Anthropogenic Global Warming

[SubGod22]

Hasn't Europe shut down a number of green nuclear power plants?

[Shockm]

Closer to home. Does anybody really believe that this will happen?

https://news.yahoo.com/bidens-oil-co...ffKDO33QFe82ox

President Joe Biden sparked a firestorm in energy circles when he said in Tuesday's State of the Union address that the United States will need oil “for at least another decade.″

The Biden administration plans to eliminate fossil fuels as a form of energy generation in the U.S. by 2035. The White House set out a target of 80% renewable energy generation by 2030 and 100% carbon-free electricity five years later.

https://www.npr.org/2023/02/02/11483...e-energy-goals

[JVShocker]

Did a quick check, maybe the numbers aren't accurate, but oil and gas industries employ more than 10 million people in the US according to some statistics - all of voting age if I had to guess. That's some serious job loss.

[Shockm]

Did a quick check, maybe the numbers aren't accurate, but oil and gas industries employ more than 10 million people in the US according to some statistics - all of voting age if I had to guess. That's some serious job loss.

Not to mention the inflationary effect of energy, automobiles, and our dependency on China because our refusal to mine our valuable resources in America, that is necessary for making batteries, etc.

[C0|dB|00ded]

There's a bunch of electric cars utilizing solar panels now. Some can charge as much as 20 miles of range a day sitting in the parking lot. The average commute to and from work is 41 miles. We are getting closer... to freedom.

[pinstripers]

Power The Future @powerthefuture

On June 21st, 2018, eco-left darling Greta Thunberg tweeted that climate change would wipe out humanity in five years.
If you were to take this absurd prediction seriously, that would mean we all have only ten days left.

[JVShocker]

Power The Future @powerthefuture

On June 21st, 2018, eco-left darling Greta Thunberg tweeted that climate change would wipe out humanity in five years.
If you were to take this absurd prediction seriously, that would mean we all have only ten days left.

Not a political statement, but bears a striking resemblance in some pics to Veruca Salt from Willie Wonka

[SubGod22]

It will be interesting to see where these ideas end up down the road.

NASA Unveils an X-Plane They Hope Will Save Earth

NASA and Boeing have unveiled the plane they hope will save the Earth.

The aim is for the experimental aircraft to help reach a net zero aviation emissions goal by 2050 in the U.S.

Working with NASA as part of a $725 million agreement, Boeing will build, test, and fly a full-scale demonstrator aircraft with extra-long, thin wings stabilized by diagonal struts, known as a Transonic Truss-Braced Wing concept.

It is hoped the new X-plane will inform a potential new generation of more sustainable single-aisle aircraft, which is the workhorse of passenger airlines around the world.

The space agency and Boeing said the aircraft produced through the agency’s Sustainable Flight Demonstrator project has been designated by the U.S. Air Force as the X-66A.

“At NASA, our eyes are not just focused on stars,” said NASA Administrator Bill Nelson. “The Sustainable Flight Demonstrator will help shape the future of aviation, a new era where aircraft are greener, cleaner, and quieter, and create new possibilities for the flying public and American industry alike.”

The X-66A is the first plane specifically focused on helping the U.S. achieve the goal of net-zero aviation greenhouse gas emissions.

They believe that with new designs, tech, and materials, this experiment could lead to a 30% reduction in fuel usage in aviation. That in itself would be a win. Making planes quieter would also be a win for those in flight paths near airports, and wouldn't suck in general for everyone else.

[SubGod22]

Here's another that I believe has been shared before, or at least a similar(ish) process.

Clean Fuel Made by Pulling CO2 From Air and Plastic Waste - Powered Only by the Sun and Photosynthesis

Cambridge University researchers have demonstrated how carbon dioxide can be captured from industrial processes – or even directly from the air – and transformed into clean, sustainable fuels using just the energy from the sun.

They developed a solar-powered reactor that uses captured CO2 and plastic waste (which acts as a catalyst) and converts it into sustainable fuels and other valuable chemical products.

Over several years of testing, CO2 was converted into syngas, a key building block for sustainable liquid fuels, and plastic bottles were converted into glycolic acid, which is widely used in the cosmetics industry.

Unlike earlier tests of their solar fuels technology, however, the team took CO2 from real-world sources—such as industrial exhaust or the air itself. They were able to capture and concentrate the CO2 and convert it into sustainable fuel.

The researchers appreciate the advances in carbon capture and storage, where CO2 is captured and then pumped and stored underground. But instead, they believe the smart move is ‘carbon capture and utilization’—making something useful from CO2 instead of burying it underground.

Something like photosynthesis—the inspiration behind the work done by Professor Erwin Reisner and his team in the Department of Chemistry and at the Cambridge Circular Plastics Centre where they develop net-zero carbon fuels.

To date, their solar-driven experiments used pure, concentrated CO2 in cylinders, but for the technology to be of practical use, it needs to actively capture CO2 from the air, which is a huge technical challenge because the air contains many types of molecules besides CO2. That’s where the plastic came in handy.

Another tech that is intriguing if it can be scaled appropriately.

[Atxshoxfan]

It will be interesting to see where these ideas end up down the road.

NASA Unveils an X-Plane They Hope Will Save Earth



They believe that with new designs, tech, and materials, this experiment could lead to a 30% reduction in fuel usage in aviation. That in itself would be a win. Making planes quieter would also be a win for those in flight paths near airports, and wouldn't suck in general for everyone else.

I'm sure our congressmen will give billions of tax payer dollars into this, only to see their experiments fail. But at least Boeing shareholders will make some money for their retirement.

[SubGod22]

Scientists Are Recycling Wastewater to Reclaim Valuable Phosphorous to Put Back in Soil

Scientists have taken pollutant phosphorus from wastewater and infused it into a soil superfood called biochar to really “close the loop” on several widespread agricultural practices.

The biochar itself is made from incinerated organic material inside an oxygen-deprived environment, turning it into charcoal that acts like an underground rainwater sponge that also delivers the necessary phosphorus and other nutrients for plant growth.

Animal life needs energy in the form of the four macronutrients: carbohydrates, fatty acids, amino acids, and ketone bodies.

Plant life operates a bit differently. One of the green kingdom’s macronutrients is phosphorus, and its presence in the soil greatly contributes to healthy crops. Phosphorus runoff into streams is a major problem for sea life because once this basic element reaches the ocean, it causes giant blooms of algae that block light from reaching the seabed.

On its way there, this same problem can occur with riverine plants, and so is also considered pollution in fresh water.

Pretty sure we've talked biochar previously, and this appears to be a way to enhance it as well as taking something out of the water system that causes problems for aquatic life. And it doesn't seem like it would be an overly complex way to clean things up while enhancing what we grow.

[WstateU]

[Atxshoxfan]

Won't be long before they require gas meters on our butts and charge us for farting.

[Kung Wu]

Won't be long before they require gas meters on our butts and charge us for farting.

I could never afford that.

[1972Shocker]

I guess this is what you would call science, yes?

World Atmospheric CO₂, Its ¹⁴C Specific Activity, Non-fossil Component, Anthropogenic Fossil Component, and Emissions (1750–2018)

https://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Fulltext/2022/02000/World_Atmospheric_CO2,_Its_14C_Specific_Activity,.2.aspx?WT.mc_id=HPxADx20100319xMP

Digging into the details of this article is above my feeble mind but here are some of the conclusions:

Abstract: Our results show that the percentage of the total CO₂ due to the use of fossil fuels from 1750 to 2018 increased from 0% in 1750 to 12% in 2018, much too low to be the cause of global warming.

Selected Conclusions Out of 10 Listed:

6. Claims of the dominance of the anthropogenic component, C_F(t), in the increase of the CO₂ concentration, C(t), first began in 1960 with: “Keeling Curve: Increase in CO₂ from burning fossil fuel” (^{Rubino 2013}). Despite the lack of knowledge of the two components of C(t), these claims have continued in the scientific literature.

9. An article on Glacial-Interglacial Cycles (NOAA) suggests that recent increases in CO₂ and temperatures are due primarily to cyclic changes of solar radiation associated with Earth’s orbit about the sun. The annual change, DC_NF(t), in the non-fossil component has positive increasing values in Table 2 (https://links.lww.com/HP/A210) after 1764. It will eventually become negative in the next glacial period when average temperatures decrease again as they have done over all of the previous glacial-interglacial cycles.

10. The assumption that the increase in CO₂ since 1800 is dominated by or equal to the increase in the anthropogenic component is not settled science. Unsupported conclusions of the dominance of the anthropogenic fossil component of CO₂ and concerns of its effect on climate change and global warming have severe potential societal implications that press the need for very costly remedial actions that may be misdirected, presently unnecessary, and ineffective in curbing global warming.