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.
Somehow it's easier to convince people that a warming climate is a sign that the Rapture is coming soon and that hurricanes and tornadoes are caused by gay people than it is to convince them to accept science.
This issue is that leftists know everybody sees how disastrous the CV models were and they are trying to get in front of the inevitable destruction of their ability to convince anyone their 100 year climate models are valid. They are rubbish.
Somehow it's easier to convince people that a warming climate is a sign that the Rapture is coming soon and that hurricanes and tornadoes are caused by gay people than it is to convince them to accept science.
Actually - it's easier to convince people that the world will be damaged by the climate.
I posted facts that they have continually been wrong, but you and the OP keep the faith in the scientists that have been in error for decades.
Furthermore. Vostoc cores show an 800 year lag between temperature rise and CO2 rise.... LAG. CO2 lags temperature rise by 800 year.... .guess what happened 800 years ago?
That implies warmer temperatures could release even more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere from natural sources (like a warming ocean or melting permafrost). That’s a potential positive feedback loop that could enhance the warming from fossil fuel burning.
Unfortunately, we don’t really have the technology to reduce fossil fuel dependence. Fossil fuels are still the most economical and abundant source of energy. Hopefully that changes, but we aren’t there yet.
That implies warmer temperatures could release even more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere from natural sources (like a warming ocean or melting permafrost). That’s a potential positive feedback loop that could enhance the warming from fossil fuel burning.
Unfortunately, we don’t really have the technology to reduce fossil fuel dependence. Fossil fuels are still the most economical and abundant source of energy. Hopefully that changes, but we aren’t there yet.
Actually, they have not been for some time now. However, battery storage still needs to catch up so all power production can be renewable.
Wind and solar are cheap only if the cost of intermittency is ignored. For wind and solar to dominate the electricity grid, we will need a massive amount of storage. Right now, we don’t have it at scale:
Wind and solar are cheap only if the cost of intermittency is ignored. For wind and solar to dominate the electricity grid, we will need a massive amount of storage. Right now, we don’t have it at scale:
Hopefully we will have cheap grid-scale batteries someday. We’re not there yet.
Good article, although somewhat dated, as there have been a tremendous amount of development in battery technology in the past two years, with more to come.
This seems most promising, especially as it would depend on existing, low-cost materials, and not lithium.
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.
