Is the ocean broken?

AGW is intrinsically intended to be a sad perspective on human beings. It's anti-human in it's philosophy.

 

Did you read their primary document?

 

Rapid worldwide growth of glacial lakes since 1990

Abstract

Glacial lakes are rapidly growing in response to climate change and glacier retreat. The role of these lakes as terrestrial storage for glacial meltwater is currently unknown and not accounted for in global sea level assessments. Here, we map glacier lakes around the world using 254,795 satellite images and use scaling relations to estimate that global glacier lake volume increased by around 48%, to 156.5 km3, between 1990 and 2018. This methodology provides a near-global database and analysis of glacial lake extent, volume and change. Over the study period, lake numbers and total area increased by 53 and 51%, respectively. Median lake size has increased 3%; however, the 95th percentile has increased by around 9%. Currently, glacial lakes hold about 0.43 mm of sea level equivalent. As glaciers continue to retreat and feed glacial lakes, the implications for glacial lake outburst floods and water resources are of considerable societal and ecological importance.

 

Stop eating steak....





without potatos.

 

ImaginaryNumber, could you try to muster the decency not to blow up to size 6 everything you quote ?

 

Yes I did, did you ?

It says on page 7...

‘‘ . . . . The 90% Clean case supports a total of 29 million job-years cumulatively during 2020–2035. Employment related to the energy sector increases by approximately 8.5 million net jobyears, as increased employment from expanding renewable energy and battery storage more than replaces lost employment related to declining fossil fuel generation. The No New Policy case requires one-third fewer jobs, for a total of 20 million job-years over the study period. These jobs include direct, indirect, and induced jobs related to construction, manufacturing, operations and maintenance, and the supply chain. Overall, the 90% Clean case supports over 500,000 more jobs each year compared to the No New Policy case. . . . . ’’

But nowhere the report tells from where those claimed 500,000 more jobs each year (× 15 = 29 million job years ?) are paid from, and nowhere is a trend that fossil fuels become more expensive in the upcoming 15 years (they talk about 2020—2035) than harvesting wind and solar energy and storing some of it in batteries.

So how do you explain the by you in post #554 quoted claim: ‘‘ three times more jobs per investment dollar ’’ ?

 

Those are some of the direct deceptions the ImaginaryNumber figure is posting here: 15 × ½ a million = 7 ½ million, and not 29 million as claimed, or did they as a lame excuse for it in their claims borrow 28 ½ million job-years from what they call the No New Policy case without mentioning it ?

And if so, then how come they claim 29 million job-years is 3 × as much as 28 ½ million job-years for the same invested money ?

When AGW fanatics have proven to incorrectly quadruple even the most simple math in their proposed figures, then how can they be trusted on any figure ?

 

LIKE

 

Ditto that.

 

B O R I N G

29 million 90% clean - 20 million No New Policy = 9 million

1/2 million/year * 15 years = 7 million, which is about 9 million, more or less.

Please do, all you want. <roll eyes>

EDIT TO ADD:
Regarding the now deleted post by Yob -- some forum software will not let a post be edited/deleted once someone else has QUOTED that post.

[I now see that if you click on Yob's quote's up-arrow it takes you to the deleted post. Interesting. The post wasn't actually deleted, just removed from the thread.]

And I now see that the third member of your little syncophany just couldn't resist also making a fool of himself.

 

That's nonsense made up by yourself.

So how do you explain the by you in post #554 quoted claim: ‘‘ three times more jobs per investment dollar ’’ ?

Where does the money for the claimed extra jobs come from ?

 

Thanks for the ad hominem attack. You temper my steel.

 

Try re-reading the document until you figure it out.

 

Taxpayers. They milk the taxpayers. Then the kickbacks happen. Research Solyndra.

https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/a...onth=01&date=29&id=621537&oref=duckduckgo.com

 

I did and it's not there, like so often you show again you don't have the decency to answer questions about the lack of info and the wrong info in the rapports you put up for discussion, nevertheless the questions are still up just in case you might choose to better your life in this regard, so just to start with the last one...

How do you explain the by you in post #554 quoted claim: ‘‘ three times more jobs per investment dollar ’’ ?

Where does the money for the claimed extra jobs come from ?