Solving Climate Change.

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by Walker »

Vitruvius wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 6:54 pm
jayjacobus wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 2:36 pm The consensus thinks the emperor has new clothes.
You think they are right, don't you?
You do realise that's a story, right? It's as fictional as your purported disbelief in the science of climate change. Protest the sincerity of your disbelief and you are either an idiot - who's low grade opinions are not worth responding to - or you're an asshole being an asshole on purpose. I suspect the latter!
Walker wrote: Wed Aug 04, 2021 4:59 pm A solution requires a problem.The climate is not a problem.
Here, I suspect the former!
Since climate is not a problem, the problem is something else trying to be solved.

Follow the power and the money trail.
Vitruvius
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 9:46 am

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by Vitruvius »

Walker wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 11:21 am
Since climate is not a problem, the problem is something else trying to be solved.

Follow the power and the money trail.
No, no, no - it's your paranoid conspiracy theory, you show the money and/or paper trial - if there is one. And if you start a thread on why climate change is a hoax, I can promise you - I'll not spam your thread!
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by FlashDangerpants »

Vitruvius wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 9:34 am My reading of the history of philosophy may be unconventional - but I think you'll find I'm right
You aren't afflicted by much of that self doubt that other people think is healthy are you?
jayjacobus
Posts: 1273
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:45 pm

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by jayjacobus »

Vitruvius wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:00 pm
Walker wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 11:21 am
Since climate is not a problem, the problem is something else trying to be solved.

Follow the power and the money trail.
No, no, no - it's your paranoid conspiracy theory, you show the money and/or paper trial - if there is one. And if you start a thread on why climate change is a hoax, I can promise you - I'll not spam your thread!
You don't know where your a-hole is.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by attofishpi »

Vitruvius wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:45 pm
attofishpi wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:09 am Well, that's kinda redundant when there are ways of storing energy.
Sure. Which do you figure is the most thermodynamically efficient storage medium? There will be an energy cost of storage, that occurs when energy is translated from one form to another. My favoured technology is hydrogen - but then, what I'm proposing will have energy and sea water in close proximity; so electrolysis makes sense. Australia is huge, and the interior is dry as a bone. It may be bathed in sunshine, so you can produce energy with a heliostat - but how do you store it, and distribute it to where it's needed?
re the most efficient storage medium, it depends on who is wanting the energy - be it onshore local, or offshore - hence hydrogen shipped out.

Vitruvius wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:45 pm
attofishpi wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:09 am Fuck carbon capture beyond forestation and the like.
Strident view - succinctly expressed, but why? Having the energy to capture carbon, desalinate, irrigate, recycle etc - things that simply can't be done with fossil fuels, or with wind and solar, is precisely the point of developing magma energy technology.
This magma thing you are fixated on, as the other chaps have pointed out has a LOT more complications involved to provide a solution. May I suggest moving to Iceland, i think they are doing a fairly good job of using the Earths thermal energy, for obvious reasons.

Using salt water from the sea and using heliostat mirrors to produce steam in countries such as Oz appears to be an obvious solution for desal AND electricity. win win.


Vitruvius wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:45 pm
attofishpi wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:09 amInvestment is being pulled from coal mining - BHP are heading in the direction of Nickel and Lithium for the electric switch. Electrolysis for Hydrogen - via heliostat generated electricity is Oz future...and yeah the sooner we stop sending coal off to Asia the better.

In my view, climate change is a global problem, and needs to be addressed as such. It's pointless to solve climate change in the US, the UK, and/or Oz - alone. There are 3 billion people in Asia, dependent on fossil fuels - who are not content to remain poor. China is developing economically. India is building a middle class - and good luck to them. But it's got to be sustainable development based on clean energy, or whatever we do in the developed world will make no difference at all. We need a globally adequate approach, and we need to do more than merely avoid creating some GHG emissions. We need excess energy to spend to sequester carbon, desalinate, irrigate, recycle etc; so as to mitigate and adapt to climate change already set to occur, These are hugely energy intensive processes - which require base load power wind and solar cannot realistically produce.
On that last point totally agree. Hydrogen sourced from renewable energy is the way forward - can be compressed to liquid and shipped around the globe from countries that are bathed in the glory of our Sun.

btw...nuclear fusion could be THE big game changer.
Vitruvius
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 9:46 am

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by Vitruvius »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:12 pm You aren't afflicted by much of that self doubt that other people think is healthy are you?
What's the point of you?

Walker wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 11:21 am You don't know where your a-hole is.
Same question! What's the point of you? STFU!
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by attofishpi »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:27 am
attofishpi wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:02 am
FlashDangerpants wrote: Mon Aug 02, 2021 8:01 pm
Molten salt energy storage is a thing, seems to be a pretty good thing at that. No idea if they are cool with getting the salt from seawater, bit fishy.
..yes, my point was not so much about '"the getting the salt from seawater." - it pretty much is more of a waste product - nice on chips though.

Point being, clean ELECTRICITY & FRESH WATER - we could have fields of arid land turned into viable (DROUGHT RESISTANT) farmland.

Thoughts?
You can, but it's usually more efficient to seek relative advantage by making use of what you have rather than to invest heavily into having stuff that other people get for free. You've got an area of land that is great for making electricity from sunshine because there's not a lot of rain clouds. I'm not sure I get the reasoning for growing such a thirsty crop as cotton there, it wastes the benefits of all that dirt cheap sparky stuff that should be useful for some other purpose.
..and yet in NSW big cotton plantations are in conflict using up water resources on the Murray Basin Vs other more rational agriculture.

FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:27 amIf you're producing 10kg of salf for every kilogram of cotton somebody with normal rainflow is producing the cotton for a much lower unit cost than you are.
I understand that. Cotton was just an example since in relation to my above point. The financial benefit of producing electricity as well as providing water resource is the point, and needs to be factored in to any equation!
Vitruvius
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 9:46 am

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by Vitruvius »

attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pm re the most efficient storage medium, it depends on who is wanting the energy - be it onshore local, or offshore - hence hydrogen shipped out.
Oh, how quaint, you have your own language. Looks quite a lot like english, but isn't!
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pm This magma thing you are fixated on,
So you don't believe energy is fundamental to addressing climate change? Or, you think wind and solar are adequate to meet the challenge?
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pm as the other chaps have pointed out has a LOT more complications involved to provide a solution.
Really? I thought I'd be okay with a shovel, a bit of old hose, and the motor from a washing machine!
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pmMay I suggest moving to Iceland, i think they are doing a fairly good job of using the Earths thermal energy, for obvious reasons.
Might I suggest you move to Iceland - the frozen foods supermarket!
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pmUsing salt water from the sea and using heliostat mirrors to produce steam in countries such as Oz appears to be an obvious solution for desal AND electricity. win win.
Australia has about 10 miles of prime real estate by the beach, and no water inland. So where are you going build this thing, and how will you get the energy to where its needed? You cannot build a heliostat within a hundred miles of civilisation. Birds burst into flames at the mere mention of the word heliostat. Also, at the risk of harping on about it, Australia exports 350 million tonnes of coal to Asia per year, to produce electricity. A solution for Australia alone, isn't a solution. It's not win win so much as - win the battle and lose the war!
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by attofishpi »

Vitruvius wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:33 pm
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pm re the most efficient storage medium, it depends on who is wanting the energy - be it onshore local, or offshore - hence hydrogen shipped out.
Oh, how quaint, you have your own language. Looks quite a lot like english, but isn't!
Wot?
Vitruvius wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:33 pm
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pm This magma thing you are fixated on,
So you don't believe energy is fundamental to addressing climate change? Or, you think wind and solar are adequate to meet the challenge?
So.
You haven't read a word I have posted.

Vitruvius wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:33 pm
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pm as the other chaps have pointed out has a LOT more complications involved to provide a solution.
Really? I thought I'd be okay with a shovel, a bit of old hose, and the motor from a washing machine!
The way I am starting to feel about U. I'd put you that washing machine, until you are almost dead. Then I'd make you use that shovel to dig a hole, throw you into it, and that bit of old hose you mentioned, I'd have it stuffed into your mouth and after I filled in that hole allowing the hose to poke out of the dirt permitting you to breath in...while me and my mates take turns farting methane into that very hose.

Vitruvius wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:33 pm
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pmMay I suggest moving to Iceland, i think they are doing a fairly good job of using the Earths thermal energy, for obvious reasons.
Might I suggest you move to Iceland - the frozen foods supermarket!


Ooooo. ok.

Vitruvius wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:33 pm
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:53 pmUsing salt water from the sea and using heliostat mirrors to produce steam in countries such as Oz appears to be an obvious solution for desal AND electricity. win win.
Australia has about 10 miles of prime real estate by the beach, and no water inland. So where are you going build this thing, and how will you get the energy to where its needed? You cannot build a heliostat within a hundred miles of civilisation. Birds burst into flames at the mere mention of the word heliostat. Also, at the risk of harping on about it, Australia exports 350 million tonnes of coal to Asia per year, to produce electricity. A solution for Australia alone, isn't a solution. It's not win win so much as - win the battle and lose the war!
Game over. You are a clueless waste of time - to think I welcomed you thinking you might be new here as someone with some nous worthy of a decent rational conversation.
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by FlashDangerpants »

Vitruvius wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:54 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:12 pm You aren't afflicted by much of that self doubt that other people think is healthy are you?
What's the point of you?
I'm just noting that you place a lot of emphasis on telling us that you personally are convinced of something and that should be good enough for anybody.
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by FlashDangerpants »

attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:58 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:27 am
attofishpi wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:02 am

..yes, my point was not so much about '"the getting the salt from seawater." - it pretty much is more of a waste product - nice on chips though.

Point being, clean ELECTRICITY & FRESH WATER - we could have fields of arid land turned into viable (DROUGHT RESISTANT) farmland.

Thoughts?
You can, but it's usually more efficient to seek relative advantage by making use of what you have rather than to invest heavily into having stuff that other people get for free. You've got an area of land that is great for making electricity from sunshine because there's not a lot of rain clouds. I'm not sure I get the reasoning for growing such a thirsty crop as cotton there, it wastes the benefits of all that dirt cheap sparky stuff that should be useful for some other purpose.
..and yet in NSW big cotton plantations are in conflict using up water resources on the Murray Basin Vs other more rational agriculture.

FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:27 amIf you're producing 10kg of salf for every kilogram of cotton somebody with normal rainflow is producing the cotton for a much lower unit cost than you are.
I understand that. Cotton was just an example since in relation to my above point. The financial benefit of producing electricity as well as providing water resource is the point, and needs to be factored in to any equation!
I'm really just pointing out that you gain something economists call relative advantage by doing stuff you are better at than anyone else, instead of spending time and resource on something someone else does better, even if you are actually pretty good at the second thing. Farmers grow cotton in water poor regions because of imbalanced incentives whereby they aren't really charged for the value of the water they use. It's doubtful that providing more underpriced water is an ideal solution but somebody would need to do a proper case study to say with much justufucation whether my suspicion is correct.
Vitruvius
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 9:46 am

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by Vitruvius »

attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:49 pmWot?
Surely you mean 'What?' Unless you are referring to an Ethiopian spicy stew. Is it me, or this subject that's not worth the bother of writing fully formed sentences, or spelling words correctly?
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:49 pmYou haven't read a word I have posted.


Reading your words, and understanding misspelt words in lazily written half formed sentences are two different things.
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:49 pmThe way I am starting to feel about U. I'd put you that washing machine, until you are almost dead. Then I'd make you use that shovel to dig a hole, throw you into it, and that bit of old hose you mentioned, I'd have it stuffed into your mouth and after I filled in that hole allowing the hose to poke out of the dirt permitting you to breath in...while me and my mates take turns farting methane into that very hose.
Maybe that's the difference between us. I'm here to talk about solving climate change. I don't feel anything about you. You are either useful to this discussion or you're in the way. You're in the way.
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 1:49 pm Game over. You are a clueless waste of time - to think I welcomed you thinking you might be new here as someone with some nous worthy of a decent rational conversation.
This isn't a game, but that said, I do hope so. Goodbye!
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 9956
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by attofishpi »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:33 pm
attofishpi wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:58 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:27 am
You can, but it's usually more efficient to seek relative advantage by making use of what you have rather than to invest heavily into having stuff that other people get for free. You've got an area of land that is great for making electricity from sunshine because there's not a lot of rain clouds. I'm not sure I get the reasoning for growing such a thirsty crop as cotton there, it wastes the benefits of all that dirt cheap sparky stuff that should be useful for some other purpose.
..and yet in NSW big cotton plantations are in conflict using up water resources on the Murray Basin Vs other more rational agriculture.

FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 12:27 amIf you're producing 10kg of salf for every kilogram of cotton somebody with normal rainflow is producing the cotton for a much lower unit cost than you are.
I understand that. Cotton was just an example since in relation to my above point. The financial benefit of producing electricity as well as providing water resource is the point, and needs to be factored in to any equation!
I'm really just pointing out that you gain something economists call relative advantage by doing stuff you are better at than anyone else, instead of spending time and resource on something someone else does better, even if you are actually pretty good at the second thing. Farmers grow cotton in water poor regions because of imbalanced incentives whereby they aren't really charged for the value of the water they use. It's doubtful that providing more underpriced water is an ideal solution but somebody would need to do a proper case study to say with much justufucation whether my suspicion is correct.
"
Vitruvius
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 9:46 am

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by Vitruvius »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Thu Aug 05, 2021 2:23 pm I'm just noting that you place a lot of emphasis on telling us that you personally are convinced of something and that should be good enough for anybody.
I think I'm being perfectly clear. I'm certainly trying to be. I'll say it again - for the fourth or fifth time, I'm a philosopher. I'm not a geophysical engineer. I'm not going to provide blueprints, but consider it entirely reasonable to note the existence of a potential source of limitless clean energy when precisely what the world needs is limitless clean energy. Of what do you remain unconvinced? Is there not a limitless amount of clean energy in the molten interior of the earth? Do we not need that energy to sequester carbon and desalinate and irrigate to survive climate change? Is it somehow - impossible to get to? You said it was impossible - but still haven't said why you think so. Please don't forget again.
Vitruvius
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 9:46 am

Re: Solving Climate Change.

Post by Vitruvius »

"I'm really just pointing out that you gain something that economists call... (because I know everything that economists know and more) ...relative advantage!"

Do you mean Comparative Advantage?
Post Reply