what woke, arrogant liberals want to convince you of otherwise.

Cheers everybody ?

 

[taxi1]

This world does not have a CO2 or global climate change problem . . . .

Cheers everybody ?

Another paragraph from the doc I linked to...page 44

It is useful to remind ourselves regularly of the capacity of human beings to persist in stupid beliefs in the face of significant, contradictory evidence.

 

[robav8r]

Another paragraph from the doc I linked to...page 44

It is useful to remind ourselves regularly of the capacity of human beings to persist in stupid beliefs in the face of significant, contradictory evidence.

@taxi1 I get it, you are completely bought into this. And, for the record, i'm not the smartest guy on this board (just ask Brett , however, if this was such an existential crises (kinda like COVID-19), why isn't the ENTIRE fucking world acting in unison to stem the tide of this disaster? The world will survive the evils of Henry Ford. The world may not survive the lunacy of the left . . . .

 

[sevenhelmet]

Another paragraph from the doc I linked to...page 44

It is useful to remind ourselves regularly of the capacity of human beings to persist in stupid beliefs in the face of significant, contradictory evidence.

Indeed. Which makes debate seem kind of futile, doesn’t it?

Very convenient.

 

[taxi1]

why isn't the ENTIRE fucking world acting in unison to stem the tide of this disaster?

That was kind of the point of the quote, I think. You'd have to check with the authors to be sure. But c'mon, your post was purposely provocative. Fight's on, no? I thought it was pretty forward of the authors to put that in their paper.

Humans are really good at ignoring the long term consequences of actions to get short term gains. I think that pretty well explains it. As @wink has stated, he's focused on lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty in the nearer term. That's a fair argument.

My wife's favorite quote from her favorite movie ever...

 

[wink]

You won’t get what you want. Adjusted to per capita Qatar is by far the worse with the evil old USA way down at 15 or 16 with even the Falklands and Canada being “dirtier.” If you drill down to actual “per person” then Australia and New Zealand make the US look kind of clean. Lastly there is the type of emissions…the high sulfur content in Chinese burnt coal is far worse than much of the western unleaded gasoline pumped into the air.

Put simply, don’t fall for the tyranny of statistics because anyone with a calculator can make them say whatever they want. China is the worst polluter on this planet and looks to stay there.

And the Paris accords goals make no adjustment for population. It seems a blunt instrument. Still only the US has come close to meeting the Paris goals in spite of be accused of damning the world to crisis by disavowing them.

 

[Gatordev]

I'm amazed there hasn't been any mention of the fusion announcement in this thread. Yes, it didn't actually make more energy than it created, but the science appears to have made a big leap towards that direction. Here's a panel discussion (that I haven't finished watching yet) but there's also an executive level brief that was just before this panel that sums it up. You can find that one on YT, as well.

 

[Brett327]

I'm amazed there hasn't been any mention of the fusion announcement in this thread. Yes, it didn't actually make more energy than it created, but the science appears to have made a big leap towards that direction. Here's a panel discussion (that I haven't finished watching yet) but there's also an executive level brief that was just before this panel that sums it up. You can find that one on YT, as well.

From my understanding, the experimental infrastructure is very different than what an actual power generation plant would look like. This has yet to even be designed. While it’s cool they’ve reached a milestone, the practical application remains several decades away, and decades more from being commercially viable as a replacement for conventional power plants.

All of this to say, more fission plants and renewables seems to be the best near term strategy.

 

[wink]

From my understanding, the experimental infrastructure is very different than what an actual power generation plant would look like. This has yet to even be designed. While it’s cool they’ve reached a milestone, the practical application remains several decades away, and decades more from being commercially viable as a replacement for conventional power plants.

Worth noting that similar rational qualifications and limitations rarely prevents the media from going all in on the latest fad science and " new research says" story. Definitely have pumped the brakes on this one.

 

[Gatordev]

From my understanding, the experimental infrastructure is very different than what an actual power generation plant would look like. This has yet to even be designed. While it’s cool they’ve reached a milestone, the practical application remains several decades away, and decades more from being commercially viable as a replacement for conventional power plants.

Sure, but we're 37 pages into this thread and it's not like anyone here is going to solve the energy "crisis."

It also doesn't mean it's an exciting step forward. Apparently the joke is that fusion has always been another 50 years away and now it may be 10-15 years away.

The actual project managers in the briefings, however were a little more nuanced. One of the next big steps is to use lasers that aren't from the 1980's, which would make the efficiency go way up and potentially make the external energy requirement match the internal payoff (ultimately hoping to make it less than the payoff). It also sounds like they need to actually recreate this again, as well, since it only happened once (at the time of recording).

 

[Flash]

Not energy, but rather agriculture, as western governments discuss confiscating farmer’s lands all in the name of climate change.

Curbing the environmental impact of agriculture will put farmers from the Netherlands to New Zealand out of business. They’re resisting. ​

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1601246301462601732

View attachment 37034

Your continue to post about the farmer protests in the Netherlands like it is some sort of existential crisis for them but fail to mention why the government is taking action. It is sort of like fishermen protesting fishing limits, there is good reason behind the policies if you bothered to look beyond the alarmist headlines.

 

[Randy Daytona]

This seems interesting:

Iran and Saudi Arabia agree to restore relations

The regional rivals are expected to reopen their embassies within two months after talks in Beijing.

www.aljazeera.com

Iran and Saudi Arabia agree to restore relations​

The regional rivals are expected to reopen embassies within two months as they re-establish ties and a security agreement after Beijing talks.