Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just another flat and boring, dry winter for my area in FL. Upper level energy will stay well to my north like always. It has warmed up so much since i started keeping records in the late 70's.
I'm not worried about the end jen. Once Clinton is in office the cards come into play as to what is to come..
So not only are you paranoid, but you are totally clueless about our reliance on carbon energy. And you would believe Clinton, that liar bra?
First the global energy demand by 2050:
Quote:
That is also the view of energy chemist Nate Lewis of the California Institute of Technology. "It's not true that all the technologies are available and we just need the political will to deploy them," he says. "My concern, and that of most scientists working on energy, is that we are not anywhere close to where we need to be. We are too focused on cutting emissions 20 percent by 2020—but you can always shave 20 percent off" through, say, efficiency and conservation. By focusing on easy, near-term cuts, we may miss the boat on what's needed by 2050, when CO2 emissions will have to be 80 percent below today's to keep atmospheric levels no higher than 450 parts per million. (We're now at 386 ppm, compared with 280 before the Industrial Revolution.) That's 80 percent less emissions from much greater use of energy."
Lewis's numbers show the enormous challenge we face. The world used 14 trillion watts (14 terawatts) of power in 2006. Assuming minimal population growth (to 9 billion people), slow economic growth (1.6 percent a year, practically recession level) and—this is key—unprecedented energy efficiency (improvements of 500 percent relative to current U.S. levels, worldwide), it will use 28 terawatts in 2050. (In a business-as-usual scenario, we would need 45 terawatts.) Simple physics shows that in order to keep CO2 to 450 ppm, 26.5 of those terawatts must be zero-carbon. That's a lot of solar, wind, hydro, biofuels and nuclear, especially since renewables kicked in a measly 0.2 terawatts in 2006 and nuclear provided 0.9 terawatts. Are you a fan of nuclear? To get 10 terawatts, less than half of what we'll need in 2050, Lewis calculates, we'd have to build 10,000 reactors, or one every other day starting now. Do you like wind? If you use every single breeze that blows on land, you'll get 10 or 15 terawatts. Since it's impossible to capture all the wind, a more realistic number is 3 terawatts, or 1 million state-of-the art turbines, and even that requires storing the energy—something we don't know how to do—for when the wind doesn't blow. Solar? To get 10 terawatts by 2050, Lewis calculates, we'd need to cover 1 million roofs with panels every day from now until then. "It would take an army .
Forget, 10,000 nuke plants, that's not reality..... You want to build 1000 nuke plants in 3 years? Still impossible to do given that we only have less than 450 worldwide right now... Let's see how much that will drop the projected global temps?
oh and what about the Paris climate deal?
Quote:
Published on Feb 15, 2016
In the Paris accord, 195 countries agreed that they would collectively keep average global temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees. But what does science have to say on how fast, and by how much, will we have to cut our emissions to get there? Professor Kevin Anderson of the Tyndall Centre is a climate scientist who looks at exactly this question. And the math he comes away with, isn't pretty.
Kevin Anderson shares his thoughts on what will need to happen if we are to meet the declarations in Paris, why it's a matter of justice that we act, and why he personally has made the difficult decision to give up air travel.
I live right on the gulf in in the Tampa FL area. I see very little rain in the summer thanks to a reverse west wind flow due to a displaced high pressure system. Nothing but 24/7 sunshine and insane dewpoints since the winds are blowing off of nasty 90 degree gulf temps. My avg lows are 77 to 82 from mid May till early Oct with dewpoints around 72 to 82. We have not had our what was our normal southeast windflow for years since the mid 80's with the axis of the high north of the Tampa area giving us a southeast wind flow, that makes showers build east of the Tampa area and move toward the west coast.
With a reverse west wind flow as i call it, showers die off just offshore at sunset and rebuild 8 to 15 miles inland of my house and move way toward the east coast. All goes to show how much my weather has changed since i started keeping records in the 70's. We no longer have any kind of winters like we did 27 years ago.
Just warmer and drier with more freak rain events were i get 30" of rain in 2 weeks time and nothing for months during the summer. Nothing can stop what is to come.
I love the Tampa area. I was in St Pete's Beach this past June. I'm probably going to buy investment property there in a couple of years.
25 fastest warming cities in the US, none of which are in Florida. So....
Did some checking.... Not true. Annual mean has risen in Tampa by less than 2F since 1940.
I don't total my avgs like most charts do. I have seen since i have kept records meaning where my house is , temps have come up 4.023 degrees since 1978.
Plus i am not in Tampa. Plus my records are somewhat screwed up since i lived in Tampa for 41 years and then moved 25 miles to the northwest on the gulf in 04 and this is where the temps and winters have really warmed up. As for Clinton she will cause a huge drop in temps world wide once the sun blocked out from a world wide nuke war many years down the road.
I don't total my avgs like most charts do. I have seen since i have kept records meaning where my house is , temps have come up 4.023 degrees since 1978.
Plus i am not in Tampa. Plus my records are somewhat screwed up since i lived in Tampa for 41 years and then moved 25 miles to the northwest on the gulf in 04 and this is where the temps and winters have really warmed up. As for Clinton she will cause a huge drop in temps world wide once the sun blocked out from a world wide nuke war many years down the road.
Now back to sweating working on my scope project.
What are you doing with that telescope. Always interested in space related stuff so I want to here .
What are you doing with that telescope. Always interested in space related stuff so I want to here .
I buy sell and trade. I rebuild old scopes for fun. Have owned over 220 scopes since 1976. Since astronomy and offshore fishing depend on the weather i had to learn up fast. Can't depend on Q card readers on the news to know a hoot about the weather heather.
I buy sell and trade. I rebuild old scopes for fun. Have owned over 220 scopes since 1976. Since astronomy and offshore fishing depend on the weather i had to learn up fast. Can't depend on Q card readers on the news to know a hoot about the weather heather.
Cool, I would be interested in a telescope, pm me your price range.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And you would believe Clinton, that liar bra?
.
