Electric vehicles vs Climate Change

It's been said that we are just one more type of Mega Fauna. See how things worked out for previous ones ;)

AI taking over is the stuff of science fiction but just look at the advances in autonomous robots in the military. The potential for scary stuff happening is accelerating rapidly.
 
Also, we're unlikely to encounter intelligent aliens simply because of galatic distances and the relatively short time period any one lifeform is likely to exist.

Looked at objectively the Human race could be seen as a destructive parasite, no different from something like HIV. We spread, consume, replicate and destroy. Maybe that's just what competing lifeforms do, but it might be a good reason to avoid aliens.
 
This is a good example of what happens to guys like Luke who have Lived the petrol head life for so long and how it takes time to "Unlearn" the crap they think they know about mans impact on climate change. BTW in the last 100 years we have cut down 1/2 the trees on this planet. THATS SCARY!

[youtube]MFzDaBzBlL0[/youtube]
 
SmarterEveryDay... that's one really cool dude... thanks for the link... especially liked the Amazing Honey Coiling High Speed Video!... no end to definitive proof how ignorant we all can be.
Arlo1 said:
This is a good example of what happens to guys like Luke who have Lived the petrol head life for so long and how it takes time to "Unlearn" the crap they think they know about mans impact on climate change. BTW in the last 100 years we have cut down 1/2 the trees on this planet. THATS SCARY! ..youtube]MFzDaBzBlL0[/youtube]
But yes, its the scary dumb stuff collective humanity is up to in vast out-of-control experiments with the atmosphere=biosphere balance equation that has us necessarily worried.

No one wonder the smart guys like Elon Musk are working on the tech to eject from the planet surface before the hell-on-Eaarth scenario enters its violent eruption phase. :oops:
 
Regardless of whether humans are the main factor in the changing climate or just one of many factors, Years ago when my children were still with here and I lived in California, my son was always sick. Asthma, crusted mucus all over his nose and just general poor health. One day I looked at my wife and asked her if she loved living in California and she replied "No".

That is when I quit my job and moved my family to Texas. Within a month, all of his respiratory ailments were gone. This is not a testament to the cleanliness of the air in Texas but as to just how foul it is in California. After seeing that, I realized just how harmful humans can be to their environment. I may not buy in totally to the catastrophic projections by the folks at the IPCC but I have first hand anecdotal experience as to how pollution is harmful to us. This is why I now ride my electric bike and regular bike and I have just starting investigating converting my work truck to electric. It only goes less than 5 miles a day so it is a no brainer. I could actually park it in one small town and never move it and I would only lose less than 10% of my business.

I have been called a denier by many and that's OK with me. I admit I do not know to what extent humans are contributing to Climate Change. I also know that the fine folks at the IPCC do not know either. Personally though, I endeavor to reduce the amount of pollution that I create. Hopefully that is enough for some of the more intolerant of you. Pollution is far more of a danger to us than Global Warming - perhaps because it is the pollution that is causing it. It is my humble opinion that the AGW crowd is simply putting the cart before the horse.

Oh and just for the record, just because there are those of us that believe that if someone is caught in fraudulent behavior (IPCC, NOAA, NASA etc) they are not worthy of our trust, it does not mean we are stupid as the warmer alarmists are so quick to point out. It simply means that we have common sense but as stated by Rules for Radical: Do not Debate Your Opponent! Change the subject and debase them. It does get tiresome in its predictability.
 
Moving to Texas might have been something to do with other allergens and things like humidity. I moved from Alberta to Vancouver island and its a temperate rain forest here. So in the spring allergies start acting up. Mine really got me this year. I have always had a problem with my sinus being plugged and all they could find was a mild allergy to dust mites. I will be getting tested again. What Im trying to say is although the air is over all better here plant life is far more lush and pollen and other allergens are really hard on a lot of people. This year my eyes we itchy like something got in them but it was what ever else I'm allergic to. I got a new down hill bike a decent one IM excited to ride and I am trying to get out min 4 days a week even though I now got asthma again after not have it for ~9 years. I know being in shape is #1

One thing I think about and never researched is I wonder if trees and plants produce more or different pollen when they have more C02? Another thing Is we had a snow free year which is related to climate patterns.... Its possible the plants will kill some of us off before we know it :)
 
Genetics. Genetics. Genetics. Some folks are born with hypersensitive airway cells that react and respond to certain reactions in their environment. Allergens, physical activity, even emotional states. Asthma is a restrictive disease vs. obstructive (bronchitis, emphysema, myasthenia gravis, and others) and some folks have both disease processes to contend with. There is an airway cell, called a goblet cell that is responsible for creating/producing mucous, a reactive process that is produced so the body can force (via coughing) whatever is invading their system. Infants & children, due to their body is still aclimatizing to the new world, are hugely susceptible (some more so with underlying asthma or similar respiratory disease processes). This mucous producing goblet cell, is inherently responsible for the bronchitis symptoms. Asthma on the phone their hand, the airway cells become inflamed and begin swelling overtime reducing the lung's passageways. It's high priority that infants & children (their airways are smaller than us adults) seek medical attention when the reactive process starts, or risk the airways shutdown :( . Smart parents bring along an epi (epinephrine) pen for such drastic cases. It is a life saver, I have no doubts about it. :mrgreen:

I have a good friend, who has moderate (sometimes severe) asthma, whose symptoms were remarkably decreased since moving to the California coastline (foggy salt marine layer, dominant ocean breeze decreasing potential allergens to his body is my guess).

I believe I have undiagnosed asthma triggered through intense physical activity and maybe a few pathogens (mold and a few tree pollens I think). I've yet to have any asthmatic type symptoms that would be worthy mention when I Ebike. I'd imagine the same would be true for those with moderate to severe asthma too.

Anyways, back to the regular scheduled programming...
Folks making babies, volcanoes, hyper consumers, reliable energy alternatives/solutions. :lol:
 
Arlo1 said:
Moving to Texas might have been something to do with other allergens and things like humidity. I moved from Alberta to Vancouver island and its a temperate rain forest here. So in the spring allergies start acting up. Mine really got me this year. I have always had a problem with my sinus being plugged and all they could find was a mild allergy to dust mites. I will be getting tested again. What Im trying to say is although the air is over all better here plant life is far more lush and pollen and other allergens are really hard on a lot of people. This year my eyes we itchy like something got in them but it was what ever else I'm allergic to. I got a new down hill bike a decent one IM excited to ride and I am trying to get out min 4 days a week even though I now got asthma again after not have it for ~9 years. I know being in shape is #1

One thing I think about and never researched is I wonder if trees and plants produce more or different pollen when they have more C02? Another thing Is we had a snow free year which is related to climate patterns.... Its possible the plants will kill some of us off before we know it :)

Nah, allergies are a modern problem specifically concerning the developed world. There was an excellent programme on the BBC about the causes.

They basically boil down to several different factors that make you more likely to be allergic to various allergens:

1.C-section birth. 2. Bottle-fed instead of breast fed as an infant. 3. Exposure to large doses of antibiotics that kill gut flora while young. 4. Lack of exposure to bacterial diversity.

Now clearly one and three can sometimes be unavoidable - although antibiotics should only used when necessary as they destroy gut flora which can cause complications.

Number four is a serious problem though and is reflective of our urban, sedentary lifestyles. The more exposure you have to nature and different types of bacteria the less likely you will have allergies.

Final thoughts for the severely allergy plagued - two words - faecal transplant. :twisted:
 
Much of the allergen discussion is interesting. In the Rancho Cucamonga area, there used to be a lot of dairy farms and the soil is very fertile but in the mornings when the dew made the soil wet, the entire area smelled like manure. The kids would go to the bus with their shirts over their noses. In addition to that, the smog would come over the the western mountain range and settle because it would get trapped by the eastern mountain range. I was a mile from mount Baldy and most days, you couldn't even see it.

Air quality was crap. When we moved to an area where the air quality was a vast improvement, the ailments went away.

I am merely trying to do my part so that other's children do not have to breathe in air that I have polluted. That is the reason I am here on this board (as well as that my electric bike is totally cool in my extremely biased opinion :D )

Has anyone heard about the solar farm that Six Flags Great Adventure is building in Jackson, NJ? Basically they are building a solar farm that will supply almost all of the electricity that the park uses but... you guessed it, the environmentalists are upset that they will cut down 19,000 trees even though they are planting 27,000 trees to replace them. I guess even when you do the right thing, they are just never satisfied. I think that the Environmentalists should be applauding what Six Flags is doing. I know I am.
 
Rancho Cucamonga bought 6 MW of solar power out of 75 MW project last year, so maybe there is hope yet.

http://azusa.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=574&meta_id=42938
 
So your saying you've lived on both extremes of the "Silent But Deadly" phenomenon? :lol:
 
myself said:
No one wonder the smart guys like Elon Musk are working on the tech to eject from the planet surface before the hell-on-Eaarth scenario enters its violent eruption phase.
Visionary Elon Musk wants a Hyperloop, to Space
Another favorite idea is that Musk's Hyperloop may be some version of a Lofstrom Loop, otherwise known as a launch loop. Originally proposed for launching payloads into orbit, a Lofstrom Loop is in essence a vacuum sheath measuring thousands of kilometers long that contains a rotor of iron or other magnetic material. The rotor is magnetically levitated within the sheath, and rotates around the loop at a speed well in excess of the orbital velocity at the Earth's surface (7.9 km/s, or 17,700 mph). The rotor velocity assumed in design studies is usually around 14 km/s (35,000 mph). An external capsule is linked to the loop magnetically, so that it accelerates to the speed of the rotor within the sheath.
speculation-how-does-elon-musks-hyperloop-work-4.jpg

Collective insanity, mass hallucination, makes me wanna get outta here pronto! :lol:
 
[youtube]Sx6vuSr9l34[/youtube]
 
On the aviation forum I used to frequent I suspected there was a reason a good chunk of pilots didn't believe in climate change. Cognitive dissonance.

But it's surprising to see how many EV users don't believe in global warming.

They're in for nasty surprise over the next 10-20 years as global warming enters its abrupt climate change phase due to sea ice loss and methane hydrate emissions. According to Paul Beckwith, Peter Wadhams, and Malcolm Light, we could see 6 degrees in a decade or two due to abrupt climate change positive feedbacks. According to James Lovelock what the IPCC predicts for 2040 could well arrive by 2025. According to Rajendra Pachauri, parts of Africa could lose 50% of the crop production by 2020. Africa will be first and hardest hit.

We're only at 0.8 degrees C and California's vegetable breadbasket is turning back into desert. How bad will things be at 3-4 C, or 6-8C?
The future is going to be a fun Mad Max ride. Enjoy what little time you have left.

Here's one study analyzing peer-reviewed research on global warming.

We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus
 
I was a scientist most of early life before dedicating myself to the emerging paradigm shift in computing. So knew about global warming, aka climate change, aka weather weirding in the early '70's. But was not paying close attention until Bill McKibben's End of Nature. But of all the books and articles on the topic that I've encountered, it was James Lovelock's Vanishing Face of Gaia that effected me most. Up until that point I felt that the IPCC, UNFCCC et.al. were doing a good job of turning the historical trend. It was his analysis and statement that the IPCC, from assessment report to next assessment, was consistently under-estimating, so skewing the projections in the model, that corrected my perception, since consistently reinforced, that no, we were not going to get it right and that run-away climate change tending to an accelerating catastrophe was not just likely, but likely inevitable.

We're at the very beginning stages of the methane clathrate melt-down, so the data is just emerging. So much so that the 5th assessment report did not include it or allow for it in the models. Big mistake! If COP 21 does not end with a new treaty to replace the Kyoto accord, then its simply too late.
 
I highly recommend the Vanishing Face of Gaia to anyone interested in climate change. Of the hundreds of books I have read on the subject, this one affected me most, i've read it at least 4 times. Another two good ones are Storms of my Grandchildren and Six Degrees.
 
This was a fascinating take on climate change from a former climate change denier. From the Yale climate blog: (excerpted)
==========================
Former climate 'denier' regrets 'how wrongheaded but certain I was' - Here's what led him to change his mind.

By Karin Kirk

John Kaiser wheeled a cart with a TV and VCR into the lobby of an academic building on the campus of the University of North Carolina-Wilmington, popped in a well-worn VHS cassette, and played a video extolling the virtues of an atmosphere rich in CO2.

“It was a video that was made to look like a news show; there were people who looked like anchors in it,” recalled Kaiser. It was part of a campaign to attract students to join a conservative movement on his undergraduate campus.

“[The video] was all about how CO2 levels are rising, but that’s great! Because plants need CO2, and the more CO2 there is, the more plants will grow and the more crops we’ll have. And the more we’ll have to eat and this will be an age of abundance because of all the extra CO2 in the atmosphere.”

Kaiser recounted the spin with a dash of wry humor, “So don’t worry about what the lefties and the liberals tell you, this is actually going to make things better.” . . .

When he left home and went to college, Kaiser said, his views surged further to the right. “I think it would be accurate to describe myself as kind of an Evangelical fundamentalist at the time.” Kaiser joined a conservative group called the Leadership Institute, which trains students to become effective in political engagement. “They would give us all kinds of stuff for how to talk about climate change,” he recalled, “in a way that advances the agenda of the political right.”

“At that time in my life I envisioned that I was going to become some kind of political operative,” he said.

Kaiser became heavily involved with the Leadership Institute, attending training events, meeting conservative icons, and learning the ropes as a political organizer, all paid for by the institute. “They would be quite disappointed in how I turned out,” mused Kaiser.

Kaiser sums up the primary reason he and other conservatives rejected the premise of climate change: “Because if climate change is as bad as they say it is, it would justify government intervention. And we can’t justify government intervention because that’s a bad thing.” . . .

By the time Kaiser was part way through his PhD program in history at the University of North Carolina-Greensboro, his views began to shift. He was in his late 20s, and his education and exposure to details of American history led to eventual initial cracks in his hardline stance. “There were things that were part of my fundamentalist upbringing that I questioned. You’ve probably followed the polling that says that the majority of Republicans are now fearful that advanced education is dangerous. And I think my experience is kind of what they fear.” . . .

"So it was very odd, I was replacing these little pieces on gay marriage, on climate change, and suddenly my puzzle didn’t work. I realized I’m looking at the wrong puzzle. I have to go get a different box – a whole different puzzle.”

“Climate change went along with those beliefs,” he said. “I never quite believed it was a hoax like [President] Trump likes to say, but I kind of took the position that what if they’re just wrong about what the outcome is going to be.”

“So I wasn’t out there denying the temperature indications. I wasn’t out there denying CO2 levels. I was denying the consequences of them.”

“And that denial stopped in 2009 or 2010. I really kind of shifted significantly. I should have looked more deeply’

Kaiser says he now is motivated to publicly share his turnabout on climate change. “I just feel guilty that my generation was part of setting up the politics of today. That we played a role in spreading misinformation. That we were unwitting allies of merchants of doubt …. We didn’t realize that coal companies and oil companies were funding all of these things we were showing about the positive benefits of CO2.”

“I do feel some responsibility that I should have known better, that I should have looked more deeply into the issue, into who was funding the stuff that I was putting out there.”. .

“Maybe when climate change starts affecting their hometown, that’s when they’re going to accept it because that just seems to be ingrained within conservatism, that it has to be something that I can feel locally in my community. I think one of the quintessential aspects of conservatism is a distrust of outsiders.” . .

“Now I’m a 39-year-old man with children who are going to reach maturity in a world that will be worse than the one that I came to maturity in. That thought horrifies me, especially because I was out there on a weekly basis telling people, don’t worry about global warming, it’s not going to be a problem.”

“I’d like to say that there’s a part of me that believes that, politically and technologically, we will figure this out in time. And that the technology of geothermal, solar, wind, all of that, will advance … to fully replace coal, and a big chunk of oil. There’s a part of me that wants to believe that. But, having been a part of climate change denial, I worry about whether we can get to that point. And I worry especially as we see active attempts at sabotaging things like renewable energy industries. Time will tell, we will see. I worry that it won’t be enough.”

https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2019/04/former-climate-change-denier-explains-his-shift/
 
Back
Top