What Do We Think About Climate Change

Haha, knut. No, we wouldn't be able to measure something like. First of all, planes is just a part of the equation, and, secondly, it cannot be measured that quickly, not to mention that it's a tad more complex than putting a thermometer up an airballoon.

How about the US made it illegal to drive anything but public transport for a few months? That might be better in the long run.

Btw, all of this is about tipping the scale. If the atlantic pump stops, all of a sudden, we'll have a new ice age on our hands, all the while deserts are spreading on the equator. Yes, the earth will survive, but millions will be killed in the wars resulting from it. Although, the dutch will propably just let those houseboats free …

 

Thank you gentlemen, and I was only armed with PC with internet connection, 3 ltrs of "Corte Federico" (Box of red, for the record; it was not even a full box), and my old HP15C (pls check the http://www.hp15c.org/ and sign the petition). Make you wonder what real men with clear minds and brains can do if they put this issue really on the table.

The travel aspect in this environmental issue is pretty interesting; they advertice for environmentaly friendly cars (new?). In my opinion;
The best you can do for the environment, is to:
stay in one place = no car.
Have an old car and not use it.
Have an old car and seldom use it (me?)
Have a new car and not use it (Hey; a new car, when will that effect from the production of that reach break even with regard to the environment, plastics, aluminiun, steel furnaces...?).
Have a new car....

Do not use planes, if you can go by train,
The CO2 gas from a car with 4 persons is probably better than if you travel by plane.. (I was stucked in a plane in fog, for 3 hours waiting for takeoff, in front of me was a folder with planes and no. of seats, engines, speed and behold; fuel consumption: I started reading, the fuel consumption was at first sight quite nice, in my opinion, but then my thoughts cleared; litres per km per seat....

Quote:
the A340-300 consumes 0.039 liter pr seat/pr kilometer. In comparison the A330-300 consumes 0.051 liter pr seat/pr kilometer.
Quote end.

Let's use 0,04 litres/ seat/ km ...: That'll be for an MD80 machine (150 person) only 6 ltr/ km. That' not bad. But here's the catch: In an hour, it travel 825 km... that's 4950 litres, pluss taxing and waiting in the air, plus the fact that they often do not travel with full capacity.

Lets assume 70% booked. That will increase fuel consumption from 0,04 ltr/ seat/ km up to 0,057 ltr/ seat/ km. My motorcycle does normally MUCH better than that, and it was never even considered the environmental issue when that was designed.

I vote for:
a non transferable personal limit for flying for all people in the industrialized part of the world, let's say x AirKm pr year.
No planing boats, no new cars with weight over 950 kg, no car engines exceeding 60 kW..

(Got your attention there..)

 

Sorry for quoting most of your post here:
Planes, I totally agree that thats only part of the equation, transport in total is a major factor. But I would like to get the number for CO2 released by planes in the atmosphere for let's say 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 and present. If anybody know where that information can be collected.

US , make it illegal to use anything but public transportation? We can dream, but they're not ready for that, that's a big country, with huge distanses in som areas. Higher fuel costs?

If the atlantic pump stops... Well I already have a Skidoo... Problem will be to keep the temperature correct for the red wine.

If the climate changes comes, and are something like our worst nightmares, some of the areas that'll get the problem in their lap, also have a large no of AK47 available for their use....

And, ah, well the dutch, they'll just be floating around, setting up some taxfree zones here and there. They'll be ok.

 

Yup, a planet suffering from global warming won't be the worst for a country like the Netherlands. Even if much of their country is below sea level.

I once looked up numbers where co2-numbers of planes were included, but for the life of me, I can't remember where I got those numbers.

A "funny" note: The danish ships pollute more than or on par with our planes (2 percent, IIRC) However, with that "we" also transport quite a bit of the world's goods (it's mostly A.P. Møller-Mærsk, of course).

Besides transport, you also have to factor the manufacturing of the goods themselves. Howsabout them plastic boats? Computers and toys?

Yet another ridiculous nugget: The only car I know that will fit four, and is not unreasonably old, that weighs in at under 900kg is the VW Lupo 3L which weighs 820-850kgs. Unfortunately, VW made it to shut up the "treehuggers", to prove it would be way too expensive, and there wouldn't be a market for it. They stopped making in it 2004, where Denmark (yes, that crappy little country to the south of you) took 60 percent of the production of the Lupo's off of VW's hands. However, since Denmark is hardly the basket you want to put all your eggs in, production was halted. 33km per litre. If you wonder, yes, we have one - no newer car comes close to it.

Oh, forgot: another great polluter is heat and/or airconditioning. If you won't help me force americans to use public transportation, how about forcing them to insulate their dwellings?

(one, two, three - wonder how many minutes or hours before someone will take offense?).

 

Don't feed the trolls.....



Btw; the Peugeot 107 (manual gear) weights 805 kg and burns 0,41 tr/ 10km (long distances, 0,55 for city driving). Not too bad either. What I'm trying to get through to people, a car like that is more freindly to the environment than a planetrip...(ehh plane-trip or planet-rip?) lets say 3 persons (75% ); (Consulting the HP15C oracle): 0,0137 ltr/seat/km.... That's way better than most planes (gliders excluded). And even with only one person aboard it is slightly better than my motorcycle (bugger).

A friend bought one, he's almost never refueling anymore...(? His own statement).

 

We cut the Scandinavians a little extra slack.

I don't know if we'll ever see any of those small, efficient cars here. People here started buying SUVs by the ton as soon as gas prices started getting silly.

As for other suggestions for the US....I'm told that public transportation is largely designed for criminal elements in the big cities, although I rode on an aboveground light rail train in Portland, Oregon that was pretty nice. But yeah, we do have some areas where even the small towns are few and far between.

Most houses here are pretty well insulated, too. People will even spend thousands of dollars to install custom windows with just a 200-300 year payback on energy savings.

But keep trying. You're sure to come up with some good ideas like other Scandinavian marvels such as......um......ok, I'm thinking......

I think this idea has potential: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCAG8sfhwzc You know, in a series, and with a good occupant release system.

 

1: Buying SUV's when the gas price goes up? I thought you guys had schools?

2: Well insulated houses, good, but we all must admit that this is a global issue, I was in Singapore a few years back and the houses there had close to no insulation, and the air condition was running like hell. On the oposite side, a well insulated house, not properly made, have other drawbacks when the monsun rain or the ants comes...

3: Keep thinking I'll wait...

4: That idea with a potential... I noticed they were NOT speaking any scandinavian language, to think that scaled up, with lets say a bus.....

 

we all should be like brazil,,,,,NO oil imported,,,make ethanol outta suga cane,,,hehe ,,,they have cars that run on both gas and suga juice.

 

everyone keeps pointing fingers at US,,,,nobody looks at china? nobody looks at Africa burning millions of acres ,,for charcoal and timber,,,,nobody looks at swAsia burning rain forest,,slash and cut,,,,,,,nobody looks at south America burning and cuttin rain forest,,,,,and these electric cars ,,,just means some body is shoveling another scoop of coal into the fire at the power plants,,,,,,cmon,,,,longliner

 

i think that everyones to blame,,even the ones trying the hardest,have only tried in the last few years,,,the damage we see now,,was caused 10 years ago,,thats why even though some restrictions have gotten tougher,,,but pollutants still go higher

 

While we have many, many flaws, I suspect that USA-bashing substitutes for serious thought in the minds of far too many people all over the planet.

 

Tide turning bit by bit.

HEAT OF THE MOMENT
31,000 scientists reject 'global warming' agenda
'Mr. Gore's movie has claims no informed expert endorses'
Posted: May 19, 2008
8:51 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily


"More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and dozens of other specialties – have signed a petition rejecting "global warming," the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth's climate."
...

"The list of scientists includes 9,021 Ph.D.s, 6,961 at the master's level, 2,240 medical doctors and 12,850 carrying a bachelor of science or equivalent academic degree."

The Petition Project's website includes both a list of scientists by name as well as a list of scientists by state.

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64734

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/719126/brr-the-climate-cools-

See latest news at http://www.icecap.us/

Perry

 

I did the primary "work" on the 3rd crab cooking theorem some time before Al Gore came with his movie or book, after hearing an scientist from http://www.efan.no/flodevigen/index.php intervieved on the radio, I was thinking "arrgh; here we go again..." another Messiah, Christ, we have forest fires, we have volcanoes we have ahhhrrgh you name it, it's probably a lot. But he tried to be on the track, even if the reporter was the type of "jippy, longer bathing season here in Noray" But then the reporter startet to irritate me, said something like: "c'mon on a scale from 1 to 10, how worried are you really?" (I hate it, when radio or tv reporters always try to "entertain") Answer was "9", calmly, without hesitation. And then the reporter went along to other issues like our queen having a new dress or something very important like that. Later that evening, my wife went to bed, it was too early to hit the sack for me, so I zapped through the 57 channels ("and no'thing to choose from" on the telly). Started getting bored, so that mean that there probably wasn't any new wooden boat magazine, profesional boatbuilder floating around.

So I startet "thinking", Why should he be so f** worried, heh? I can (can I?)calculate or estimate this, Ok; What factors can I ignore or what factors are vital?

• Air temperature? Ok, that's a really uncertain value, cities, asphalt, wind all thes will affect it.
• Soil temp? Ah... well some place there's probably some values or registrations, but not available to me.
• Ok, water temp, What is the first you'll notice coming from outer space to the earth, probably water, blue, and clouds, also water but hey 1 m3 of cloud versus 1 m3 of water where's the energy? Clearly in the water.

Water has a beautiful capacity for storing energy, to increase the temperature of steel 1 deg C, you'll only need approx 1/10 of that amount of energy needed to do the same for water. For ice; approx 1/5 of the same. And the fact that water at 4 deg C is heavier than water at 0 deg C... All these facts could be a basis for a (new) religion...

So why did I believe sea temperatures had risen; well a few factors:

• This fella at the radio he tried to shut up this idiot of a reporter with numbers, I don't recall those now. but he had the measured facts, ok, they might be local variations so why bother?
• We had had a "incident" at Antarctica; a huge ice berg about the size of a small country were drifting, Well they probably build up, until they reach critical mass, don't they? (But then, we had...)
• Reports regarding the reefs outside Australia, problems due to higher than normal sea temperatures. (But then, that's not my problem, hey, they're on the oposite side of the earth, and I don't know know any Aussies or Kiwis, I only like the wine and beer (But I,m open for improvement in that area). But hey; that's on the southern hemispfere. (Or....)
• Here in Norway we have some glaciers, I'm found of sea, and mountains. (As my son at 5 years said so clearly; Mountains don't float, so they'll have to be placed on land (and if we hadn't any sea, we wouldn't have any land either)). We were visiting a glacier, and it was a lot smaller than i recalled, but hey; that might only be a local variation in that specific valley? (but then..)
• Norway is full of strange people, let's face that as an undisputable fact; I mean; Norway is populated by people following the ice shelf north.. that must be caused by some genetic flaw or practical joke from God's side. One of these is Børge Ousland, He's taking trips to the Nort pole like us other taking trips to the shop for wine, he stated that his way of living(!) were probably over, as on the last trips he had had serious problems with open water. (ok there too...?)
• Recently, some people say that the North west passage may be regulary used for shipping as open water is mere present there too.

I then did the math. I remenber the hair of my body sticking out, Supertramp was on the radio, they were playing "the crime of the century"...

• Higher temperature, more moisture going up, that must come down, more rain, more winds, more weather, more clouds... Where will it stop?
• Then I went, at the middle of the night in a protest march, all alone... (Actualy I ended up in a chair outside my house with a box of wine..).
• Then I worried, what if the pendulum picks up speed, what if Africans... (I mean; we can't expect them to stay put (and behave) in their homes, when we're partly responsible for frying them, how many can we take in), what if...
• I am still worried, as I see no clear solutions, as politicians everywhere are more worried about their wages, pensions, reelections...

I'm getting convinced; temperature is increasing, Some say that in the last 1000 years temperature hasn't been that high. So, in what way we, humans are causing this, or to what degree we're responsible for that, I'm not so sure again. But my question(s) is or are:

• If the temperature is increasing, why should it stop doing just that?
• Is somthing we're doing, even by fractions working upon this effect?
• How much can we do, to work on even that little fraction?

Keep thinking...

 

Knut,

You will agree that it is the Sun that warms the planet? From 1979 to 1998, the global temperature rose a little because of a more active Sun. Since 1998, global temperature has been falling, although CO2 has risen 20 parts per million. Shouldn't the temperature keep rising, or perhaps CO2 is only important for plant growth. Scandinavia's forests need massive volumes of CO2. Drive your SUV into the woods and rev up to grow trees. if your petrol is still affjordable. We are paying the equivalent of 11.26 Norwegian Kroner per litre.

Now, the Sunspot Cycle 24 is one year late.

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/05/21/sunspot-cycle-more-dud-than-radiation-flood/

Latest readings. Still cooler than last year.

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/

Sign up and eat your greens.

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/the-32000-who-say-no-convincing-evidence/

Become Atheist.

http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/religion.htm

Live long and prosper.

Perry

 

humm, Pericles I ain't as fast as you on the keyboard..

Ok, I agree that the sun is heating us, that was also what i meant by typing; "We're painting the greenhouse". There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the effect the sun has on our planet, hugely exceeds the amount of energy we humans use. Problem is, some of these gases, are pretty damaging, and we place these gases, right where they does the worst to us.

Plants absorb CO2 in daylight, but at night, they're giving some of it away again... So driving my old VW Passat out in the woods and rev it up.., not at night.

I'll keep that car until it goes to Sweden to be transferred to nails. Our gas price is approx 13 NOK and still rising (Europes highest).

A few year ago, we had problems with the Ozone layer, restrictions were introduced, this situation is alredy in control, we can do something.

So; CO2 and air in the atmosphere, Here's some values:

http://encyclopedia.airliquide.com/Encyclopedia.asp?GasID=26

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-properties-d_156.html

Thermal conductivity for CO2 is 0,01465 W/m.K

Thermal conductivity for Air is 0,0243 W/m.K

Values are from surface 1 atm, 0 deg C, different factors wil be for lower temp, lower pressure, but probably the relation will be quite similar.

So, my 5 cent here; On the sunny side of the earth, heat emission from earth is superseeded (is that the right word?) by the heat input from the sun. At night, heat loss, should have been higher, but we're putting om a blanket instead. There is a reason that CO2 were used in dual insulating glass earlier... Heat transfer properties is almost half of that for air. The total heat loss will be lower. And this is probably an self-increasing action.

We need to take this seriously.