Global Warming - Right & Wrong

Gulfcoastguy

BuckeyeFork said:

Baaaaa.

It’s actually quite clever. The sheep will keep the weeds from growing up around the panels and the panels will give the sheep shade for their afternoon siestas. 

fishlessman

they could add some goats

https://m.facebook.com/DailyMail/videos/bouncy-goats-frolic-on-solar-panels-at-florida-farm/275034183960136/

Gulfcoastguy

Goats dancing a jig on expensive panels wouldn’t be optimal.

fishlessman

i dont see them working well in animal farms, animals be animals

fishlessman

open fields with turkey, deer, and hunters poaching wouldn work much either and/or the shrinking hunting spaces

Gulfcoastguy

Windmills, on the other hand, don’t bother livestock at all. They also block minimal sunlight meaning crops can be grown on the same land. I saw that out West last October.

fishlessman

I'm ok with them on land, not so much in the fishing grounds.  Seen a blade that broke off maybe a month ago going up I95.  Looked to be about 130 foot and it took about 2. Lanes plus

nolaegghead

Right those windmill blades break off all the time and can cut billions of fish

fishlessman

nolaegghead said:

Right those windmill blades break off all the time and can cut billions of fish

and they close the fishing grounds......oceans big, they can fish elsewhere like the places with no fish. seeing the broken blade i can say that they dont belong in cities either....but that seems to be ok with me

what happened to the gyroscope oscillating flywheel generating technologies they were working on, i remember seeing the aftermath of an expiremental one that exploded... atleast it was in a deep cement bunker underground.those companies developing it around me are all out of business now. those dont need sun, wind, natural  spaces.

JohnInCarolina

fishlessman said:

nolaegghead said:

Right those windmill blades break off all the time and can cut billions of fish

and they close the fishing grounds......oceans big, they can fish elsewhere like the places with no fish. seeing the broken blade i can say that they dont belong in cities either....but that seems to be ok with me

what happened to the gyroscope oscillating flywheel generating technologies they were working on, i remember seeing the aftermath of an expiremental one that exploded... atleast it was in a deep cement bunker underground.those companies developing it around me are all out of business now. those dont need sun, wind, natural  spaces.

We have thousands of these windmills operating in the US these days.  The frequency with which there's some kind of a massive structural failure seems to be extremely low.  

fishlessman

JohnInCarolina said:

fishlessman said:

nolaegghead said:

Right those windmill blades break off all the time and can cut billions of fish

and they close the fishing grounds......oceans big, they can fish elsewhere like the places with no fish. seeing the broken blade i can say that they dont belong in cities either....but that seems to be ok with me

what happened to the gyroscope oscillating flywheel generating technologies they were working on, i remember seeing the aftermath of an expiremental one that exploded... atleast it was in a deep cement bunker underground.those companies developing it around me are all out of business now. those dont need sun, wind, natural  spaces.

We have thousands of these windmills operating in the US these days.  The frequency with which there's some kind of a massive structural failure seems to be extremely low.  

my complaint is it will disrupt fishing for ground fish such as haddock and cod, maybe lobster as well if you cant drop traps or dredge bottom. i only mentioned the broken blade because it was huge, pretty much stopped traffic up i95 into maine from mass, maybe 50 wide load cars and cruisers and fire trucks following it. i think it was going to a testing facility to find out what failed.  was good timing with the new ezpass system widening the interstate.

dbCooper

The spinning blades do take out unsuspecting birds, fortunately they are CIA drones and not living creatures.

fishlessman

windmills are just a communication device network so those good doer democrats can call home. alien lizard people are real

JohnInCarolina

I think we can file this under “wrong”

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/davelevitan/status/1572760143007485954?s=20&t=Weqye65ASIpD4ilEFO2F-g

lousubcap

A good read regarding climate and Hurricane Ian from The Atlantic:
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/09/climate-change-impact-hurricane-ian/671604/?utm_source=nextdraft&utm_medium=email

Canugghead

Darn paywall

lousubcap

@paqman if the above is directed to my posted link above I am surprised as I do the pedestrian no pay option.  That said, here's a copy and paste. FWIW-
"

Honestly? The Link Between Climate Change and Hurricanes Is Complicated

Hurricane Ian shows some symptoms of global warming. But saying anything beyond that is folly.

By Robinson Meyer

Ricardo Arduengo / AFP / Getty

SEPTEMBER 29, 2022, 5:02 PM ET

SHARE

Hurricane Ian is one of the most destructive hurricanes ever to hit Florida. A day after the storm made landfall, hundreds of people have been rescued and, as of this morning, millions were without power. President Joe Biden has indicated that early reports suggest “substantial loss of life,” but no firm numbers have been confirmed. With such a catastrophic storm coming after the string of disasters this summer, some commentators have tried to link Hurricane Ian to climate change.

But while climate change is clearly fueling some disasters, such as heat waves and wildfires, it has a more complicated effect on hurricanes. The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations–led panel of hundreds of climate scientists from around the world, has said that it’s an “established fact” that industrial carbon pollution has led to an increase in “frequency” or “intensity” of extreme weather. But the report uses more circumspect language such as “likely” to talk about tropical cyclones. (Tropical cyclones are only called hurricanes when they’re above a certain wind speed and in the Atlantic or North Pacific Ocean.)

Climate change is changing hurricanes in a few ways. “First of all, you can have more intense hurricanes in a warmer climate. That finding goes back well over 30 years now,” Kerry Emanuel, an MIT meteorologist and an expert on how climate change affects hurricanes, told me. “For that reason we expect to see more of the highest-category storms—the Cat 3s, Cat 4s, Cat 5s, more of the Ian-style storms.”

Read: How Hurricane Irma is sucking Florida’s beaches dry

In effect, climate change raises the speed limit on storms, he said, allowing hurricanes to attain a higher wind speed than they would otherwise. Why does this happen? It arises from the brute-force physics of a hurricane colliding with the inescapable presence of greenhouse gases. “A hurricane is a heat engine,” Emanuel told me, turning heat from the ocean into wind energy. This transformation happens because as water evaporates from the sea surface, it transfers heat from the ocean to the atmosphere, essentially speeding the storm. (The underlying phenomenon here is also why “if you’re wet, you feel cold, all else being equal,” Emanuel said.)

So how does the ocean get hot in the first place? There is really only one way for heat to enter the ocean and only two ways for it to leave, he said. Heat always arrives in the ocean as sunlight; it always leaves as infrared radiation, which is emitted back into space, or as evaporation from the sea surface. But carbon dioxide and other climate pollutants prevent infrared radiation from escaping the ocean—that’s the “greenhouse effect” that gives greenhouse gases their name. Because heat has nowhere else to go, the rate of sea-surface evaporation has to speed up, which means more heat energy can pass into the storm.

In other words, climate change “creates the conditions for water to evaporate faster,” Emanuel said, which means more heat can enter a given storm—and it can get windier.

Second, researchers agree that hurricanes can now strengthen far faster than they could in the old climate. The number of tropical cyclones that have undergone “rapid intensification”—a term of art meaning a storm’s top wind speed has increased by at least 35 miles per hour over a 24-hour period—has “likely” risen over the past 40 years, the IPCC has found.

“The forecaster’s nightmare is going to bed with a tropical storm in the Gulf of Mexico and waking up to a Cat 4 bearing down on a city” that has no time to evacuate, he told me. Even when meteorologists can safely predict that a storm will rapidly intensify, they can struggle to communicate its risks to the public.

Hurricane Ian looks like a textbook case of rapid intensification: On Monday morning, its top wind speeds were 75 miles per hour, barely qualifying the storm as a hurricane; just 48 hours later, its winds howled at up to 155 miles per hour—just shy of Category 5 status—as it made landfall in Cayo Costa, Florida. Indeed, people may feel like every hurricane to hit the United States recently has undergone a similar metamorphosis. Last year, Hurricane Ida made landfall in Louisiana as a powerful Category 4 storm only 74 hours after it became a tropical depression; the storm formed and came ashore faster than New Orleans could evacuate. In 2018, Hurricane Michael rapidly exploded into Category 4 status before it walloped the Florida Panhandle; a year earlier, Hurricanes Harvey and Irma also experienced rapid intensification before they made landfall.

Finally, climate change is making hurricanes rainier, Emanuel said. That’s actually true of most storms, tropical or not, but it’s especially important for hurricanes, because rain from a given hurricane can combine with other impacts to increase a storm’s overall danger.

Read: Did climate change intensify Hurricane Harvey?

“If you have a more intense storm and an elevated sea level, you’re going to be more susceptible to surge flooding,” when the storm pushes the ocean ashore, he told me. Then, surge flooding and “freshwater flooding” from all that extra rain “can gang up,” he said, creating a brackish flooding disaster. “It looks like that’s what happened in Fort Myers,” which has seen some of the worst damage, he told me.

So that’s what scientists do know about climate change and hurricanes. But much remains unclear or unknown about how the two interact. There’s essentially no agreement on what a warming climate will do to smaller hurricanes in the Category 1 or 2 range, Emanuel said. Historically, these less intense storms form far more often than major storms, and they dominate the raw numbers of hurricanes that form each year (although major hurricanes still cause by far the most damage). But “we just don’t know if the number of those smaller storms will be more or fewer or stay the same.”

Climatologists also don’t know what will happen to the diameter of hurricanes. The size of hurricanes is an overlooked but important aspect of a storm’s danger, Emanuel said. For instance, Hurricane Ian made landfall in almost the same place that Hurricane Charley did in 2004, but Ian is a much wider—and thus a much more destructive—storm. Charley, in fact, could almost fit entirely within Ian’s eye. Idealized computer models show that climate change will likely make these monster storms more common, Emanuel said, but so far “nobody wants to carry that over to the real world,” which is far more complex than a simulation.

So what can we say about climate change’s effect on Ian? Stepping back, it seems safe to say that it showed some symptoms of climate change. It rapidly intensified. It dumped huge amounts of rain. You could even argue that it showed evidence of that “higher speed limit.” But asking questions beyond that is folly, Emanuel said.

“I don’t like the question ‘How did climate change affect this storm?’” he told me. “If you had a grandparent who died of lung cancer and who smoked two packs a day, you wouldn’t ask, ‘How much did smoking contribute to his lung cancer?’ Because sometimes people get lung cancer without smoking at all. You just can’t answer that question.”"

paqman

lousubcap said:

@paqman if the above is directed to my posted link above I am surprised as I do the pedestrian no pay option. 

I am not  @Canugghead ‘s troll account 🤣😂

lousubcap

@paqman Sorry as I F'd that big time.  I was close to earth then, now not so much.

Canugghead

Dislikowart strikes again.

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/billmckibben/status/1576218248248688643?s=20&t=tq8uAJSIfqM29KgR1VbIxg

lousubcap

Canugghead said:

Dislikowart strikes again.

And he/she is making up for lost time.  It's everywhere 

nolaegghead

Do I really need to post an article how the medical community has had some colossal bad ideas in the past and therefore you should not believe in modern medicine?  

JohnInCarolina

nolaegghead said:

Do I really need to post an article how the medical community has had some colossal bad ideas in the past and therefore you should not believe in modern medicine?  

Wouldn’t do any good.  Some men… you just can’t reach.

JohnInCarolina

http://twitter.com/TheAtlantic/status/1576686626008203265?s=20&t=AmJRTfGMYtULn7WT8FzC8g

Legume

http://www.cnn.com/2022/10/02/us/solar-babcock-ranch-florida-hurricane-ian-climate/index.html


I am over trying to embed links.

Interesting article, small town 12 miles from Ft Myers that was designed to be 100% solar, underground utilities, streets designed to flood rather the homes, etc.  Nobody flooded, nobody lost power, minimal damage.

Botch

Tomorrow I need to do some research on flood insurance.  
When I was working on my MS in IE we had a class on "Current Issues in IE", and one of the more interesting sections was on Insurance.  At that time (~1990) Flood Insurance was the only common type that was subsidized by the Feds (some really ugly case studies for that).  I'd read later that the laws were changed, it was all on the private insurance companies.  I'd read a bit later again that the laws were changed back, as the Wealthy didn't want to pay full cost for insuring their beachside homes.  
Now, with Ian, I'm seeing on the news that flood insurance companies are pulling out of FL in droves, so it sounds like the laws have flip-flopped again.  I also saw, on Bill Maher's show from Friday night, that Bill himself can't purchase fire insurance for his home in California; I'm assuming that's the case for many (all?) californians now?  
 
When Katrina decimated NO I had suggested on a different forum (back in, what, 2006?) that it didn't make sense to rebuild the low section of NO, as both the Gulf and Lake Ponchartrain have a water level higher than that section; global warming was increasing the sea level; and global warming was also increasing hurricane seasons and strength.  Wow, I received the worst flak from anyone on a forum in my life!  "That's our HOME!  How DARE You!"  I guess its because my Dad, and then I, moved often that I didn't have such a sense of "place".  Live in a place where you have work, make the best of it, and hopefully it's inherently safe.  And now I'm seeing the same statements from FL Keys residents, "We'll rebuild here, this is our home".  I guess, if they can find/afford insurance, I'm okay with that, but are they counting on the next hurricane not arriving before their next 30-year mortgage being paid off?  
 
But now, where is it  totally safe?  Hurricanes will only grow in intensity and frequency; parts of Miami flood, daily, with the tides, now (due to sea level elevation already); when I was a teenager tornado season in the midwest was July and August (now it's year-round); the intermountain west where I now live is burning up (as with tornados there's no longer a "season"); and both snowpack and groundwater sources are drying up here too. 
 
More to follow maybe.  

HeavyG

One thing is certain - the NFIP has created a huge bucket of moral hazard since its inception. Not a single penny of federal taxpayer dollars should support that program. It's funding should be derived entirely from users fees.

The NFIP should be closed to any new property development.

FEMA should not be providing any grant money (low or no interest loans are ok) to folks whose property falls within a flood zone but who decided to forgo the purchase of flood insurance.

I'd also go one step further and say that any state whose governor voted against the feds providing disaster relief money for hurricane events in the past (like say...Hurricane Sandy) when they were a Congressman shouldn't be asking for money now for their state.

JohnInCarolina

Any moron can look at the many astrologists and essential oil chemists at the Flat Earth Society meetings and understand that even the planet being a sphere isn’t “settled science”.  C’mon people, this is just common sense, and global warming is just the sun.  Duh!