Most of the cunts excited about it are talking through their holes all right. The only thing we know for certain is we have been pumping CO2 into the atmosphere in increasing amounts for 150 years or so. Even at today’s levels we produce about 5% of what nature produces (and uses up). Atmospheric levels of CO2 have gone up about 100ppm since the Industrial Revolution and most climate scientists are convinced our emissions are responsible for it. They may be right but it wouldn’t be the first time science was wrong or at least incomplete, and there is some other natural explanation we know little or nothing about. The available data certainly suggests we are reponsible.
How so?
The technology is there in theory, but it has not and is not being utilised in any significant way. For many reasons - this theoretical technology is not possible in practice, the costs are astronomical, there is no substantive support for it among governments, business and the scientific community. The costs of building ultra super critical coal plants with carbon capture and storage will mean much much higher energy prices, while not reducing carbon emissions in any material way. It’s unproven and simply won’t work.
In reality, it’s a fairytale thought up by the coal industry to shade the debate about coal. Coal is fucking up the world - no, look over there, we think we’ve found a way to burn shit loads of coal and not be as messy, so don’t worry about it, it’ll be grand.
We get pedalled this line by the government in Australia that we should be opening coal mines so that poor people in India can have electricity (the Australian government, with such a great track record of concern for poor people in foreign countries, or for that matter, their own). Totally ignoring the fact that those poor people will not have access to an electricity grid (or that the Indian government’s policy is to reduce coal imports and seek alternative energy sources). Localised energy sources based on renewable’s like hydro, solar, wind are the obvious answer.
Why would anyone, other than right wing nut jobs, invest in the myth that is clean coal, when every bank in the world runs a fucking mile from it? Why wouldn’t you invest instead in the future, in the pretty obviously massive market that will be renewable energy? In particular as battery storage, now in it’s infancy, is pretty clearly going to be the future. Energy consumption from the grid here is decreasing as more people use solar on their homes. Electricity grid’s will become more and more expensive sources of electricity, motivating more and more people to produce their own energy. I have solar hot water (during a four day category 2 cyclone 2 years ago, where we had no sun, we had hot water the whole time, solely from that solar system. We had no electricity from the grid for almost 2 weeks, as it was knocked out from the cyclone, we will soon be putting a solar array on the roof as well, after which I’ll never pay another electricity bill).
Clean coal is the dying sting from a dying industry. In 10 years time, energy will be completely transformed and we won’t be able to close coal plants quick enough.
Fuck off with this clean coal shite.
There is no such thing as clean coal. All we can do is massively reduce the emissions. Emissions, by the way, from natural gas, are 60% of that from coal.
Carbon capture and storage is not theoretical. It has been implemented in one of the largest coal plants in the US and abandoned due to lack of legislative support. It is very expensive and thus needs a commitment from politicians to support a huge increase in electricity costs.
You are ignoring the main point I made however. 40% of the worlds electricity is generated by coal. How are we going to replace it? Your answer is think of the future. How many people are willing to give up their electricity to accomplish that goal? Switch to solar you say? Fuck right off. How many living in major cities all over the world can switch to solar?
The planet is heating up - We have contributed to it greatly - 98% of the scientific community agree that we are largely behind it. In fact, scientists who specialize in climate studies are in 100% agreement on this - a few lads with lesser expertise are muddying the waters largely for business/corporate reasons.
What would you know about science?
Climate science is one of the most difficult sciences and one we are early enough in our understanding. How often is the weatherman (or woman) right about the weather in a few days, let alone 50 years from now?
Ask yourself this question. The natural carbon cycle of the earth handles 20 times the CO2 emissions that humans have created. Why do you think it can’t handle that extra 5%? Or maybe it has and something else is in play.
Nuclear is the only job
3 Likes
Fusion though, fission is nasty shit when things go wrong.
I don’t have to know about science to know what scientists think - They publish their results to inform. We know you did half a science degree in an RTC, that doesn’t make you Einstein or give you a monopoly on scientific discussion on the board, bud. Are you suggesting that unless we are an expert on a topic we should refrain from engaging in it? Today is my first day giving up coffee, don’t be starting… i’m telling you straight.
I never set foot in an RTC in my life you wanker.
You are entitled to an opinion as well as anyone. Scientists embedded in their own field can be very passionate and confident about their evidence. Sometimes scientists outside the field can be more objective.
Are you suggesting we should hand over the science moderation to the history department? That’s a step too far.
I’m not suggesting that at all, you cunt. You tried to discredit my opinion with your whataboutery … I’d certainly respect your opinion over an IT help desk person like @TreatyStones, but don’t be so condescending … we’re all here to learn, kid.
2 Likes
The earth has been around for 4.5 billion years. It’s sustained life for most of that time, through unimaginable climate changes. Life adapts, that’s the lesson of evolution. Those ranting against burning fossil fuels want to deny electricity to poor cunts without it. The same cunts whinge if the house temperature drops a degree.
I agree that it is rich of the west lecturing emerging economies alright …still, the likes of China are off the scale with the emissions they are producing.
What are your thoughts on battery power? It seems to be all the rage/lingo now but how do you replace lithium-ion based batteries, what’s the new battery of the future?
Alfa batteries will replace lithium in time, but battery power will replace the combustible engine sooner. Next ten years almost total conversion to battery powered and driverless vehicles, 100% for commercial.
The big problem is electricity generation. Especially with the increasing demand and reliance on fossil fuels. With developed markets stagnating, energy companies are totally focused on emerging markets.
1 Like
Caused a few of them when drunk, though, I bet.
2 Likes
Its kill or be killed mate. Fuck them.
Do you understand what and how an eco system works, you dumb fucker?
1 Like
In Laois an eco system is a septic tank.
1 Like