Is the ocean broken?

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by daiquiri, Oct 24, 2013.

  1. rangebowdrie
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 103
    Likes: 38, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Oregon

    rangebowdrie Senior Member

    It goes beyond that. If their costs go up X percent, you can bet our costs will go up X+50%.
    You "desire" to pay more?
    Then non-fossil energy sources need to come down. The use of fossil fuels will NOT be reduced by any significant measure no matter what other energy sources are used.
    What's this "We", no need to use the "Royal" term,, that's the "Let them eat cake" mind set, it exposes proclivities in thinking.
    Of course they will, the poorer classes always are the first, and suffer the most, from the idealistic whims of those who themselves never have to contend with the results of the burdens they impose on others.
    "Distributed monthly in equal per capita"
    Ah yes,, we get to the real heart of this, you might have said; "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need",, didn't that come from Karl Marx,, I've maybe forgotten,, something about the "Redistribution of wealth"?
    The way it really works is that the "redistribution" process increases the size of the pie to those who already have most of the pie,, it widens the gap.
    What would it take to convince you?
    Since the end of WWII the rest of the world has been sucking on the teats of the US. When we look at the stage today what do we see? Europe is falling apart under the weight of a system that can no longer be sustained,, you can't pay doctors wages to ditchdiggers and pay everybody not to work.
    England has already circled the drain, they tug at their forelocks and bow to their "betters" in submission,, the sprit is just about gone.
    We are ~20 Trillion in debt, do you think we should spend 10 Trillion more to maybe reduce temps .5 degrees?
    Who will pay? Certainly not the rest of the world.
    The first world is fast approaching insolvency.
    The second world is already broke.
    The third world doesn't even have a pot to piss in.
    Their are a great number of people who really need to stop listening to that little Swedish girl,, and those who would have you pay more for less, they do not have your best interests in mind.
     
  2. Will Gilmore
    Joined: Aug 2017
    Posts: 562
    Likes: 243, Points: 43
    Location: Littleton, nh

    Will Gilmore Senior Member

    History | NASA Science – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet https://climate.nasa.gov/nasa_science/history/
    NASA - What's in a Name? Global Warming vs. Climate Change https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/climate_by_any_other_name.html
    I can't find any archive articles from the 80s and 90s that talk about climate predictions. much less references to NASA's comments. I do remember the debates from that period and I am sure I remember some reporting over descenting voices from NASA scientists. The above articles and quotes show the switch in focus for NASA exploration and funding is the reason.

    You are making me read a lot of stuff, IN. No problem though. I was trying to find information on the percentage of lost ice sheets, but they only seem to talk about area, not volume. I can get volume or tonage quotes about annual melt, but I can't seem to scrape up the relative loss of volume. For instance, the Greenland Ice Sheet would raise sea level over 7 meters (https://phys.org/news/2020-08-sea-quickens-greenland-ice-sheet.html#:~:text=Crumbling%20glaciers%20and%20torrents%20of,the%20journal%20Communications%20Earth%20%26%20Environment). if it all melted. Since the 1990s, sea level has risen somewhere in the neighborhood of 7 cm.(https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-sea-level#:~:text=Global%20mean%20sea%20level%20has,of%20seawater%20as%20it%20warms). The Greenland Ice Sheet melt accounts for about 40% of that(https://phys.org/news/2020-08-sea-quickens-greenland-ice-sheet.html#:~:text=Crumbling glaciers and torrents of,the journal Communications Earth & Environment.). That tells us that roughly 2.5 - 3 cm of sea level rise out of 700 plus cm total potential. that is around 1% of the ice sheet. Is that how much of Greenland's ice sheet is being reported as lost? I can't varify it, but the reports sound much more alarming than that. Not that 1% isn't alarming enough. My point is, I can't help but feel like the doomsday scenarios are interfering with my willingness to sing the selected choir song. I recycle and refuse to litter and am conscious of excess fuel consumption, etc. because it is the right way to live as a person of good morals, but some of Yob's words about AGW being weilded as a tool to herd a population into paying for what amounts to church indulgences in the form of carbon credits and more taxes and added smog control devices, etc. begins to ring true.

    Then there is you saying things like,
    And it sounds like more, "Because the Bible tells me so." and "God works in mysterious ways."

    You can say that I don't sound very scientifically literate, and that might even be true, but to question is the foundation of science.

    -Will (Dragonfly)
     
  3. Dejay
    Joined: Mar 2018
    Posts: 721
    Likes: 137, Points: 43
    Location: Europe

    Dejay Senior Newbie

    They will only listen when the consequences start to affect them personally. Many not even then as we've seen with covid.

    I recently watched a documentary series by Adam Curtis called "The Century of Self" which helped me understand better how people are manipulated using their irrational fears and desires. It's not impossible to convince some people but it's rare and without a big budget for PR it's a sisyphean task. I don't know how you keep trying and stay so calm haha.

    The only way to deal with extremism like this is to remove the extremists from the mainstream (from the US counterinsurgency handbook) and just ban them. Sunlight is not a disinfectant at all. They will just continue to troll, derail and post verifiable wrong claims that promote violence and the deaths of billions of people.
     
  4. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,806
    Likes: 373, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

  5. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 435
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    That argument doesn't make sense to me. Fossil fuels are already heavily taxed. If the fossil fuel companies can massively increase their profits by simply multiplying their current prices by 1.5, why haven't they already done so? Indeed, what's to stop them from making that number 2.0, or 3.0?

    OPEC has in fact tried that trick, and demand went way down.
    The cost of wind and solar has massively come down in cost, and new wind and solar is now, in many places, cheaper than building a new coal power plant. The big problem with wind and solar is that are an intermittent source. Much more research and development needs to be done on electrical storage systems, which is best driven by government incentives, but done in collaboration with private research companies.
    Yes, it will help the poor more. The rich tend to use more fossil fuels, and the poor use less. But since all receive the same amount of rebate, the poor's rebate will more than cover the cost of their use of fossil fuels, while the rich person's rebate will not begin to cover their extra cost.
    There really is no question that we all are going to pay, sooner or later. The question really is whether we want to show a little foresight and self-disciple, and start paying now so as to reduce the payments that later generations will have to pay, or whether we want to selfishly maximize our own benefits in the present and let future generations sink or swim as best they can with the less friendly environment that we've given them?
     
  6. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 435
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    Thanks for the snippets of NASA history.
    Quite a bit of information here. Maybe it will answer some of your questions.

    The Greenland Ice Sheet
    The total volume of Greenland’s ice sheet is about 2,900,000 km3. This 10 years of loss is equivalent to 0.05% of that volume. However, mass-loss rates are increasing, and the cumulative loss by the end of this century is likely to be a few per cent. The loss of 5% of Greenland’s ice would be equivalent to a sea-level rise of ~35 cm.
    I am reminded of a game that children sometimes play with their parents. They ask their parents a very legitimate question. The parents attempt to give an honest answer couched in terms the child can understand.

    Then the child asks WHY?

    Another answer by the parent.

    Another WHY?

    Another answer.

    Another WHY?

    It soon becomes clear that the child doesn't actually understand the answers, and the asking of WHY is just a game to get attention, or a method to avoid dealing with an answer they don't like.

    You and I are both children in this analogy. We don't understand the answers, except at a very superficial level. We either choose to believe our parents (scientists), or we choose not to. I choose to believe scientists, even while realizing that they are fallible humans, just like our parents are fallible humans. My perception is that Hoyt and Yob have chosen to not believe scientists, even though there is close to unanimity of opinion regarding AGW.
     
  7. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 435
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    Very interesting. I enjoyed working through the game. I'll try to be more like a "kittycat" :)
     
  8. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 435
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    Climate change could dramatically reduce future US snowstorms
    Under an unabated greenhouse gas emissions scenario, the study projects 28% fewer snowstorms on average per year over central and eastern portions of North America by the century's last decade.

    There will be fewer snowstorms, less overall precipitation that falls as snow and almost a complete removal of snow events in the southern tier of the United States.

    The size of the most extreme snowstorms, such as those that produce blizzards, are projected to decrease by 32%.

    The most notable snowfall changes would occur during the "shoulder-seasons," which bookend the core winter months. Snowstorm counts for October, November and April were projected to decrease by 83.5%, 48.4% and 60.5%, respectively.​

    The study was published in Nature Climate Change
     
  9. Yobarnacle
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 1,747
    Likes: 130, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 851
    Location: Mexico, Florida

    Yobarnacle Senior Member holding true course

    fewer blizzard is good. We hate blizzards in Florida. They encourage migrant snowbirds
     
  10. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 435
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    Want To Combat Climate Change? Feed Seaweed To Cows
    • The majority of human-induced methane emissions comes from livestock
    • Reducing enteric methane can be done by changing cows’ diets to more digestible feed or adding more fat, but are not cost-effective
    • The study added 1.5 to 3 ounces of red seaweed (Asparagopsis) per animal per day for beef cattle
    • It took a few weeks for the animals to get used to the taste of seaweed
    • The steers released a lot more hydrogen – up to 750% more – as their systems produced less methane.
    • Methane emissions from cattle on high-forage diets decreased by 33% to 52%. Emissions from cattle fed low-forage diets fell by 70% to 80%
    • Steers in the study converted feed to body weight up to 20% more efficiently than cattle on a conventional diet
    • A panel of consumers did not detect any difference in tenderness, juiciness or flavor in the meat
    The study was published in PLOS ONE
     
  11. Will Gilmore
    Joined: Aug 2017
    Posts: 562
    Likes: 243, Points: 43
    Location: Littleton, nh

    Will Gilmore Senior Member

    I like that idea a lot.
    Has anyone walked on Mustang Beach in Texas? Be nice to do something useful with that seaweed.

    -Will (Dragonfly)
     
  12. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,806
    Likes: 373, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    Cows aren't designed to eat seaweed.
     
  13. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 435
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

  14. ImaginaryNumber
    Joined: May 2009
    Posts: 435
    Likes: 59, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 399
    Location: USA

    ImaginaryNumber Imaginary Member

    Economic benefits of protecting nature now outweigh those of exploiting it, global data reveal
    • Dozens of sites were studied around the world
    • Each site was evaluated for "ecosystem services", such as carbon storage and flood protection, as well as converting it for production of goods such as crops and timber
    • A major economic benefit of natural habitats comes from their regulation of the greenhouse gases
    • If carbon costs are calculated at $31/tonne, 70% of the sites have greater monetary value as natural habitats
    • If carbon costs are calculated at $5/tonne, 60% of the sites have greater monetary value as natural habitats
    • If carbon costs are calculated at $0/tonne, 42% of the sites have greater monetary value as natural habitats
    • TESSA (Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-based Assessment), enables users to measure and where possible assign a monetary value to services provided by a site under nature
    The findings were published in the journal Nature Sustainability
     

  15. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,806
    Likes: 373, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    Humans are designed to eat cows, but should leave the sea cows alone until there are no more land cows.
    Today red meat, tomorrow the world!
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2021
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.