+- +-


Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Total Members: 42
Latest: eranda
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Total Posts: 9382
Total Topics: 234
Most Online Today: 4
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 2
Total: 2

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
Climate Change / Re: Future Earth
« Last post by AGelbert on April 07, 2018, 02:19:08 pm »

What would be interesting to know is how much electrical energy it took to produce those lettuces in the Antarctic. Actually that equates to how many litres of distillate for the generators.

I believe your focus on energy requirements is not the most important issue here. The reason for that is that wind energy in Antarctica is off the charts high, as well as being nearly constant. They will always have plenty of energy to grow these veggies. The issue is whether this technique provides adequate nutrition for people and animals that will consume it. I am not convinced that it will.

One of the reasons I get tired of posting at the Doomstead Diner is your misguided fixation with energy issues. The problem is pollution, not energy. I will never convince you of that. That's regretable but I can deal with that as long as you stop using my channel to voice your erroneous world view that lack of energy instead of massive pollution from greenhouse gases is what will cause the collapse of human civilization. If your purpose is to "teach" me about what a "tough world" it is out there, you are wasting your time. I knew about that long before you did. If your purpose is to make me stop posting about the sine qua non benefits to mankind of Renewable Energy, you are succeeding. Keep it up and I will stop posting completely. Congratulations, fossil fueler.

Boy oh Boy, That Eden Project certainly looks inviting.

What a gorgeous looking vegetation endowed spot on our marvelous planet.  :emthup: :icon_sunny:

Yes, it is quite impressive. Did you see the large greenhouse in Iceland used for starting their tree saplings in the posted Iceland video? It wasn't that big but it wasn't small either. The Icelanders get it. Climate Change caused by greenhouse gases is THE issue of our time, not lack of energy.

For some really BIG greenhouses, though not in the attractive dome shape of the Eden Project, check out Denmark's massively huge greenhouses. I posted on it a while back. You can find it if you do a search. 8)

Who CAN you trust? / Re: Corruption in Government
« Last post by AGelbert on April 07, 2018, 02:10:13 pm »
I'm sure we're safe.We can't even influence one another.

Homeland Security to Compile Database of Journalists, Bloggers

Hmmmm. I am sure that the Doomstead diner and my teeny tiny Renewable Revolution forum will earn some "honorable mentions" in this new fascist fun venture. Doesn't it make ya feel warm and fuzzy inside to be a source of jobs for all those loyal Trumpers out there?

No? I didn't think so. Me neither, but I am trying to add a bit of levity to our dystopian situation.

As a person trained by the USAF as an Intelligence Operations specialist/Photo Interpreter {dual AFSC (air force specialty code) }, I imagine that certain words and phrases will be looked at it with interest.

Here is a very small list of some of them:

Trump, Trumper, Trumpista, Trumplethinskin, etc.
Livable wages
Capitalist cruelty
Orwellian mindfork
Government Corruption
Oil and Gas corruption, pollution, murder and skullduggery of various sorts
pejorative comments about fossil fuels
Racist Bigots
Elite bastards
Oligarch, Oligarchy, Oligarchs, etc.
One percent (i.e when depicted as crooks, parasites, liars, cheats, welfare queens, etc.)
Greed is Bad

Considering what I have posted about here for five years and on disqus for over ten, I am certain that I have gotten somebody's attention.

Proverbs 29:27 An unjust man is an abomination to the righteous,
And he who is upright in the way is an abomination to the wicked.


Renewables / Re: Electric Vehicles
« Last post by AGelbert on April 07, 2018, 12:32:44 pm »
Lightning ⚡ Systems’ Electric Ford Transit Vans Begin Deliveries This Month

April 6th, 2018 by Steve Hanley

Lighting Systems, based in Colorado, has developed a complete battery electric drivetrain for the heavy duty Ford Transit vans. The upfit is offered as part of the Ford Quality Vehicle Modifier program, which keeps the original factory warranty intact for vehicles modified by approved companies like Lightning Systems, XL Hybrids, and Motiv Power Systems. Vans outfitted with the Lightning Systems electric powertrain will come with a 5-year/60,000-mile warranty from the company.

Lightning Systems electric Ford Transit

The company will take the new electric Transit vans on tour this month and deliver the first of them to Halo Event Group, a FedEx Ground contractor in New York City, and XPO Bus Sales in Los Angeles when the tour concludes. CleanTechnica’s Tina Casey is planning to test drive one of the vans in New York City later this month.

“The upcoming road show is a great chance for fleets to experience firsthand how quiet, smooth, and powerful the new LightningElectric is,” said Tim Reeser, chief executive officer for Lightning Systems. “It comes with all the benefits fleets expect from a Ford vehicle — interior comfort, warranty and top-class fit and finish — with the added benefits of a zero emissions electric vehicle like instant acceleration and lower maintenance costs.”

Lightning Systems says its certified upfit contractors can complete the conversion process in a few hours. It is working with Ford to obtain a rolling chassis with no drivetrain installed direct from the factory. Until that happens, the original drivetrain components are being repurposed. The conversion is available for all versions of the Ford Transit 350HD chassis, which is used in many commercial applications that involve passenger and cargo transportation.

The primary benefit for customers is a significant drop in operating and maintenance costs. The Lightning Systems Transit van has been rated at 61 eMPG in city use and 66 eMPG on the highway by the EPA. Transits with conventional powertrains are rated 13 city and 15 highway. In addition, the Lightning Systems Transit is eligible for a variety of federal, states, and local zero emissions incentives that may reduce the acquisition cost by $25,000 or more.

The electric Transit is available with either 50 miles or 100 miles of range. Recharging time is 30 minutes with DC fast-charging equipment and 6 hours with a Level 2 240 volt charger. Payload for the short-range version is 4,000 lbs and 3,000 lbs for the longer range model. Lighting Systems also manufactures hybrid and fuel cell conversions for the Ford Transit van in order to meet the needs of its customers.

“The LightningElectric is the full package,” Reeser added. “Engineering excellence combined with high-quality components validated by years of use in the industry, merged into a first-class, proven platform and supported by the Ford eQVM program and Ford dealer network for service and base-vehicle warranty. Add to this our industry-leading efficiency numbers, with the current government incentives landscape, and it is easy to see why we are already having to add to our production capacity.”


Agelbert NOTE: The comments at Cleantechnica on the above article are first rate! 🌞

DBC Cookie • 20 hours ago
If electric delivery vans become popular, and I hope they do, night-time demand for electricity will increase. That's exactly the time solar is not producing energy, so even more batteries will be needed. At least with a personal car there is a chance it can be charged at work.

•Reply•Share ›
Dan  DBC Cookie • 20 hours ago
New York just anounced a big off shore wind project. That will help with those night hours.

•Reply•Share ›
Brent Jatko  Dan • 19 hours ago
Offshore wind (as opposed to the hot air coming from the politicians in Trenton) is coming to NJ as well.

•Reply•Share ›
Mazter  DBC Cookie • 10 hours ago
Hydro, wind, bio-energy, CSP (in southern States), PHS.

•Reply•Share ›
Andy • 7 hours ago
The problem with conversions is the suboptimal weight distribution. As can be seen from the diagram, all the additional weight is outside the wheel-base with no weight inside the wheel-base, where the ideal configuration is to have all the additional weight inside the wheel-base. Three dimensionally it also has additional weight above the axles, where the ideal is below, or at least centred on the axles.

Having said that, conversion of these vans might shame Ford into producing purpose built electric vans. In general, conversion is probably a better option than just scrapping what are otherwise desirable vehicles, when goverments begin imposing bans on ICE vehicles, so the existence of experienced conversion companies is a good thing. When i first started looking at getting an EV, 30 years ago, conversions were all i could consider.

•Reply•Share ›
Martin  Andy • 2 hours ago
Well, if the corps will not build EV's, but people want there some, other ones will supply to the market, just look what the German post office did, when they were told an EV van could not be build.

•Reply•Share ›
Steve Hanley  Andy • an hour ago
Good points, Andy. A New Flyer bus with the batteries mounted on the roof rolled over this week. Ruh Roh! I'm thinking of doing a story about that but don't want it to be too snarky.

•Reply•Share ›
freedomev  Andy • 43 minutes ago
It doesn't have to be done that way. Fact is conversions is how a lot of Vans, trucks are going to become EVs.
As battery prices drop, EV motors, controllers already have the parts are low enough to just convert a company's ICE vans, trucks to serial or pure EV drive., not unlike what Workhorse has done for their drives.
Thus save the cost of a new EV van for about $15k as not enough new ones will be available a accounts do the numbers..
This is especially true for those with alum bodied vans which can go for 40-50 yrs and need engine replacing in 5-10 yrs. Thus saving the cost of a new ICE, etc and cutting running costs by 75% help pay for the conversion.

•Reply•Share ›
Andy  freedomev • 11 minutes ago
Yes. The more the merrier.

•Reply•Share ›
bwollsch • 2 hours ago
So we see it is possible to have a Ford electric delivery van. Why does this need to be outsourced to a third party? Why isn't Ford doing this internally now?

•Reply•Share ›
Steve Hanley  bwollsch • an hour ago
Wish we had an answer to that question.

•Reply•Share ›

Climate Change / Re: Global Warming is WITH US
« Last post by AGelbert on April 06, 2018, 10:22:33 pm »
This new Antarctic Discovery will affect You massively 🌊


Climate State

Published on Apr 6, 2018

Past studies of Antarctica's accelerated glacier retreat focused on regional trends, a new study now finds continental trends of over ten percent of marine terminating glaciers moving inland. Current peak retreat has been documented to be in the ballpark of 25 meters each single year, with some even in the three digits.

Read Chris Mooney's Washington Post article study summary goo.gl/HuxtxL

Press release University of Leeds, Antarctica is retreating across the sea floor http://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/article/4...
Climate Change / Re: Global Warming is WITH US
« Last post by AGelbert on April 06, 2018, 09:32:46 pm »
Climate & Extreme Weather News #108 (April 3rd-6th 2018)

Understanding Climate Change

Published on Apr 6, 2018

00:15 Brazil: Goiania, Teresina & Juazeiro do Norte flash floods

07:45 Mexico: Tlalpan flash flood

11:32 Indonesia: Lampung Selatan & Bekasi floods

15:18 Canada: Ontario windstorm

16:37 Midwest storms, cold & snow & the Pineapple Express

19:37 C3S March Temp Data; April temp anomalies & anomaly forecasts

Climate Change / Re: Global Warming is WITH US
« Last post by AGelbert on April 06, 2018, 09:07:14 pm »

Frankenstein Meets Climate Change: Prof Michael Wysession (March 2018)

Agelbert NOTE: Excellent comparison of the scientist (the REAL monster) that created the Frankenstein creature in the novel by Mary Shelly with our civilization's reaction to the monster of Climate Change that we caused. The story of where Mary Shelly was when she decided to write the Frankenstein story, and why she wrote it in the first place, is fascinating as well.    
Climate Change / Re: Future Earth
« Last post by AGelbert on April 06, 2018, 06:48:19 pm »

How to Survive When, NOT IF, Catastrophic Climate Change Makes Earth's Climate Unsuitable For Humans

By Anthony G. Gelbert (Edited April 6, 2018)

During many periods in human history, some were doing just fine and others lived on the edge of starvation in a constant state of collapse. Abrupt changes in climate, such as that caused in France by a massive Laki volcanic eruption in Iceland in 1783, have resulted in famine induced starvation. In that case, starvation was followed by social upheaval and revolution, instead of collapse. Civilization in Iceland was nearly wiped out with that eruption (over one third of the population was killed), but did not collapse.

For a collapse to occur, the society destroying pressure must last longer than a decade or so. For example, natural climate alterations that produced lengthy droughts caused some ancient starving civilizations to eventually collapse. 

SNIPPET From the March 21, 2016 article, "Ten Civilizations or Nations That Collapsed From Drought", by Jeff Masters:

Drought is the great enemy of human civilization. Drought deprives us of the two things necessary to sustain life--food and water. When the rains stop and the soil dries up, cities die and civilizations collapse, as people abandon lands no longer able to supply them with the food and water they need to live. While the fall of a great empire is usually due to a complex set of causes, drought has often been identified as the primary culprit or a significant contributing factor in a surprising number of such collapses. Drought experts Justin Sheffield and Eric Wood of Princeton, in their 2011 book, Drought, identify more than ten civilizations, cultures and nations that probably collapsed, in part, because of drought. As we mark World Water Day on March 22, we should not grow overconfident that our current global civilization is immune from our old nemesis--particularly in light of the fact that a hotter climate due to global warming will make droughts more intense and impacts more severe. So, presented here is a "top ten" list of drought's great power over some of the mightiest civilizations in world history--presented chronologically.

֍ Collapse #1. The Akkadian Empire in Syria, 2334 BC - 2193 BC.
֍ Collapse #2. The Old Kingdom of ancient Egypt, 4200 years ago.

֍ Collapse #3. The Late Bronze Age (LBA) civilization in the Eastern Mediterranean. About 3200 years ago, the Eastern Mediterranean hosted some of the world’s most advanced civilizations.

֍ Collapse #4. The Maya civilization of 250 - 900 AD in Mexico. Severe drought killed millions of Maya people due to famine and lack of water, and initiated a cascade of internal collapses that destroyed their civilization at the peak of their cultural development, between 750 - 900 AD.

֍ Collapse #5. The Tang Dynasty in China, 700 - 907 AD. At the same time as the Mayan collapse, China was also experiencing the collapse of its ruling empire, the Tang Dynasty. Dynastic changes in China often occurred because of popular uprisings during crop failure and famine associated with drought.

֍ Collapse #6. The Tiwanaku Empire of Bolivia's Lake Titicaca region, 300 - 1000 AD. The Tiwanaku Empire was one of the most important South American civilizations prior to the Inca Empire. After dominating the region for 500 years, the Tiwanaku Empire ended abruptly between 1000 - 1100 AD, following a drying of the region, as measured by ice accumulation in the Quelccaya Ice Cap, Peru.

֍ Collapse #7. The Ancestral Puebloan (Anasazi) culture in the Southwest U.S. in the 11th - 12th centuries AD. Beginning in 1150 AD, North America experienced a 300-year drought called the Great Drought.

֍ Collapse #8. The Khmer Empire based in Angkor, Cambodia, 802 - 1431 AD. The Khmer Empire ruled Southeast Asia for  intense decades-long droughts interspersed with intense monsoons in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries that, in combination with other factors, contributed to the empire's demise.

֍ Collapse #9. The Ming Dynasty in China, 1368 - 1644 AD. China's Ming Dynasty--one of the greatest eras of orderly government and social stability in human history--collapsed at a time when the most severe drought in the region in over 4000 years was occurring, according to sediments from Lake Huguang Maar analyzed in a 2007 article in Nature by Yancheva et al.

In this image, we see Kurdish Syrian girls among destroyed buildings in the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobane on March 22, 2015. Image credit: Yasin Akgul/AFP/Getty Images.

֍ Collapse #10. Modern Syria. Syria's devastating civil war that began in March 2011 has killed over 300,000 people, displaced at least 7.6 million, and created an additional 4.2 million refugees. While the causes of the war are complex, a key contributing factor was the nation's devastating drought that began in 1998. The drought brought Syria's most severe set of crop failures in recorded history, which forced millions of people to migrate from rural areas into cities, where conflict erupted. This drought was almost certainly Syria's worst in the past 500 years (98% chance), and likely the worst for at least the past 900 years (89% chance), according to a 2016 tree ring study by Cook et al., "Spatiotemporal drought variability in the Mediterranean over the last 900 years." Human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases were "a key attributable factor" in the drying up of wintertime precipitation in the Mediterranean region, including Syria, in recent decades, as discussed in a NOAA press release that accompanied a 2011 paper by Hoerling et al., On the Increased Frequency of Mediterranean Drought.

A 2016 paper by drought expert Colin Kelley showed that the influence of human greenhouse gas emissions had made recent drought in the region 2 - 3 times more likely.

Ten Civilizations or Nations That Collapsed From Drought - lots of great pictures

As Dr. Jeff Masters evidenced above, extended drought, sometimes alternating with other harsh climate conditions like intense rains, can lead to starvation. Long wars exacerbate the situation, leading directly to collapse.

In addition to the above, there is another climate change based collapse level attack on human civilization, one that is 100% unavoidable now, that has wreaked havoc in the past.

SNIPPET from the March 23, 2018 article, "Humanity has contended with rising seas before — and it didn’t go well for us", by Alxandru Micu:

The Neolithic revolution was the first major transformation humanity had paused — the transition foraging to farming. Spreading out from the Middle East, this wave of change took peoples used to hunt and forage wherever they pleased and tied them down, hoe in hand, to sedentary — but oh so lucrative — farms and fields.

Around 7,600 years ago, however, the revolution paused — no new agricultural settlements seemed to pop up in Southeastern Europe around the time, existing communities declined, and the progress of civilization as a whole came to a standstill. Up until now, we didn’t have any inkling as to why this happened, but new research from the Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, the Goethe University in Frankfurt, and the University of Toronto sheds some light on this mysterious period.

According to their findings, this lull in progress was due to an abrupt rise in sea levels in the northern Aegean Sea. Evidence of this event was calcified in the fossils of tiny marine algae preserved in seafloor sediments.

The impact this event had on societal dynamics and overall development during the time highlights the potential economic and social threats posed by sea level rise in the future, the team says. Given that climate-change-associated changes in sea level are virtually unavoidable, the team hopes their findings will help us better prepare for the flooding ahead.

“Approximately 7,600 years ago, the sea level must have risen abruptly in the Mediterranean regions bordering Southeastern Europe. The northern Aegean, the Marmara Sea and the Black Sea recorded an increase of more than one meter. This led to the flooding of low-lying coastal areas that would have been ideal areas for settlement,” says lead author Professor Dr. Jens Herrle.

The evidence supports a link between the two timeouts in the Neolithic revolution and the flooding events. The event 8,400 years ago coincides with archaeological findings suggesting that settlements in low-lying areas were under significant hardship from encroaching seas and other associated climatic changes. The renewed rise just 800 years later likely amplified these communities’ woes, keeping them from making the transition to agriculture.

“The source of this may have been Lake Agassiz in North America. This glacial meltwater lake was enclosed in ice and experienced a massive breach during this period, which emptied an enormous volume of water into the ocean.”

Past fluctuations in sea levels have already had a significant effect on human history during the early days of agriculture, the authors note, warning that it would be unwise to dismiss the challenges it will place in our path in the future.

"Humanity has contended with rising seas before — and it didn’t go well for us"

The article goes on to repeat the overly conservative estimate from the IPCC of a rise by up to "one meter over the next 100 years". That is the same IPCC that predicted the amount of ice depletion we have at present at the poles would not occur until 2070. That is the same IPCC that has NOT figured in the contribution of ice loss from Greenland to global sea level rise in any of the models.

So, if you are a logical person, I recommend you count on 3 to 6 meters, at least, of sea level rise several decades before the end of the century. As Peter Ward says (The Flooded Earth: Our Future In a World Without Ice Caps by Peter D. Ward]), over 25% of the world's arable land is near sea level and will be flooded. Most major airports along coastlines will be flooded. Every harbor facility in the world will require a staggering amount of land fill to raise them as the sea level goes up. Most coastal real estate, currently highly assessed in value, will be flooded and become worthless.     

By the way, the latest science indicates that rapid sea level rise will be accompanied by a large increase in volcanic eruptions (which might slow down the heating due to a temporary increase in aerosols), and and increase in earthquaqe activity. The volcanic aerosols, at most, will be a minor speed bump on the way to intolerable climate caos. So, please don't count on volcanic eruptions to 'save us' from global warming hell. That is wishful thinking.

I am not a voice "crying in the wilderness" on this issue. I will provide you some screenshots from the video of a scientist who recently wrote the book, "Waking the Climate Giant". He predicts a continued increase in volcanic activity, now observed in the data, due to terrain bounce from melting land ice and increased pressure on the surrounding seabed, as the the global average temperature increases. It's not the volcanoes that are increasing the heat, it's the greenhouse gases that are causing massive ice melt that, in turn, triggers earthquages and volcanic eruptions. Read his book if you disagree. I just watched the video but I think he is spot on.

On Earth, destructive climate change was not catastrophic before. The difference now it that the entire globe will be impacted. Humans have never lived on a planet with an average temperature of 3° C above pre-industrial. We will pass that mark up a half century before 2100 and continue towards PLUS 4° C and beyond, with no available technological or natural negative feedback mechanism to stop the continued acceleration, not slowing, of the rate of increase in temperature.

Already our atmosphere is being distorted by global warming to the point of pushing the dry subtropical bands on either side of the tropics towards their respective pole, thereby increasind drought conditions in highly populated areas and a large percentage of hitherto arable terrain.

SNIPPET from the February 2, 2016 article, "The mystery of the expanding tropics", by Olive Heffernan

As Earth's dry zones shift rapidly polewards, researchers are scrambling to figure out the cause — and consequences.

One spring day in 2004, Qiang Fu was poring over atmospheric data collected from satellites when he noticed an unusual and seemingly inexplicable pattern. In two belts on either side of the equator, the lower atmosphere was warming more than anywhere else on Earth. Fu, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Washington in Seattle, was puzzled.

It wasn't until a year later that he realized what he had discovered: evidence of a rapid expansion of the tropics, the region that encircles Earth's waist like a green belt. The heart of the tropics is lush, but the northern and southern edges are dry. And these parched borders are growing — expanding into the subtropics and pushing them towards the poles.

Tropical forest losses outpace UN estimates

Cities that currently sit just outside the tropics could soon be smack in the middle of the dry tropical edge. That's bad news for places like San Diego, California. “A shift of just one degree of latitude in southern California — that's enough to have a huge impact on those communities in terms of how much rain they will get,” explains climate modeller Thomas Reichler of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City.

Elsewhere, there is evidence that tropical expansion is affecting the ocean. Where the Hadley cell descends, bringing cool air downward, it energizes the ocean and whips up currents to high speeds. This energy powers the upwelling of cold, nutrient-rich waters towards the surface, which feeds some of the world's most productive fisheries. But there are hints that some of these regions are suffering because of shifts in the Hadley cell.

These upwelling zones could move south over time, or get weaker or stronger, depending on what happens to the Hadley cell, says Cook. In any case, it means that fishing communities that rely on these resources will not be able to count on traditional patterns.

On land, biodiversity is also potentially at risk. This is especially true for the climate zones just below the subtropics in South Africa and Australia, on the southern rim of both continents. In southwestern Australia, renowned as one of the world's biodiversity hotspots, flowers bloom during September, when tourists come to marvel at some of the region's 4,000 endemic plant species. But since the late 1970s, rainfall there has dropped by one-quarter. The same is true at South Africa's Cape Floristic Province, another frontier known for its floral beauty. “This is the most concrete evidence we have of tropical expansion,” says Steve Turton, an environmental geographer at James Cook University in Cairns, Australia.

Turton worries that the rate of change will be too rapid for these ecosystems to adapt. “We're talking about rapid expansion that's within half or a third of a human lifetime,” he says. In the worst-case scenario, the subtropics will overtake these ecologically rich outposts and the hotter, drier conditions will take a major toll.

The Mystery of the Expanding Tropics

Vermont is already experiencing the economy harming effects of climate change. A Vermonter, concerned about this, wrote about it. He has a right to be.

Watching Nature Collapse March 24th, 2018 by George Harvey

Sometimes it seems the best of everything is passing away.


A few years ago, someone threw a peach pit into shrubbery on the front yard of the house where I live. The tree that sprouted from the peach pit is now bearing fruit. Neighbors have paw-paw trees growing in their yards. But Vermont’s maple sugar industry, and the apple orchards, and the blueberry fields are all suffering. Vermont is fast becoming a place unlike what it has ever been, and it is not an improvement.

Watching Nature Collapse

Don't look at what he wrote as the "new normal" and just think we can 'adapt' to climate change by growing different crops and so on. This is the leading edge of climate that will soon, much sooner than many think, become intolerable for crop growing. We are not just on a treadmill moving in the wrong direction; our velocity on that deadly treadmill is increasing. Please keep that in mind so you are not lulled into thinking it would be 'nice' to grow palm trees in Burlington. Yes, the fossil fuel industry 🦖 does continue to try to pitch the 'warmer weather good' out of context propaganda happy talk. They'll do anything to keep their profit over people and planet suicide machine going. Stupid is as stupid does.

All these deleterious effects of Catastrophic Climate Change will continually get worse, not for a decade or so, but for over a century.

Temperatures unsuitable for human life are baked in for at least a couple of centuries, even if we stopped the insanity of constantly making things even worse by going on a crash program to stop burning fossil fuels. Yeah, we have to do that. Yeah, if we don't, we are all dead. But, regardless of what we do, it will take a while to catch up to all of us. I write this for those who, though sadly unable to stop the insane suicidal "business model" of the biosphere killing fossil fuel fascists, wish to survive as long as possible.

I wish to stress that, though many confused voices out there do not wish to face this, the one unifying aspect of the present threat 🌡️ to human civilization is Catastrophic Climate Change 🚩, NOT lack of fossil fuel based energy.

Have I got your attention? Good.

Then, look at this graphic from the Video, "Waking the Climate Giant", and ask yourself if it reflects our current situation:

The above graphic is already correct in its prediciton. In 2017 (the emissions data was for the years 2014, 2015 and 2016) the greenhouse gas emissions INCREASED. Consequently, there is a very, very high probability that the collapse of our civilization will occur much sooner than we think.

Some humans in different parts of the globe are already well acquainted with living on the edge of collapse. I am absolutely certain that many jungle tribes in Brazil, Ecuador and Peru, RIGHT NOW, live on the edge of starvation in a constant state of collapse, while most of the city dwellers nearby live not much better, but still avoid starvation.

My point in this quixotic exercise in hard truth logic is that the lack of food in the past has eventually triggered revolutions, not collapse of the civilization. It is after the social upheaval, when no solution to the lack of food problem is found, such as is in LONG WARS of aggression or extended harsh climate conditions, that collapse ensues.

People tend to fear other people more than deleterious climate. People can certainly be a threat to your life and stuff, but Catastrophic Climate Change is a much greater threat to everything you hold dear, past, present and future.

Catastrophic Climate Change is worse than a long war of aggression because it will last much longer than a human lifetime.

The climate change problem is intractable, but I believe some WILL beat it for maybe a century or so. For example, there are places near the equator with very high mountains. A world heated plus 4° C by around 2060, despite happy talk by certain wishful thinkers, will kill off most humans. BUT, in high mountains, the tree line will move way up while the temperature becomes temperate, even at the Equator. I stress the equator, though RE will vigorously disagree, because human civilization in a low food environment with over acidified seas (no easy fish or whales or seals to catch = NO ESKIMOS) with poor available sunlight is not a recipe for long term survival, even if the temperature is mild enough to grow crops.

There is a mountain in Ecuador (Chimborazo) about 20,000 feet high that will, because of the horrendously altered atmosphere, get plenty of rain even at high altitudes. There are several other candidates in the HIGH tropics around the world. This will enable the folks living there to grow enough food, thanks to an ABUNDANCE of sunlight all year round, with low tech methods. They just might be able to ride out the fossil fuel burning stupidity that dooms most of human civilization.

The tree line, the highest point on a mountain that trees will grow, varies between 5,000 feet and up to 13,000 feet above sea level. It varies so much mainly because of wind chill, though the length of the summer growing season is important as well. A tree in relatively mild wind conditions can grow all the way up to the maximum recorded tree line altitude at temperature well below freezing (down to minus 40° F =- 40° C  ;D), provided its roots can get enough water.

Trees can have liquid water in their tracheal elements at such low temperatures because of a wonderful combination of two factors. The first is that the 'pumping' mechanism of a tree is more a sucking mechanism than a pumping mechanism. The transpiration of water vapor into the atmosphere at the branch leaf pores creates negative pressure on the water molecules inside the tree (as long as the tracheal elements vacuum is not breached by air intrusion).

Water molecules, as they travel up the inside of tree, aided by capillary action as well as transpiration, can be stretched by as much as negative 25 atmospheres! That is how those Giant Sequoias can move up to a 130 gallons of water a day over a 100 feet vertically.

The second factor is that the water in the tracheal elements, in addition to being thoroughly stretched, is extremely pure. This prevents the crystalization of water around non-water substances that would normally trigger freezing at 0° C. But, when the wind is howling during below freezing temperatures, the wind chill can cause the water in the tree to freeze and eventually kill the tree.

The closer to the equator a high mountain tree is located, the longer it's growing season will be. If the growing season is too short, like in the White Mountains of New Hampshire, the tree line is only about 4,500 feet.

SNIPPET from an article about the Tree line:

The elevational limit of such suitable summer conditions varies by latitude. In Mexico, for example, treeline occurs somewhere around 13,000 feet, whereas farther north, in the Tetons, for instance, it occurs lower, at approximately 10,000 feet. Again, it’s a ragged line that may vary by hundreds of feet on any mountain, depending largely on shelter and exposure.

Because the elevational treeline is so closely tied to temperature, many suggest that it could be a particularly sensitive indicator of global climate change. Presumably, rising temperatures would increase the elevation of treeline in any locale, altering forest distribution and potentially ousting rare plant communities – and their inhabitants – that now exist above treeline. Although the specific physiological mechanism of treeline formation is not fully understood, there is growing photographic and other evidence of upward shifts in treelines worldwide.

Why Is the Treeline at a Higher Elevation in the Tetons than in the White Mountains?

A PLUS 4° C (and still going up) atmosphere by around 2060 will enable trees to grow at much higher altitudes. For every degree increase in average global temperature, a corresponding increase in humidity of at least 7% to 13% will take place. We will have an atmosphere expanding vertically, but also with increased humidity. This will accelerate warming because water vapor is a powerful greenhouse gas, but the good news is that high mountain areas will, in some areas, experience more rain higher up.

As noted at the beginning of this article, humans need water and other adequate growing conditions in order to have a viable civilization.

The Catastrophic Climate Changed world of 2060 will be a stormy place. The over acidified, mostly dead oceans, will be full of giant waves. The winds during storms will be off the charts in comparison to what we experience now. High up in the mountains, some type of barrier will need to be erected to keep the fierce winds from destroying the crops.

Finally, those hardy folks who carve out a life in year-round sunny high mountains will have to deal with UV radiation. It is a fact that, at present, the UV levels at around 10,000 ft. and above are particularly hazardous to humans.

However, with the expanded atmosphere in an overheated planet, this is the one area I see as hopeful for humans and animals living on very high mountains. You see, in said expanded atmosphere of plus 4° C and above, the massive increase in humidity will inhibit UV radiaiton.

Nevertheless. Since the equator alpine areas are infamous for high UV radiation, it would be prudent to plan to plant crops that have high UV tolerant foliage, like tubers. Hopefully, the greatly increased humidity will help protect the High Mountain Human Heroes.


Everyone is exposed to UV radiation from the sun and an increasing number of people are exposed to artificial sources used in industry, commerce and recreation. Emissions from the sun include visible light, heat and UV radiation.

The UV region covers the wavelength range 100-400 nm and is divided into three bands:

UVA (315-400 nm)
UVB (280-315 nm)
UVC (100-280 nm).

As sunlight passes through the atmosphere, all UVC and approximately 90% of UVB radiation is absorbed by ozone, water vapour, oxygen and carbon dioxide. UVA radiation is less affected by the atmosphere. Therefore, the UV radiation reaching the Earth’s surface is largely composed of UVA with a small UVB component.

Environmental factors that influence the UV level

Sun height—the higher the sun in the sky, the higher the UV radiation level. Thus UV radiation varies with time of day and time of year, with maximum levels occurring when the sun is at its maximum elevation, at around midday (solar noon) during the summer months.

Latitude—the closer the equator, the higher the UV radiation levels.  :(

Cloud cover— UV radiation levels are highest under cloudless skies. Even with cloud cover, UV radiation levels can be high due to the scattering of UV radiation by water molecules and fine particles in the atmosphere. :(

Altitude—at higher altitudes, a thinner atmosphere filters less UV radiation. With every 1000 metres increase in altitude, UV levels increase by 10% to 12%.


What do you think are the chances of human civilization achieving what the following graph says we HAVE TO DO?

There is NO WAY in God's (formerly good) Earth that we can avoid a climate that is almost entirely unsuitable for human life. The above graphic illustrates that. Anyone who thinks that we can do what needs to be done to avoid a PLUS 4° C (and above!) climate that will kill most humans and cause the extinction of thousands of other vertebrate species is engaging in magical thinking.  >:( 

ALL the people near the surface in the tropics will die as crispy critters, period. Those in temperate zones will perish too. Those near the poles who live near the surface will last as long as the food they have lasts. Unless they can maintain some geothermally heated and powered high tech greenhouse CITY that includes PLENTY of crop growing quality light and plenty of water, they will die too.

I might add that those greenhouse giant domes, both near the poles ond on high equatorial mountains, had better be MASSIVELY strong. The storms that will visit them and the wind speeds they will face in a PLUS 4 ° C planet  will make any recent hurricane look like a gentle breeze.

In Antarctica, some vegetables have now been (sort of) successfully grown.


These Antarctic vegetables were grown without pesticides, daylight, or even soil — but they look absolutely delicious.

Various vegetables which were harvested from the EDEN-ISS greenhouse at the Neumayer-Station III on Antarctica. Image credits: DLR

Germany’s southernmost workplace, the Neumayer-Station III, has harvested the first crop of Antarctic vegetables. Biologists report that they’ve successfully grown 3.6 kilograms (8 pounds) of salad greens, 18 cucumbers and 70 radishes grown inside a high-tech greenhouse, as temperatures around the research station were plummeting to -20 degrees Celsius (-4 Fahrenheit).

The plants were grown without soil, in a closed-water circle. No outside lighting was used — instead, researchers optimized and used an LED system. The carbon dioxide cycle was also closely monitored.

While this is a solid crop already, researchers are expecting much more in the future. The German Aerospace Center DLR, which coordinates the project, said that in the coming months, they expect to harvest 4-5 kilograms of fruit and vegetables a week.

Image shows engineer Paul Zabel with fresh salad he harvested in the EDEN-ISS greenhouse at the Neumayer-Station III on Antarctica. The project with — instead of soil — a closed water cycle, optimized lightning and carbon dioxide levels is a test of what may become part of the nutrition program for astronauts in future moon or Mars missions. Image credits: DLR.

Full article: Scientists harvest first batch of Antarctic vegetables

I am skeptical of the nutritive value of crops grown this way. Though it is good to know they used no pesticdes, the article says nothing about any nutritive mineral analysis of these vegetables, so there is no evidence yet that this is a sustainable crop growing method in a harsh climate changed plus 4 degrees C world.

The article ends with optimistic talk about using the above technique (and similar techniques like they use in the International Space Station) to eventually grow food in spaceships and on other planets.

Within a decade or less, successfully growing food near the poles will be far more important for the survival of humanity here on earth than in space or on some other planet. 

Speaking of activity near the poles to deal with Climate Change, Iceland is one of the few places on Earth that are seeing benefits from Climate Change. They may be destined to be one of the outposts of humanity in an increasingly overheated world.

Now they are planting evergreens 🌱 🌲.
But, if we do not reverse the overheating trend, they will eventually have to plant these: 🌴  :P

Vikings cleared the forests, now Iceland is bringing them back

Even with laudable efforts like the forest planting project in Iceland, humanity needs to do far, far more to survive.

We will need gigantic, and I mean "miles in diameter" GIGANTIC, greenhouses to get a reasonable amount of food grown near the poles and/or on the equatorial mountains.

The giant greenhouse domes situated in the high equatorial mountains would have to be something like the U.K. Eden Project Domes, but way up high on a mountain. In England they have an enclosed rainforest in these domes. They need to be ten or twenty times bigger for an equatorial alpine community. If the post collapse alpine community could control the atmospheric pressure in the giant domes, more UV protection is guaranteed and more comfortable living for humans too.

For those still worried about fellow humans trying to kill you for your stuff, remember that high mountains are a natural defense against warlike humans during the initial phases of the Climate Change Caused Collapse. The heat lower down will eliminate any human threat after a couple of decades. 

STOP thinking you are going to live on planet that has the remotest resemblance to the one you have lived in all your life. THAT is WISHFUL THINKING! The LEAST of your problems is going to be worrying about the "zombie" humans getting your stuff.

NOTE: I pose these issues for your discussion. I will not argue the merits of them beyond this comment. If you disagree with anything I said, then you are entitled to be as wrong as you like.  ;D  :D 
Climate Change / Re: Pollution
« Last post by AGelbert on April 06, 2018, 05:23:13 pm »

Photo: By Mr Nai / Shutterstock

Global Shipping Is Part of the Climate Problem, Too: Editorial

April 5, 2018 by Bloomberg

By James Gibney and Clive Crook (Bloomberg View)


Already, international shipping accounts for about as much carbon dioxide each year as Germany’s whole economy. On current trends, its share of the total will rise quickly. It could account for roughly 15 percent of the global carbon budget set by the Paris accord for 2050.


The main thing next week is to acknowledge that confronting climate change is too urgent a goal for any sector of the global economy to be given a pass.

Full article:
Who CAN you trust? / Re: Corporate Mendacity and Duplicity
« Last post by AGelbert on April 06, 2018, 05:06:27 pm »

UK sugar tax starts today — here’s what it means


A groundbreaking sugar tax enters into force as of today in the United Kingdom, which joins a handful of other countries which have already introduced similar taxes.

Much more than cavities

Sugar has been linked to a number of health issues. A 2003 World Health Organization (WHO) technical report provided evidence that high intake of sugary drinks (including fruit juice) increased the risk of obesity, and since then, the evidence has piled on. Simply put, eating lots of sugar makes you fat, and if you’re thinking ‘but I don’t really eat that much sugar’ — then think again. Sugar is embedded into a surprisingly large number of processed foods, popping up in most things you’ll find on the shelves. Not least of all, sugar is typically present in large quantities in sugary drinks, and, as a result, sugary drinks are one of the main drivers for obesity in several countries.

Backed by a mountain of scientific evidence, the WHO says that society needs to curb its consumption of sugar to fight the upcoming obesity pandemic — and this is where the sugar tax comes in.

The levy will be applied to manufacturers, and whether they will pass it on consumers or support the tax themselves is up to them. From now on, drinks with a sugar content higher than 5g per 100ml will be taxed 18p ($0.25) per liter, and drinks with 8g or more will be taxed 24p ($0.34). The tax is expected to act on several fronts.

Firstly, manufacturers are expected to reduce the sugar content of their products, which many have already started doing (Fanta, Ribena, and Lucozade have cut the sugar content of drinks, but Coca-Cola has not).

Secondly, consumers are expected to be somewhat dissuaded by potentially higher prices, and therefore reduce their consumption.

, an expected revenue of £240m ($340) is expected to be raked by the government — that money will be invested in schools sports and breakfast clubs.

However, products such as cakes, biscuits and other foods are not covered by the tax.

Of course, taxes are never popular, and so far reactions have been mixed. Many argue that having a Coke or whatever other sugary drink is a personal choice and shouldn’t be taxed — however, similar taxes have long been applied to alcohol and tobacco (among others) in most parts of the world. Similar taxes have been applied successfully in countries like France, Norway, or Denmark.

It’s important to note that a recent study has shown that the sugar industry was aware of the negative health effects of sugar for decades, but it simply swept them under the rug. 😠

Coca-Cola has been under fire since 2015 when emails revealed that funding for scientific studies sought to influence research to be more favorable to soda, and research funded by soda companies is 34 times more likely to find soda has no significant health impacts on obesity or diabetes.

Fossil Fuel Folly / Re: Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi
« Last post by AGelbert on April 06, 2018, 02:31:50 pm »
With climate change, fake news is old news

For the last three decades the greatest disinformation campaign of our time convinced millions of Americans to reject the fairly basic science of greenhouse gas pollution. Like earlier tobacco campaigns, the simple purpose is protecting sales of industry products, in this case coal, oil and gas.

Increasingly, science and fact-based journalism show industry has long promoted a blend of fake news and biased reporting to undermine acceptance of climate science. Research last year from Harvard University analyzed over 180 climate-related documents published by ExxonMobil between 1977 and 2014. It showed the firm issued dozens of news-worthy statements dismissive of climate change while, simultaneously, company scientists quietly affirmed the threat. Engineers even began adapting drilling infrastructure for rising seas and other anticipated changes. The LA Times reported similar findings, sparking protests and the hashtag #Exxonknew.

But ExxonMobil is hardly alone. Increasingly, reports describe fossil fuel industry funding of conservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute, and others known for peddling skepticism on climate science. Their custom-crafted messages enter news cycles via conservative politicians and sympathetic media outlets. Or in the case of the Heartland Institute, supported by Peabody Energy and other coal giants, by erecting billboards likening climate scientists to serial killer Ted Kaczynski.

Climate disinformation has been expertly served to the public. Consider the so-called “climate-gate” scandal, founded on selective reading of emails stolen from researchers. First surfacing in 2009, it was debunked by eight independent investigations. Yet for years, conservative news and commentary shows pushed the story, which Republican lawmakers cited to justify inaction on climate. Research from George Mason University showed the campaign increased public skepticism about climate change, especially among conservative voters.

Like ExxonMobil’s public statements, climate-gate reflects a decades-long effort to disrupt public discourse, especially at key moments. It intensified leading up to the first global climate initiative, the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which the U.S .did not ratify. Climate-gate itself came as the U.S. joined 2009 global climate treaty talks in Copenhagen. In 2016, fossil fuel interests supported and advised President Trump campaign. Trump ultimately fulfilled promises to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate accord and appointed industry veterans to top government posts.

With homegrown meddling like this, who needs the Russians?

But while climate-gate is outright fakery, a more insidious concern is widespread underreporting and media bias against climate coverage. In an exhaustive examination of television news broadcasts, Media Matters found nearly 80 percent of 2017 climate change reporting focused on statements by Trump. Only minimal coverage discussed climate in connection to the year’s record-setting natural disasters, including epic Atlantic hurricanes and devastating California wildfires, which together destroyed infrastructure and tens of thousands of homes. Media Matters showed some networks even favored stories disputing connections between climate change and extreme weather. It corroborated earlier research by the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Similar to Russian election interference, climate disinformation is a complex melding of forces. It entails industry money, social media algorithms, and political and cultural identity, especially within a modern conservative movement priding itself on distrust of science and journalism. The entwined results are that millions of Americans still reject climate change science, and fossil fuels maintain dominance over the energy sector.

Yet, resistance is growing. Shareholders, the Security and Exchange Commission, and several state attorneys general have launched investigations and lawsuits to determine whether ExxonMobil committed criminal deceit. And nine U.S. cities, including San Francisco and New York City, are suing dozens of fossil fuel companies. They seek billions of dollars in damages for urgently needed climate change adaptations, including new sea walls and storm-water controls.

The cases signal mounting anger among citizens stuck with high infrastructure costs tied to burning fossil fuels. Meanwhile, advances in science lend legal weight to the cases. Researchers are increasingly able to tally historical CO2 emissions and even approximate their contribution to specific meteorological events.

It is also worth noting efforts to improve K-12 media literacy education. Media Literacy Now and others offer models for state legislation, aimed at ensuring students learn to discern between news sources and recognize persuasion techniques. Several states have adopted the laws and others are considering bills, according to Media Literacy Now.

Media literacy skills will remain important. In December, the National Association of Manufacturers 👹 formed a new trade group to oppose climate change lawsuits, and last month automakers urged regulators to dismiss established climate science. They represent a continued industry commitment 😈 to public disinformation over an earnest debate about regulation and public health.

Tim Lydon works in federal lands management and is the author of “Passage to Alaska, Two Months Sea Kayaking the Inside Passage.”


Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]

+-Recent Topics

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
April 25, 2018, 11:38:14 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
April 25, 2018, 07:55:12 pm

Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda by AGelbert
April 25, 2018, 06:58:50 pm

Microgrids by AGelbert
April 25, 2018, 06:11:41 pm

Money by AGelbert
April 25, 2018, 05:46:11 pm

Photvoltaics (PV) by AGelbert
April 25, 2018, 02:46:49 pm

Profiles in Courage by AGelbert
April 23, 2018, 05:15:56 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
April 23, 2018, 02:33:25 pm

Apocalyptic Humor by AGelbert
April 22, 2018, 08:13:27 pm

Dam Hydropower by AGelbert
April 22, 2018, 08:04:42 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial