DIY Si
|
| posted on 26/1/07 at 12:13 AM |
|
|
True. My rose bushes are starting to sprout already! May just be down to a lack of winter this year.
“Let your plans be dark and as impenetratable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.”
Sun Tzu, The Art of War
My new blog: http://spritecave.blogspot.co.uk/
|
|
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 26/1/07 at 08:03 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
just a thought on cows
Any co2 they release must come from the food they eat, and the carbon in that came from the atmosphere, so over all, cows have no net effect on
atmospheric co2.
Cows and sheep eat grass which is grown by using CO2 from the air. They convert that grass to methane which has 10x the greenhouse effect of CO2
|
|
|
trogdor
|
| posted on 26/1/07 at 09:42 AM |
|
|
most of the CO2 released is balanced by a uptake of CO2, the main release of CO2 that is not balanced is by us burning the oil and coal that took
millions of years to form yet is being released in much quicker than than that, obviously if a volcano erupts this is another main export of CO2 into
the atmosphere
i tried to find that company on the web but was unsuccessful, it was there only a few weeks ago! oh well!
alot of the stuff that is seen on tv is misleading in some way, even the bbc's horizon documentry's we watched one once in a lecture, it
was about the gulf stream slowing down and stopping meaning it will get really cold here etc, like that film the day after tomorrow.
however after it finished the lecturer completly ripped it apart saying it pretty much was a load of spin and hype
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 26/1/07 at 12:50 PM |
|
|
although it does highlight the point we all hear global warming and assume it will get hotter. It should be called climate change - some places
hotter, some colder, some damper, some drier.
|
|
|
ChrisJLW
|
| posted on 26/1/07 at 01:23 PM |
|
|
The oil and coal was once CO2 as well, we're just 'repatriating' it.
The human race will survive global warming and the loss of natural resources such as coal and oil but it will take a big fall before hand. Hence the
need to conserve what we have and develop alternatives for what we will lose, although I cannot see alternatives for oil based products ever being
developed.
I've lived a life that's full.
I've traveled each and ev'ry highway.
But more, much more than this,
I did it side-ah-ways.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 26/1/07 at 09:57 PM |
|
|
the future is nuclear. Fuel cells and nuclear
|
|
|
t.j.
|
| posted on 27/1/07 at 08:31 AM |
|
|
We all buying this crap by the media.
The sun-activity is at a high point last decades. So what happens if the sun shines?......
So arround 2012-2020 the sun is relative low.
And then watch it becomes normal.
But then the media will say....
Look what our envoirment is doing better by................
And china, india will blast more and much more....
So... ok, it is important. Only by stressing the car-owner in Europe: NO!
Nuclear fusion will bring in the future our energy. If the Oil-holding lands will not distroy us, cause that only their money-maker.
|
|
|
Rob Palin
|
| posted on 27/1/07 at 09:02 AM |
|
|
If this is all just hype from the media, perhaps you should let the various experts know at Oxford, Cambridge and Imperial College (amongst many
others) that they are wasting their time researching Climate Change.
I'm sure all those professors will be glad to know that they shouldn't be fooled by what they see on the news and can get back to
gardening, or whatever they would otherwise be doing...
http://www.cei.group.cam.ac.uk/directory/climate/
http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/research/climate/index.php
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/climatechange
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 27/1/07 at 01:39 PM |
|
|
There's as many 'Professors' in the 'against' camp as the 'for'. Just not given the media space. You see,
they're not as controversial and shock horror doom.
Those beardies with their long hair and burned out hippy looks have to justify their bloated research grants somehow.
Cheers,
Syd. 
|
|
|
jlparsons
|
| posted on 27/1/07 at 06:53 PM |
|
|
Global warming, ozone layer, rainforest depletion, who cares? Fact is there's way too many of us and we're hyper-consuming - the planet
can't support this growth in consumption and population for long. It's broke? Chuck it out, buy another.
So it gets a bit hotter - big deal. What we need to look at is long term economic stability and no politic system yet devised promotes this, long
terms plans are 50 years but what the hell is that? Blink of an eye.
Spleen vented!
Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead is purely coincidental. Some assembly required. Batteries not included. Contents may settle during
shipment. Use only as directed. No other warranty expressed or implied. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment. Subject to
approval, terms and conditions apply. Apply only to affected area. For recreational use only. All models over 18 years of age. No user-serviceable
parts inside. Subject to change. As seen on TV. One size fits all. May contain nuts. Slippery when wet. For office use only. Edited for television.
Keep cool; process promptly.
|
|
|
t.j.
|
| posted on 28/1/07 at 12:09 AM |
|
|
Some years ago they had acid rain....
Then someone finds out it's normal.....
We all believed it.....costs......
Water rises by increasing ice???? it lay's on top of water.... What did you learn at fysics...
So this year:
We get a wet summer...... it's global warming
We get a cold summer...... it's global warming
We get a hot summer.... it's global warming
Don't misunderstand me, envoirment is important, but not this way.
Stay awake: http://www.realclimate.org/
[Edited on 28/1/07 by t.j.]
|
|
|
Rob Palin
|
| posted on 28/1/07 at 10:54 AM |
|
|
Ice does not "lay on top of water" as you say, but submerges partially in it, to a depth determined by the relative densities of the sea
water and (pure water) ice. Most of the ice is under the surface, hence the expression "just the tip of the iceberg".
On a physical basis though you could question whether the sea level would rise because (pure) water expands inbetween 4 degrees C and freezing so the
ice takes up more volume than its equivalent mass of liquid water. The argument then being that when it melts it might not take up any more actual
space than it did as ice and so the water level itself may not change. This is something you could calculate fairly easily and i'm sure
they've already done it.
As far as raising the seas worldwide, however, you'd have to take into account the mass of snow / ice on top of land and, in the case of
antarctica in particular, that's a hell of a lot of land!
Anyone tried going on a skiing holiday recently? Not much snow about this winter, is there?
I agree that there isn't 100% consensus on whether or not the climate is changing *entirely* because of us, but it IS changing and we're
certainly not helping. As the world gets more crowded it surely makes sense to try and be a little more responsible and considerate with how we use
and dispose of the natural resources which will gradually become rarer.
Has anyone ever read about the early civilisation on Easter Island (the one with the funny head statues)? They died out because they cut down all the
trees on the island to use as fuel. I wonder if the bloke who cut down the last one thought "nah, it'll be alright, some more will grow
soon"...
[Edited on 28/1/07 by Rob Palin]
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 28/1/07 at 12:36 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by t.j.
Some years ago they had acid rain....
Then someone finds out it's normal.....
Did they, when was this published (serious question, cause i completely missed it)
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 28/1/07 at 03:41 PM |
|
|
he probably means 'normal' in that its just atmospheric moisture disolving gas to produce acid. Not normal is the excess of so2 etc that
is the problem!
|
|
|
t.j.
|
| posted on 28/1/07 at 07:07 PM |
|
|
just read some other stuff
read this
You don't hear about acid-rain cause the people as you and I can't do anything about it. Our car-contribution is to low now. So now they
focus on the C02.
So what if we all drive electric cars which come from water- or airpropelled generators.... Yes they find out that the wheels are from rubber which
produce noise and dust which is harmfull.
Over 20 years you will remember this, and smile.....
So do the things which have direct effort.
Save childern from starving, stop war, don't mess up the envoirment by flying.
Help your neighbour. Bring your chemical waste to the collecting place.
But don't focus on things which costs a lot of money and the outcome is uncertain!
And put a catalist on your BEC car 
|
|
|
t.j.
|
| posted on 28/1/07 at 07:21 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
he probably means 'normal' in that its just atmospheric moisture disolving gas to produce acid. Not normal is the excess of so2 etc that
is the problem!
If you put it in to the cloudes it will fall down. Which is logic to me.
But is there really something to do about it now? NO.
So that's why you and I don't have to hear about it.
We have raising envoirment tax on electricity to reduce Co2. What a crap...!
It's only to get the money....
|
|
|
trogdor
|
| posted on 29/1/07 at 09:25 AM |
|
|
the future would be in renewable sources of energy, nuclear fisson is a dead end as sources of suitable uranium ores are scarce, it will prob last as
long as oil if we are lucky certainly not coal. if we could develop controlled fusion then that would be the way forward.
|
|
|
DorsetStrider
|
| posted on 30/1/07 at 06:08 PM |
|
|
The fact of the matter is that the governement is more interested in collecting taxes for it's coffers than any real interest in the
environment.
All the majour car manufactures have hydrogen or hybrid engine designs they are happy to start using but what would be the point when the only place
that you can get hydrogen is aberdeen?
The Governement doesn't want to force in hydrogen power for the simple reason that it would upset their bum buddies in the oil/gas/coal
industrys.
Who the f**K tightened this up!
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 09:41 AM |
|
|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6321351.stm
Climatic changes seen around the world are "very likely" to have a human cause, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has
concluded.
By "very likely", the IPCC means greater than 90% probability.
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 09:58 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bluemoon
smart51 your spot on.. Anyone who thinks that this is not a problem will find out in the next 25-50 years if it is... As we have only one planet I
would be a little worried.
Dan
I agree also, watch "An incovenient truth" Al Gores film, and come back and tell me its not an issue..
Bush is an asshole, not only for kyoto, but many other things, and many cities in the US are now ratifying Kyoto regardless of Bush, good on
them...
China is an issue with them opening 600 new coal fired power plants, but they will find themselves with international sanctions and no export trade if
they dont sort themselves out, and thats the way forward...
We should be talking with our wallets and not buying goods made in china so that they have to start thinking about clean nuclear enrergy...
If you see the state Tehran is in with smog and polution, you will understand why they are trying to reduce their reliance on oil and switch to
nuclear..
You can only drive your car every other day there now, depending on whether it is odd or even numbered... Of course the rich twats just have 2 gas
guzzling monsters to get round this
We are on the verge of a major climatic change if we dont do something, then it wont matter about money anymore as people in the northern hemisphere,
US, Europe etc will be extinct!
I urge everyone to make it their business to find out about this, like smart and dan said... it is a much bigger problem than the govt's are
letting us know!
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
G.Man
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 10:03 AM |
|
|
http://www.climatecrisis.net/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnfe7Cnwfm4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j0BngYcNaw
Opinions are like backsides..
Everyone has one, nobody wants to hear it and only other peoples stink!
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 10:54 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by zetec7
I agree, for differnt reasons...according to the actual numbers, we're not warming - we've cooled over the last 100 years, and we should
actuall have warmed (remember - we're between ice ages!). The actual numbers gathered over the last 150 or so years show we're slightly
cooler on average than would be expected. Realistically, it's pretty silly of us to think that we can alter something as large and complex as
our planet's ecosystem in only a few decades - and I've read that one volcano erution puts more crap into the air than all the man-made
pollution combined, since the beginning of the industrial revolution!
I wholeheartedly agree with the above, nice to know I am not the only one!
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 11:02 AM |
|
|
The fact of the matter is all of the data on the matter is skewed one way or another for the political (or other agenda) benefit of the writer. No
more or less. You can make statistics tell you absolutely anything you want to depending on which method of analysis you apply to them.
I still stand by the statements I made earlier. It is imperative that we slow our use of the world's resources, however not from a global
warming point of view, though the change in technology will lead to a natural decrease in emissions.
I believe the focus should be on developing true alternative fuels etc for the real reason that we ARE running out of natural fossil fuels, not for
the hyped up reason that is global warming.
David
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 11:13 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Syd Bridge
I saw the quotes that co2 levels are now at 380ppm as well. But they are known to have been much higher in times past.
No one has mentioned the 'global dimming' thing. First awareness made by an aussie working on another project to do with evaporation
rates. The evaporation has slowed down largely and measurably since the 1950's.
The slow down in evaporation is known to be caused by less sun energy coming through. This then impacts on vegetation growth and carbon (CO2)
absorbtion. Less sunlight = less growth= less CO2 absorbtion. The drop in sunlight transmission WILL end up in rapid cooling and an ice age.
The cooling will drop the amount of water in the atmosphere in a rapid switch, the planet will then warm up, the atmosphere will fill with water
vapour and dust, will then dim and cool,......and the cycle will go on for millenia.
The time between cold (or ice) ages is also known to a decreasing period since these cycles have been known to exist. Millions of years, and each
'warm' period has got progressively shorter.
Then there's the sunspot cycles within cycles within cycles. No mention of the relevance of any of this either, but it is more relevant than
most of the bs talked about.
Man thinking he can change the climate? You'd have more chance of pissing into a hurricane and staying dry! 
Anyway, it's all a big con to get us to pay more tax and spend money on unnecessary junk, like cat converters. All to end up in the pockets of
the wealthy, one way or another.
Cheers,
Syd.
Well put Syd:
"Man thinking he can change the climate? You'd have more chance of pissing into a hurricane and staying dry!"
I completely agree. How clever do humans think they have got now, we need to wake up and smell the roses!
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 2/2/07 at 11:44 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by G.Man
I agree also, watch "An incovenient truth" Al Gores film, and come back and tell me its not an issue..
"An incovenient truth" was made by a politician as a political tool, and can not therefore be taken seriously. If Tony Blair made a film
about WMD in Iraq would you belive it for a second?
|
|
|
