The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[All Darc]

Have you heard about thermal depolymerization, a process than can turn anyting organic into a oil similar to gasoline but much less polutent ?

Plastic and even tires and chicken fat could be turn into such oil.

At the time I saw on TV the cost was equal to oil, but from then to now the oil prices get lower.

It mimics nature process of heat and pressure :

[oil pan 4]

Nuclear is the only thing that is going to produce loads of power, actual name plate capacity, around the clock, 355 to 360 days a year, rain or shine with little CO2 produced.
Or we can keep bring coal. It doesn't bother me one bit.
Every other country besides the US that has nuclear power is recycling their nuclear waste. The nuclear waste problem only appears to be a problem in the US. It is a manufactured political problem, not technical one.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by sendler

There is no possibility of building a fraction of the SCALE of any hardware to replace our oil consumption. These are all pipe dreams that can't happen and are delaying rational thought toward a plan that works to bring us in for a softer landing.

Maybe a less hard landing?

Originally Posted by RedDevil

There is not a single solution. We'll need renewables AND nuclear AND carbon/carbon dioxide binding/storage in gas fields.

All Darc — It came on my radar a while back as dense thermal depolymerization. It employs heat and pressure. I agree it's interesting.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

I like how climate change and what causes it has some how gone from being a hypothesis to surpassing known laws of science as far as not being open for debate.
That just means they are scared.
This line of thinking alone is telling us all we need to know.

Seems like climate change is well understood:
*1824 Joseph Fourrier (sp?) explains the greenhouse effect
*1864 John Tyndall isolates CO2 as 'the' greenhouse gas in Earth's atmosphere
*1898 Arrhenias Svante is able to predict global warming from CO2 atmospheric concentration.
*1950s David Keeling's CO2 curve,from Mauna Loa ,measurements is verified by other researchers' proxy data.
*Antropogenic CO2 is rising at a nonlinear,geometric rate.(Isotopic assay verifies that this carbon is 'ancient' carbon,dug from the ground)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Venus is 30,000,000 miles further from the Sun than Mercury,and yet,it is 500F warmer.(it has a CO2 atmosphere)
*Earth's MOON,with no atmosphere,averages -100F.
*Earth,at the same distance from the Sun has averaged 56F,with a small compliment of greenhouse gases until recently.Now we're over 57F.
*We've already warmed 1.5 degrees since the Industrial Revolution began.
*If we turn off coal-fired power plants today,we'll gain another immediate 1.5-degrees due to the stratospheric albedo loss from settling Sulfate aerosols now suspended up there.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the debate?

[freebeard]

What is the debate?

Not so much the climate as to whether humankind can act with unanimity.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by sendler

There is no possibility of building a fraction of the SCALE of any hardware to replace our oil consumption. These are all pipe dreams that can't happen and are delaying rational thought toward a plan that works to bring us in for a softer landing.

I wouldn't worry about it.
We'd have to bring back the Committee on Public Information from WW-I,and then send out the vigilante slacker raids to literally beat citizens into compliance of the onerous federal regulations,with approval all the way up to the White House,as we did back then.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Not so much the climate as to whether humankind can act with unanimity.

Unanimity could be had within 72-hours with the media alone.It would require an Edward Bernay's moment,like the Boston Massacre,Lusitania,USS Maine,Pearl Harbor,USS Pueblo,USS Vincennes,or 911 etc. to get the 'Crystallizing Public Consent' catalyst.Wag the dog? Easy!

[aerohead]

I'm losing interest in anything which involves a tailpipe.
It's a leap of faith to just put my trust in another's hands,but having some of the actual climatological research papers from 'SCIENCE','NATURE' Cambridge University,I'm convinced that that these folks knew,or knew about Richard Feymman's commencement address mandate,and are the first to make mention of weaknesses in their own research.
Their urgency about getting off fossil fuels as quick as we can leaves me below luke-warm when I read of any new combustion scheme.
We're gonna need hydrocarbons for all sorts of 'durable' products,long into the future.And we're going to have to depend on our neighbors in that industry.But we shouldn't burn the stuff any more than we have to.And we have options now.

[All Darc]

How much $ per watt ?

Originally Posted by sendler

Thorcon has a great design we should be pulling for.
.
.
Thorcon Power | The Do-able Molten Salt Reactor
.
I am also hopeful the Moltex can come to fruition.
.
Moltex Energy | Safer Cheaper Cleaner | Stable Salt Reactors | SSR
.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Unanimity could be had within 72-hours with the media alone.

More like the media is what stands in our way. I hauled firewood upriver with my friend today. He said the he get info from 'primary sources' through the mainstream media, and ignores conspiritoral opinion. I said "Oh, like Fire & Fury and Stormy Daniels?" He had to a reluctantly agree. Never heard of Maggie Nixon.

Uncensorial truth is all that's needed. That and the TCP/IP stack.

Originally Posted by All Darc

How much $ per watt ?

This is why I didn't respond to your question. It leads to more questions, like is the Thorium extracted from coal slag or from sea water with graphene sheets with nano-pores. Then that leads to other quetions and that leads to.... who knows?