The Analysis of Sea Levels.

[SunlitZelkova]

7 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

-- Were someone to make the argument that 'I don't care' about science, or physics or cosmology, they'd be dramatically wrong.  The answer to 'why' I haven't gone back to do the research and learn the maths isn't 'don't care' its 'don't have time or capacity' given all my other requirements of daily life.

...

Contrast this with someone with less education and lower wattage.  They don't 'not care' simply because they haven't done the research.  They have massively over-competing needs that fill their daily lives.  Usually immediate needs that require much more attention than the diffuse possibility of future harm because of the habits of 7 billion people and decades of incremental growth and trillions of dollars worth of legacy technology still powering all of it.

I am not necessarily asking average citizens to actually be responsible for crafting a full scale climate change response plan. When there are economic problems, officials go to economists to figure out how to sort things out. When we have other societal issues, policymakers and analysts provide insight into solutions. A proper response to climate change would require contributions from various different professionals, from climate scientists to relief organizers, yet that hasn't really happened.

I am now thinking what I mentioned in my original comment was actually a symptom of the problems democracies have been having all over the world in regards to participation, rather than something pertaining to climate change specifically.

[mikegarrison]

I am essentially a corporate-sponsored environmentalist. Does it matter if the corporations only care about the climate because they need it to be stable in order for them to keep making money? As long as they are convinced it is profitable for them to try to remain sustainable, that's good enough.

And don't forget that corporations are made up of actual people. On another forum some nut was saying that the entire earth was going to be uninhabitable by people in the next five years, and that the banks were hiding this because they just wanted to keep making money. But even bankers understand that it doesn't matter how much money you have if you aren't alive to spend it. People make short-sighted decisions, yes, but not like that.

Edited January 20, 2022 by mikegarrison

[kerbiloid]

A conspiracy: the bankers have been digitized and exist as AI, and that's why they have invented the cryptocurrencies, to generate moar money even without the people.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:

I am not necessarily asking average citizens to actually be responsible for crafting a full scale climate change response plan. When there are economic problems, officials go to economists to figure out how to sort things out. When we have other societal issues, policymakers and analysts provide insight into solutions. A proper response to climate change would require contributions from various different professionals, from climate scientists to relief organizers, yet that hasn't really happened.

I am now thinking what I mentioned in my original comment was actually a symptom of the problems democracies have been having all over the world in regards to participation, rather than something pertaining to climate change specifically.

Look - you are on to something, and not wrong.   Not at all.  I'm not trying to dissuade you, by any means.

 

...

 

I was thinking about this as I drove to the tire place.  Another personal story/analogy to kind of frame the issue:

From the time I was 18 'til about 38, I lived an incredibly active lifestyle.  I was the guy who in my late 20s and most of my 30s could spend 10 days living in 'the field' hiking an average of 10 - 25 km per day with 40-60 pounds of gear, interspersed with periods of intense cardio or just waiting for the next event, sleeping rough (when we slept)  in all weather from snow and ice on the coast to high desert and heat depending on time of year and place of event.  Come back in for a single day of recovery, laundry and gear-cleaning and then spend the next week doing 'normal' stuff like running 3-12 miles per day, 3 days out of a week and giving/taking classes or doing paperwork, planning, maintenance, etc. and getting ready for the next 'Field' op.  Food was fuel, and we ate a LOT of it.  During my off hours, I ate or drank whatever I wanted, including alcohol to whatever extent I wanted. 

This was my life for most of the first two decades of adulthood.

Fast forward to me in my 50s.  I've transitioned from that early active life, and for the last 10 years have led a comparatively sedentary existence.  I benefit from all that early, strenuous activity - but my habits formed then still affect me today. 

I eat.  A lot.  My 'instinct' when it comes to food is to stock up on as much fuel as I can, every time I sit down to eat - because (back then) there were times I never knew when I was going to either need the fuel - or if I would have a chance to fuel.  (During one notable op, I had to go three days without eating anything, despite covering an estimated 53 klicks in 40 degree weather and only sleeping one night of the three... that kind of stuff takes a toll).

You've probably guessed this - but the habits I had during those decades, while good for me (and necessary) at the time have taken a toll on my old body.  I allowed myself to get overweight and for the life of me can't lose it.  Rather than looking like a fit, 6-7" football receiver, I look like an old lineman gone to seed.  Mind you - I'm educated and like to cook.  So I go to the expensive 'Fresh' grocery and try to buy organic foods and make healthy meals.  That requires mindfulness and a lot of effort and, yes, education, and time.

I've also got teenagers living in the house. 

They just want fuel.  Easy food, nothing fancy, and they certainly don't want to wait, and they want a lot of it.  So mealtimes in my house is a competition between what my wife and I need and want, and what they crave and need.  Then there's the 'little bit of leftovers' issue: not enough to save, but I'm full ... yet why waste it - so just let 'Dad' finish it off...  Mind you, I'm educated, I know what I 'should' do - and acknowledge what I actually do.  When I 'get it all right' I feel pretty good - but it's also a luxury... of time and money and mental effort.  (I also have a full kitchen with high-quality pots and pans that make it easier to prepare fresh, organic foods; something I did not have or enjoy in my youth).

...

I live in a 'normal' American city where quite often the subject of poverty and food scarcity and food quality comes up for those living in the urban parts of town.  We've also got a 'lower middle class / poor' suburban part of the city where they talk about 'the obesity epidemic' and 'kids not eating during the weekend'... and the news shows people on food stamps buying nothing but easy-to-make processed foods with tons of preservatives in it (mind you, their store does not have an organic section and the selection of fresh foods is slim).  They'll follow a family back home and entertain us by watching these poor slobs microwave crap and slop goo from cans into pans to feed their kids... and then lament how fat everyone is, even when little Johnny might have one or two weekends where if he's not on subsidized school meal plans he won't have anything to eat.

...

Education tells me that little Johnny and my kids and I need to, for our own respective health and well-being, eat fresh farm-to-table foods that don't come out of cans or packages full of pseudo-hormone containing plastics, fire retardant chemical preservatives or other crap.

Do you know how hard that is? 

How much time, and mindfulness and effort it takes to 'live a normal life' and also 'buy and prepare and cook healthy' meals?  It's not easy.  I can do it, given the privilege of my education and financial success... but the single mother who takes a bus from job to job?  And even though I can do it, and know I should do it, and try to do it... quite often it's a bucket of beer cheese, a box of Triskets and a football game with several beers that ends up being my 'meal.'  (While the kids scrounge up their own crap and stare at their own devices).

...

 

So this story / analogy is to highlight that something as personal and immediate and real as my own health, the health of my children and the health of my community - ends up being nigh-unto-impossible to 'solve'.  How much less immediate, with far less obvious solutions is 'climate change' or 'ocean acidification' to the average person?  I would never accuse them of 'not caring'... but there's a lot of people with both more pressing, immediate needs and frankly, habits they don't know how to change.

 

 

...

 

Spoiler

Again - I don't want to dissuade you; had I started better habits in my 20s - with access to fresh, organic foods and the habits of healthy living... I might be in a better place today.  Like the people living with scarcity and few options in the inner city and less well-to-do suburbs, if we give them opportunity for higher quality foods, and the resources to take advantage of them - they'll be healthier, too.  But there's a LOT of inertia (whether societal, industrial or commercial) and comfort in 'the easy.'

That said: if you compare the availability and interest in fresh/organic foods in America today to what was available in the 70s/80s... the 'demand' for higher quality stuff is shifting the industry.  America today has so much more potential to be a healthy place than when I was a kid and nuking a Hot-Pocket was a meal.

 

You can extend that (*hopefully*) to larger issues like CC, where education and information create demand and that demand shifts the broader economy and industry.

 

Edited January 20, 2022 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[mikegarrison]

1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:

A proper response to climate change would require contributions from various different professionals, from climate scientists to relief organizers, yet that hasn't really happened.

As someone who has actually worked with such people trying to do this for the past 15 (or so) years, I find it strange that you think it is not happening.

[Rakaydos]

6 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

As someone who has actually worked with such people trying to do this for the past 15 (or so) years, I find it strange that you think it is not happening.

The old adage about leading a horse to water but not being able to make them drink seems to apply. Not to @SunlitZelkova, but to the movers and shakers who actually need to act to start the ball rolling.

Here in the US, a major political party has made climate denialisim a plank of their party platform, and they have enough muscle to deadlock any substantial answer to climate problems. Russia, among others, has an economy built around extraction- to end extraction would basically end them as an economic player, and so are motivated to delay any climate transition as long as possible, by any MEANS possible.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Coral reefs: Pristine community discovered in deep water off the coast of Tahiti | New Scientist

 

2 hours ago, Rakaydos said:

The old adage about leading a horse to water but not being able to make them drink seems to apply.

That's kind of my story, above.  Even in the 'simple and obvious' category, changing ways is bloody hard.

[K^2]

4 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

I'm a smart guy.  I love science and space.  I routinely come here and ask what must seem like incredibly dense questions to those who have studied physics and have the maths to understand cosmology (I can only guess what @K^2 thinks every time I ask an outlandish question about gravity, relativity, etc).

So... theoretically, if I cared I could go back to school, try to figure out where my disconnect was in Algebra and Geometry and resolve that to give me a chance at cracking Calculus and then move on to Physics and Astronomy to follow my passion.  

But that stuff is hard, man... and I've got a lot on my plate.

I mean, it's a lot like physical training. Almost anyone, with rare exceptions, can build up to impressive strength with training, and while being Olympic champion might require some genetic predisposition, you can still compete on the word stage by dedication and training alone. But when you tell someone, "You're not strong enough to lift that," they tend to be fine with it. You say, "You're not smart  enough to understand it," and they take offense. And that's a cultural issue.

Say I wanted to move a piano. Like, a proper, full upright, a metric-ton-if-it-is-a-pound piano. Now, I don't know how you picture me, but I'm not a large person, and while I'm reasonably athletic for an average person, I couldn't make a full piano budge by running at it full speed. Any reasonable person can tell if they can move a piano. Perhaps, if they're not familiar with the instrument or suspect it might be a fake, they might need to give it a trial push to convince themselves. And maybe if it just needs to be moved a few feet, a few people know they can move it by maneuvering one side at a time. Most of us will also be able to identify a group of people who can move it by working together, and will be satisfied that with the right tools, the group can be smaller. Looking for help or hiring a professional team to move a piano is a completely reasonable behavior, and we kind of expect a competent person to manage that.

What you would not call reasonable behavior is if I was pushing against the piano on my own, make struggling noises, and insisting that I'm making progress. And if I started accusing anyone pointing out that the piano hasn't shifted an inch of being in the pocket of piano moving companies, you would be right to be concerned about my mental health. And yet, that's the attitude a lot of people are taking with scientific topics. There are a lot of concepts that an average person won't make anymore progress with than I would with moving a piano. Finding people who can help you out with that is the right call. In some cases, you also need to be able to tell people who can help from these who'd just get in the way. This is what I expect from a reasonable person, whether they are trying to understand something for their own sake, or if they have a political decision to make.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Quote

But based on initial estimates, it is not looking like the latest Tongan eruption has released enough sulphur dioxide to cause significant cooling. 

How do volcanoes affect the weather and what's going on with the Tongan eruption?   - ABC News

Quote

 

The last volcano which did have a global cooling effect, Mount Pinatubo in 1991, released significantly more sulphur dioxide.

"Mount Pinatubo emitted about 15 to 20 megatonnes, so somewhere in the order of 100 times more than what the Tongan volcano has." 

 

 

[NFUN]

10 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

I am not necessarily asking average citizens to actually be responsible for crafting a full scale climate change response plan. When there are economic problems, officials go to economists to figure out how to sort things out. When we have other societal issues, policymakers and analysts provide insight into solutions. A proper response to climate change would require contributions from various different professionals, from climate scientists to relief organizers, yet that hasn't really happened.

I am now thinking what I mentioned in my original comment was actually a symptom of the problems democracies have been having all over the world in regards to participation, rather than something pertaining to climate change specifically.

way to burn climate scientists

[SunlitZelkova]

9 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

As someone who has actually worked with such people trying to do this for the past 15 (or so) years, I find it strange that you think it is not happening.

I would be interested in anything you could direct me to!

What has been put on the table so far by lawmakers hasn't really been up to muster (at least for the Paris goal). This is what I was referring to in that particular sentence.

6 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Even in the 'simple and obvious' category, changing ways is bloody hard.

Looking back, the original comment I made was itself emotional to a great extent, and I defended my position in a zealous manner. I apologize.

I am just very disturbed when looking at the potential damage compared to the level of response 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

For those interested: NASA would like you to stare at the clouds 

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/langley/nasa-globe-cloud-challenge-2022-clouds-in-a-changing-climate

[miklkit]

Around here the clouds turn brown and rain ash from May to November every year.

[kerbiloid]

Spoiler

Yes, it's a known problem. 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/metals-and-mining/our-insights/tackling-the-challenge-of-decarbonizing-steelmaking

An interesting article about industry tackling carbon 

[DDE]

14 hours ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/metals-and-mining/our-insights/tackling-the-challenge-of-decarbonizing-steelmaking

An interesting article about industry tackling carbon 

What's interesting about electric arc systems is that they allow for much smaller facilities to be practical.

https://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/23/business/the-rise-of-mini-steel-mills.html

Note article date

Also, to mention the usual canard, high-temperature Gen IV reactors have been proposed as a way to process steel.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Satellites have located the world's methane ‘ultra-emitters’ | Science News

[Nuke]

On 1/20/2022 at 7:44 AM, kerbiloid said:

A conspiracy: the bankers have been digitized and exist as AI, and that's why they have invented the cryptocurrencies, to generate moar money even without the people.

dead men horde no gpus.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

@SunlitZelkova

I think you will enjoy this - if you haven't already seen it:

https://www.netflix.com/title/80216393

 

 

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

Let's see if anything comes of this:

Big coal states eye small nuclear reactors for grid, economy - POLITICO

Sadly, it's a slow process:

Quote

 

So far, the NRC has approved just one small modular reactor design from Portland, Ore.-based NuScale Power. The 720-megawatt plant, dubbed the Carbon Free Power Project, will consist of a dozen reactors on 890 square miles at DOE’s Idaho National Laboratory.

TerraPower, a nuclear startup founded by billionaire Bill Gates, announced plans in November to build its first advanced reactor in Wyoming, at the site of Rocky Mountain Power’s Naughton coal-fired power plant, which is due to close in 2025.

Neither SMR project is expected to begin full operation until 2030, meaning broader commercial deployment won’t happen until later next decade at the soonest.

 

 

Edited February 17, 2022 by JoeSchmuckatelli

[SunlitZelkova]

I have heard about this. NuScale getting approved was a little bit of a local headline here.

From an analytical point of view, would more reactors mean more possibilities for failure? Or will safety remain as it is now even if SMRs become widespread?

[kerbiloid]

I recall the 1980s-2000s anti-nuclear green hysteria and prayers to the gods of the solar and wind powah.

And now behold the miracle!

The same green pedants have rebooted in salto mortale jump, and now the nuclear powerplants are again lovely, healthy, and good!

Isn't this all brilliant?

Next step: we need increase carbon dioxide to raise the ocean and make more land watered.

Spoiler

 

[DDE]

3 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

The same green pedants have rebooted in salto mortale jump, and now the nuclear powerplants are again lovely, healthy, and good!

Isn't this all brilliant?

I don't think Germany has gotten your message. The re-acceptance of nuclear seems to be a variously localized phenomenon that coincides with having a nuclear industry to rescue from bankruptcy.

[kerbiloid]

8 minutes ago, DDE said:

I don't think Germany has gotten your message.

I don't mean exactly Germany. It was an analogy to the grammar pedants.

Edited February 19, 2022 by kerbiloid

[Codraroll]

5 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

I recall the 1980s-2000s anti-nuclear green hysteria and prayers to the gods of the solar and wind powah.

And now behold the miracle!

Back in the 1980s, nuclear power was becoming a serious competitor to fossil power. The fossil fuel companies poured millions into the anti-nuclear lobby and eagerly promoted a solar- and wind-powered future, because they knew this future would be decades away and fossil fuels would have free reign in the meantime.

Now, solar and wind are here, so the pendulum swings the other way. The fossil companies have broken the nuclear lobby, to the point that they know it would take years of discussion, planning, and construction for nuclear plants to be built at a large scale again. Yet more years of uninterrupted, competition-free reign for fossil fuel power.  So funding for nuclear enthusiasm is quietly raised a bit, while retaining some funds for the anti-nuclear crowd to slow things down to an appreciable pace.

They will always try to promote the future that's 20 years away, because that gives them freedom to act with impunity in the meantime. It's a matter of dragging out the status quo for as long as possible.