F1technical.net

actually humankind doesn't know what is the correct state of the Antarctic ozone 'layer' - as they have maybe never seen it
the first-ever AAOL measurements (1958) 'discovered' the presumed-anomalous nature of the OL
this was blamed on the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons (there's a greeny cause !)
though the NASA link may imply that CFC effects were being seen even then
the OL case is not an answer my question to would-be climate modifiers


'how we should generate and cleanly store electrical energy'

this is of course the question I have been asking in the threads that I have started over several years
ie right now there's only value in going EV if (pretend) zero carbon electricity is quadrupled ie to 120% of present grid max
otherwise EVs just increase the demand for electricity from all existing sources
battery storage is implausible - there's not enough Lithium in this planet and it's only good for 1000 cycles

but eg even when land transport has become all EV we have decarbonised only a fraction of our energy

sorry messed up an edit big time

Strangely the global temperature went down 0.5°C for a couple of years.

There have been a number of volcanic eruptions that have led to temporary cooling due to the cloud blocking sunlight. Sorta like nuclear winter. Wanna set off a bunch off nukes to cool the planet?

until Governments take advice of scientists who know what they are talking about

My God
That's what I have been showing you. That they have been listening to scientists. Scientists that have been liying all down the line at every turn.
IF the I.P.C.C. would quit lying and allow the other side to show their proof we could get somewhere, but they have squelched all discussion and blackballed all who wouldn't play on their team.

strad wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 20:24

Strangely the global temperature went down 0.5°C for a couple of years.

There have been a number of volcanic eruptions that have led to temporary cooling due to the cloud blocking sunlight. Sorta like nuclear winter. Wanna set off a bunch off nukes to cool the planet?

until Governments take advice of scientists who know what they are talking about

My God
That's what I have been showing you. That they have been listening to scientists. Scientists that have been liying all down the line at every turn.
IF the U.P.C.C. would quit lying and allow the other side to show their proof we could get somewhere, but they have squelched all discussion and blackballed all who wouldn't play on their team.

I have not looked lately, but when I used to care about such things the UK government was being advised by 'scientists' alright, but none who would know much about climatology, and they probably read it the same place as I did, if they even bothered.

When I say scientists,I mean appropriately qualified and experienced scientists.

but none who would know much about climatology, and they probably read it the same place as I did, if they even bothered.
When I say scientists, I mean appropriately qualified and experienced scientists

.
Big Tea; With that I couldn't agree more. Most of those on the U.P.C.C. are not climatologists but rather politicians.
There are relatively few scientists and almost no proper scientific methodology.
Instead you have a small group all agreeing with each other and reviewing each others papers. No real peer review.

Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 16:03

battery storage is implausible - there's not enough Lithium in this planet and it's only good for 1000 cycles

Well, there's an estimated 50 million tonnes in the ground in various forms. And about 200 billion tonnes in the oceans. It is also recyclable. That'll be another of those situations where spending a bit of money and effort to develop systems could lead to lithium being readily available for as long as we want it. I reckon we could afford that too - $1700 billion spend on weapons each year worldwide - surely no one would miss a billion to spend on research such as this?

Or we could just, you know, keep doing the same old same old and telling ourselves it'll all be ok.

strad wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 20:24

There have been a number of volcanic eruptions that have led to temporary cooling due to the cloud blocking sunlight. Sorta like nuclear winter. Wanna set off a bunch off nukes to cool the planet?

I'd be up for that as an option. Can I draw up the list of places that have bombs dropped on them? Please?

Just_a_fan wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 21:57

Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 16:03

battery storage is implausible - there's not enough Lithium in this planet and it's only good for 1000 cycles

Well, there's an estimated 50 million tonnes in the ground in various forms. And about 200 billion tonnes in the oceans. It is also recyclable. That'll be another of those situations where spending a bit of money and effort to develop systems could lead to lithium being readily available for as long as we want it. I reckon we could afford that too - $1700 billion spend on weapons each year worldwide - surely no one would miss a billion to spend on research such as this?

Or we could just, you know, keep doing the same old same old and telling ourselves it'll all be ok.

Have you researched what lithium strip mining does to the environment?? It's not good.
https://www.google.com/search?q=lithium ... 01&bih=962

Wayne Pickette of Intel fame is a Facebook friend. He is working on ceramic batteries to specifically prevent the need for lithium.

Mining the ground for lithium (although much is extracted with brine in boreholes too), assuming we need lithium for the foreseeable future, is a thing of the past - that's my point. There's more lithium than we can use in the seas if we just put a bit of thought/effort in to its extraction. Indeed, people have been looking at extracting lithium from seawater. It's been done in research facilities but will take time/effort/money to bring to commercial reality. We (mankind) can make this a reality as soon as we want if we have the political will. And that's the nub of the problem. Politics and vested interests.

Having said that, there is a bit of light at the end of the tunnel - in the UK, BP has bought an EV charging network and intends to develop it further. They realise that EVs are the future and are getting in on the act early. This is a good thing.

https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/ ... aster.html

If the governments were serious about it they would be funding research with all the 'carbon tax' they are collecting instead of using it as 'shut up' money

Zynerji wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 22:17

Have you researched what lithium strip mining does to the environment?? It's not good.
https://www.google.com/search?q=lithium ... 01&bih=962

A bit of digging suggests that some / many of those images aren't lithium mines at all but for copper and other stuff.

Interesting piece here comparing various systems of extracting lithium and oil in response to a meme about lithium being a baddy.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10027822859

It gets so you don't know who to believe any more...

Zynerji wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 02:35

Dazed1 wrote: ↑

01 Jul 2018, 22:02

Just_a_fan wrote: ↑

01 Jul 2018, 14:44

People who don't want to change their way of life try to find ways to defend it even when the evidence suggests changes are needed.

So true. Try quoting world-wide gun-death statistics to Second Amendment Worshipers(no other word for it) here in the US.

Please don't bring Sedition into this...

Sedition?

Zynerji wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 22:17

Have you researched what lithium strip mining does to the environment?? It's not good.
https://www.google.com/search?q=lithium ... 01&bih=962

Electric cars are mostly steel and aluminum by weight, depending on the car. Logically, your mining anxiety should be directed there. Is there a specific issue you have with lithium, over other minerals? What's your opinion of uranium mining, copper mining, coal mining, forestry, oil drilling, oil sand processing, gas wells? A moritorium on all mining, or just lithium?

Zynerji wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 22:17

Wayne Pickette of Intel fame is a Facebook friend. He is working on ceramic batteries to specifically prevent the need for lithium.

It amuses me that the term stranger has been replaced by facebook friend.

roon wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 23:10

Zynerji wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 22:17

Have you researched what lithium strip mining does to the environment?? It's not good.
https://www.google.com/search?q=lithium ... 01&bih=962

Electric cars are mostly steel and aluminum by weight, depending on the car. Logically, your mining anxiety should be directed there. Is there a specific issue you have with lithium, over other minerals? What's your opinion of uranium mining, copper mining, coal mining, forestry, oil drilling, oil sand processing, gas wells? A moritorium on all mining, or just lithium?

Zynerji wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 22:17

Wayne Pickette of Intel fame is a Facebook friend. He is working on ceramic batteries to specifically prevent the need for lithium.

It amuses me that the term stranger has been replaced by facebook friend.

Haha. Not a stranger at all. He was a customer of mine that added me after the interaction. I haven't had dinner with the man, so I don't call him a "friend" like I would with someone that is in my daily personal life.

strad wrote: ↑

02 Jul 2018, 20:24

Strangely the global temperature went down 0.5°C for a couple of years.

There have been a number of volcanic eruptions that have led to temporary cooling due to the cloud blocking sunlight. Sorta like nuclear winter. Wanna set off a bunch off nukes to cool the planet?

You said the low concentration levels of CO2 in the atmosphere meant it could be ignored. But you agree that the much smaller levels of another gas have a dramatic effect. So the concentration level isn’t a suitable metric for discounting CO2.

So what other technical explanation can you offer to ignore CO2?