Climate Change

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Platapus

That's why I am a shade worshiper.

Always enjoyed getting a nice tan whilst abroad on holiday over the years but must admit I don't anymore.

[Wolferz]

My legs have not seen the sun in fifty years.
Can you say vitamin D deficiency?

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by Von Tonner

A very interesting article without getting too techy on how the sun can misbehave and the consequences to us on mother earth.

I think it's all retribution for not adopting the Copernican Model sooner.

[u crank]

I spent 20 odd years working construction and got enough sun for a lifetime. Now I avoid it. Wife sits in the sun, I sit in the shade. Even on holidays other than swimming or walking I tend to look for a shady spot.

Mad dogs and .....

[STEED]

Screwed with it screwed without it, looks like the sun has got planet earth by the balls so to speak.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Platapus

That's why I am a shade worshiper.

Let me guess, they are gray and about 50 of them....

[Rockstar]

Who builds Russias breakers these days? Btw I served 3 years on the arctic icebreaker Северный Полюс

[Von Tonner]

Originally Posted by STEED

Screwed with it screwed without it, looks like the sun has got planet earth by the balls so to speak.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think I recall reading way, way back that the earth is moving closer and closer to the sun through its orbit around it.

So really, while a sustainer of life it really is our nemesis at the end of the day.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Who is saying that pollution is the sole cause? Pollution has exacerbated a natural trend.
In regards to why, the main reason is because we've only been able to collect atmospheric records since 1850, and since these trends take thousands of years to peak and fall, we just don't have enough atmospheric data. However, we can see the effect that the changes had in geography through fossil records, soil samples and tree rings.
If I had to take a stab in the dark, I'd say that there is no one real cause, it's a combination of factors, solar activity, geological activity, even botanical activity, which all combine together to create these peaks and troughs.

Well, if you and I wanted to argue what caused what, I wouldn't mind because I think at the end of the day we would just go our separate ways no worse for wear. The issue I have is the arguement has gone too far in society as a whole. It has now infected the media, it has sadly become a political issue, very divisive in nature and only served to raise the cost of my water, and property taxes to pay for someones research. Still nobbody has a diffinitave answer and even if they did so what if someone proved what is causing the climate to get hot and cold. We have known pollution has been wreaking havoc for decades. Yet without batting a eye the same self depreciating whinners continue pumping crap into the ground water to make their flower beds look pretty.

The thing is, people aren't preparing for it. We have a bigger footprint on the planet than at any time in our history, which means that when something happens it effects more people. In regards to flooding, there are millions, if not billions of people living on flood plains, some might not even realise that they are because they haven't flooded in hundreds of years. A hundred year storm rolls through and suddenly they're underwater.
Building companies are only too happy to build on flood plains because it's cheap, but home owners will find that their insurance company suddenly won't insure their home.
Cold means more energy usage, more people going to hospital through illnesses and accidents. Take a look at places in the south of America when snow first rolls through, it's carnage, people skid off the road because they don't know how to drive in snow.
Getting too hot means more energy usage in air conditioners, it means drought, it means crop problems, forest fires.
It really isn't as simple as you seem to think it is. Extreme conditions bring extreme problems. Just ask people in Australia.
Sure, we have done it through human history, but our society is a lot more fragile and a lot more easy to damage than ever before.
Take two hurricanes, the 1856 Last Island hurricane and Hurricane Katrina, both hit New Orleans, the 1856 storm was actually a bit more intense than Katrina, and yet while Katrina caused 1,577 deaths in New Orleans, the 1856 storm caused over 200, certainly no more than 300. Now, I don't know how much financial damage the 1856 storm caused, but I'd wager that it wasn't $108 billion. Why? because New Orleans wasn't even half the size that it is now.
Another example? In 1869 a Category 3 hurricane swept ashore in Rhode Island, caused a handful and some damage. Hurricane Sandy came ashore as a category 2 (weaker than the 1869 storm), killed about 233 people and cost $68 billion worth of damage.

Out of the top ten most costly Atlantic hurricanes, only 1 of them did not occur within the last fifteen years.

We are getting weaker to strong climatic events, not helped by the fact that most of our major cities are near the sea.

LOL ya you're right people just don't prepare for a lot of things these days. I've seen all sorts of homes and condos on the beachfront getting hammerd by hurricanes and errosion. Why it happens I think is because we have become dumber as the years go by. Not too long ago I was house hunting in areas that had a vast numbers of colonial era homes. I noticed something about the location of all those older homes. They were all built on the higest ground away from the rivers. All the modern homes were right smack on the banks of the rivers and bays. Vanity vanity all is vanity! heheh

But we move our cities away from the flood plains and beaches. Where are they going to go? Earthquake prone areas, mountain regions where they have avalanches and rockslides, desert region? Meh, we have to deal with the forces of nature anywhere we go, just gotta take it day by day I suppose

[ikalugin]

Baltic shipwright.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Well, if you and I wanted to argue what caused what, I wouldn't mind because I think at the end of the day we would just go our separate ways no worse for wear. The issue I have is the arguement has gone too far in society as a whole. It has now infected the media, it has sadly become a political issue, very divisive in nature and only served to raise the cost of my water, and property taxes to pay for someones research. Still nobbody has a diffinitave answer and even if they did so what if someone proved what is causing the climate to get hot and cold. We have known pollution has been wreaking havoc for decades. Yet without batting a eye the same self depreciating whinners continue pumping crap into the ground water to make their flower beds look pretty.

Most things, alas, become a political football after a time, although sometimes it's better that some things are done than none at all. Certainly some bad things will occur as a result of it, and in regards to raising water costs and property taxes, alas that is part of the system we live in, where money is funnelled into all the wrong pockets, but that is a discussion outside of the remit of our current talk, and is, again, a political football.
Still, the thing is about research is that seven or eight times out of ten, eventually the benefits of it reaches public level. Perhaps one day when humanity gets its act together we can create an array of solar panels in non-habited areas which would power all the homes in the world and some more, although you can bet your bottom dollar that even with an abudence of power, they'd still find a way to charge you for it.
It's an interesting thing that a resource as basic and as necessary as water is something we have to pay for, but there you go, that's the treadmill we made for ourselves, and again, outside of the discussion of climate change.

LOL ya you're right people just don't prepare for a lot of things these days. I've seen all sorts of homes and condos on the beachfront getting hammerd by hurricanes and errosion. Why it happens I think is because we have become dumber as the years go by. Not too long ago I was house hunting in areas that had a vast numbers of colonial era homes. I noticed something about the location of all those older homes. They were all built on the higest ground away from the rivers. All the modern homes were right smack on the banks of the rivers and bays. Vanity vanity all is vanity! heheh

But we move our cities away from the flood plains and beaches. Where are they going to go? Earthquake prone areas, mountain regions where they have avalanches and rockslides, desert region? Meh, we have to deal with the forces of nature anywhere we go, just gotta take it day by day I suppose

Even the Romans were smart enough not to build on or near marshland and swamps, somewhere along the line in our rush for affordable housing (which seems to be a goal we never seem to attain) we threw that common sense out of the window and now we pay the price for it.
There are safe-ish spots further inland from current city locations, yeah some areas are going to have earthquake problems, and I think we can probably adapt that that easier than we can rising water. Earthquake-proof buildings are available, just as hurricane proof buildings are, but unfortunately it's expense that stops their widespread adaptation. We are rather a short-sighted species in that we'd rather spend billions of currency when disaster strikes than prepare for it widespread in advance. That being said, some nations are pretty good at it, Japan for example is showing what can be done, but even they have the problem that old buildings aren't earthquake proof, something that the Kobé earthquake showed pretty clearly and forced the Japanese authorities to take extra steps to earthquake proof as much of their infrastrcture as they can. Still, mother nature will occasionally throw a real wrench into your plans that you simply can't expect, as Japan would find out 16 years later when the Tóhoku disaster happened. Nothing could have prepared Japan for that, the fourth strongest earthquake since records began in 1900.
We can adapt, as you say, although some things we will struggle with. It will be interesting to see how the worlds major cities deal with rising sea levels, whether they build bigger walls or leave parts of cities to be submerged and build new parts in the unflooded areas.

[Rockstar]

The Северный Полюс (North Pole?) was built by Western Pipe and Steel Company, San Pedro California and originally commissioned as the USS Westwind (AGB-6). Transferred to the Soviet Union in 1945 and named Северный Полюс. Returned to the U.S. in 1950 and recommissioned USCC Westwind (WAGB 281) the crew affectionately called her the (W)andering (A)rctic (G)arbage (B)arge afer all the trash which would pile up on the fantail while on patrol.

If we looked hard enough we could still find Russian graffiti and name plates in the bilges. It was told there was the ghost of Russian sailors in engine rooms B-1 and B-2 which the crew named 'Boo' and 'Super Snipe' .

Baltic has been around a long time and makes makes good breakers but I'll put my money on the ones buit by Finns to be the best.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled topic.

[ikalugin]

Oberon, solar panels (other "green" energy sources) are not the way to go because:
- the cost of producing energy using solar panels (other energy sources).
- CO2 emitions during their production.
- actual performance in real conditions vs paper specs.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

Oberon, solar panels (other "green" energy sources) are not the way to go because:
- the cost of producing energy using solar panels (other energy sources).
- CO2 emitions during their production.
- actual performance in real conditions vs paper specs.

This is true, sadly, but again that's what research is for. Nuclear is a short term solution, the waste output and footprint of each station in regards to how long it takes the radiation to reach safe levels is not something we really should want to keep expanding. Fusion would be nice but seems to be always 'just around the corner' Wind is good but really something that needs to be used in conjunction with things like solar, and hydro-power is even more expensive.

There is a lot of CO2 production during the making of them, this is also true, but you've got to look at the pay-off, how much CO2 does an oil station create over a sixty year period compared to the CO2 created making those panels? It's a balancing act, this is true, and we're still pretty early in solar technology and deployment, but I honestly think that in time it's something that could be beneficial for us in the long run.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Von Tonner

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think I recall reading way, way back that the earth is moving closer and closer to the sun through its orbit around it.

So really, while a sustainer of life it really is our nemesis at the end of the day.

Never heard that befoer but I know that the sun will become a red giant at the end of it's life and swallow earth and some more planets. So yes, life here doesn't have a future (though I'm sure that humans will destroy the planet much sooner than the sun).