A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

So you say there's no GW, how do you splurge energy?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 16th 10, 03:47 PM posted to alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,misc.consumers.frugal-living
jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 71
Default So you say there's no GW, how do you splurge energy?

Don Klipstein wrote:
In article , jeff wrote:
Don Klipstein wrote:


With me severely snipping to edit for space

When you look beyond decades:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...ure_Record.png

You see the underlying long term trend which tracks with CO2 levels.


I see that tracking with overall greenhouse gas levels, only about 70%
of which is CO2, and the other 30% is from methane, organochlorines, and
nitrous oxide - recently stopped increasing.


I'm not seeing evidence of that (for methane).

http://climateprogress.org/2009/04/2...e-levels-2008/
among others

Long term chart:

http://ecen.com/eee55/eee55e/growth_...mosphere.ht m

I also see the periodic component, correlating well with AMO.

And, I see a periodic component, largely Atlantic Multidecadal
Oscillation.

That shows up even better in the most-major other of the surface-based
three of the "Big 5" indices of global temperature - namely, HadCRUt3,
which goes back to 1850.


I don't doubt the cyclic components. We'll see if temps are still
rising at the AMO low point, and then the next cycle up will be very
problematic.

In Fact, Wikipedia used HadCRUt3 until only a couple years ago, then
switched to GISS.

HadCRUT3 global temperature, UK "Met Office" version, is available at:

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3.../global/nh+sh/


Nice.

I don't doubt that the overall warming may be less than predicted.
But it seems fairly clear that relatively low temperature changes have
profound effects on climate. If it wasn't for the extreme longevity of
CO2, I'd be more optimistic. After all we wouldn't be the first
civilization to have consumed it's way to collapse.

BTW, I've been seeing more and more LED light arrays for "designer"
lighting in the $25 or so range. To my eyes the better ones seem to have
acceptable color. Wonder how long to a price collapse? Just enquiring
because you are the resident lighting expert...


It's going to be gradual. It appears to me that LED technology has
historically advanced at roughly 40% of the pace that computer technology
did since the late 1970's.


That seems to imply a $10 price point in about 7 years and widespread
adoption, where CFLs are impractical in about a decade.

Jeff

- Don Klipstein )

Ads
  #2  
Old February 17th 10, 03:32 AM posted to alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,misc.consumers.frugal-living
Don Klipstein
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 308
Default So you say there's no GW, how do you splurge energy?

In article , jeff wrote in part:

Don Klipstein wrote:


SNIP to here

I see that tracking with overall greenhouse gas levels, only about 70%
of which is CO2, and the other 30% is from methane, organochlorines, and
nitrous oxide - recently stopped increasing.


I'm not seeing evidence of that (for methane).

http://climateprogress.org/2009/04/2...e-levels-2008/
among others

Long term chart:

http://ecen.com/eee55/eee55e/growth_...centration_in_
atmosphere.htm


Your short term chart is a bit of news to me, but shows little more than
a decade. Your long term one shows the 20th century increase too
scrunched horizontally to show what happened in the last 10-15 years.

For an inbetween-scale view, unfortunately endingwith 2004, there is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ma...gas_trends.png

Going up to 1780-1790 in the past year or two is disturning, unless
there is reason for that bump-up to be a short term temporary one.

- Don Klipstein )
  #3  
Old February 17th 10, 06:29 AM posted to alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent,rec.bicycles.misc,rec.bicycles.soc,misc.consumers.frugal-living
jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 71
Default So you say there's no GW, how do you splurge energy?

Don Klipstein wrote:
In article , jeff wrote in part:

Don Klipstein wrote:


SNIP to here

I see that tracking with overall greenhouse gas levels, only about 70%
of which is CO2, and the other 30% is from methane, organochlorines, and
nitrous oxide - recently stopped increasing.

I'm not seeing evidence of that (for methane).

http://climateprogress.org/2009/04/2...e-levels-2008/
among others

Long term chart:

http://ecen.com/eee55/eee55e/growth_...centration_in_
atmosphere.htm


Your short term chart is a bit of news to me, but shows little more than
a decade. Your long term one shows the 20th century increase too
scrunched horizontally to show what happened in the last 10-15 years.

For an inbetween-scale view, unfortunately endingwith 2004, there is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ma...gas_trends.png

Going up to 1780-1790 in the past year or two is disturning, unless
there is reason for that bump-up to be a short term temporary one.


Apparently, quite a surprise.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0927151132.htm

However, during the scientists’ 2007 measurement of methane for northern
wetland regions, including the Arctic, temperatures for the year were
the warmest on record. This temperature increase coincided with the
large jump in the amount of methane measured in that area.

Lets hope that is not the dominant reason for the increase. There has
been much discussion of whether Global Warming has a negative feedback
component, ie one that mitigates against the increase.

There is a huge amount of methane locked up in hydrates. And that could
be a dangerous positive feedback.

What troubles me is that this is warmer than the globe, and
particularly the arctic has been for some time. This is uncharted
territory, for whatever reasons. The insurance companies, who deal with
pricing risk, are certainly concerned.

I've been reading some of the related stories on Science Daily, I
don't find *anything* there that is comforting. This is not a site I'm
familiar.

Jeff

- Don Klipstein )

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
verve energy [email protected] Australia 0 September 11th 09 12:38 AM
Energy gel cost. someone Techniques 42 July 21st 09 10:56 PM
Green Energy Summit 2009: Clean Technology, Renewable Energy, andSustainability Shaguf Techniques 0 November 12th 08 05:45 AM
Energy Question [email protected] Techniques 10 August 17th 08 12:45 PM
en route energy didds UK 15 May 14th 08 04:33 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.