The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by sendler

I have been saying the same thing here for a year and a half. Things will be much smaller and simpler after oil gets remote.

I dislike the expression 'tiny house'. Too reductive.

When you're inside a box, because of the focal length of the human eye, the walls seem to bulge inward toward you. A spherical space is psychologically more accommodative.

Plus which, the air circulation provides passive heat/cooling for free.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

There are a few medical problems doctors are able to substantially treat. Mostly they entertain the patient while nature takes its course.

It's about a tie in my book between medicine and climate as least understood domains of science.

If you really want them to stop they will.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I dislike the expression 'tiny house'. Too reductive.

When you're inside a box, because of the focal length of the human eye, the walls seem to bulge inward toward you. A spherical space is psychologically more accommodative.

Plus which, the air circulation provides passive heat/cooling for free.

I mostly agree.My dome seems much more 'spacious' than it's plan-view footprint would suggest.
Passive solar heating has been okay,but our North Texas latent heat is really hard to bear without refrigerated air.Some nights the low temp. is 90-F,with a heat index of over 100.Ten years without AC probably took 20 off my lifespan.
I'm able to cool the house with 5,500 Btu/hour heat rejection.The electricity is rhetorically 'carbon-free'.
Presently,the local wind speed is very low,but it's blowing 20-mph in Amarillo wind farm,Texas.
Reynosa-V wind farm,Tamaulipas,Mexico,is 10.3 kph/with gusts to 50.5 kph.
Tehachapi Pass wind farm,California is 13.8 mph

[oil pan 4]

Ha. I'm in portales NM and it gets just ad hot as Amarillo but cools off down into the 70s at night.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by aerohead

When you do that,you can really cut into load.
Why does that escape 'smart' people?

The total efficiency gains available from a full electric conversion have been calculated. They project about 2:1 improvement. This leaves a techno-utopian solution to come up with 8.5 TW average currently after replacing or retrofitting $100's of trillions in built out machines and infrastucture. Not to mention the continuing population growth that we are locked in to for another 70 years and bootstrapping 3 billion underdeveloped people who still burn wood and dung for cooking and heat.

Originally Posted by aerohead

No mention of technology?
I can increase the population while increasing wealth.

Not without increasing total primary energy consumption again. If you get down from the current 17 TW to 8 TW from the maximum application of technology, any increases in population, or the standard of living for poor people, will increase energy consumption from there. It will take a complete redistribution of wealth and a whole new world wide social system to get below the half of 17TW that a techno transformation might provide.
.
Underdeveloped farmer/ herders are the world leaders in percentage of renewable energy at 97%. From firewood and dung. They will suffer the least in the next 50 years during the coming Great Simplification.

[NeilBlanchard]

A lot of information covering a wide swathe about climate change and energy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLWDY-L2tA8

[All Darc]

This kind of home, using domes& geometric 3D shapes, vaults, etc... It could be even less expensive if use aircrete. AIrcrete use a lot less portland cement.





Aircrete also insulates better from heat and cold, reducing energy required for cooloing or heating.

[freebeard]

All Dark -- I'm materials agnostic. Pros and cons abound. I like paper/hempcrete but it's not fireproof. For that you want basalt fiber canvas. You could put that on metal standoffs on a wood inner shell and circulate air between the two.

A single layer, ventilated shell can maintain a 10 degree difference, add windpower and it gets better.

Originally Posted by aerohead

I mostly agree.My dome seems much more 'spacious' than it's plan-view footprint would suggest.
Passive solar heating has been okay,but our North Texas latent heat is really hard to bear without refrigerated air.Some nights the low temp. is 90-F,with a heat index of over 100.Ten years without AC probably took 20 off my lifespan.
I'm able to cool the house with 5,500 Btu/hour heat rejection.The electricity is rhetorically 'carbon-free'.
Presently,the local wind speed is very low,but it's blowing 20-mph in Amarillo wind farm,Texas.

Thanks -- can I quote you? They look smaller on the outside too, because of people's box-oriented perceptions.

Isaac Arthur has put up some interesting stuff.

The Santa Claus Machine
18K views8 hours ago
Visit our sponsor, Brilliant: https://brilliant.org/IsaacArthur/ Revolutionary improvements to automation and production may one day ...
11:27

Earth 2050: Predictions for the Next Generation
53K views3 days ago
To ring in the New Year, we're joining up with Kaspersky Lab's Earth 2050 project to make some predictions about how our world ...
27:30

Colonizing the Arctic
70K views1 week ago
Use my link http://www.audible.com/isaac or text "ISAAC" to 500-500 to get a free book including a copy of Sir Terry Pratchett's ...

The collaboration with Kaspersky Labs is interesting; they're the only antivirus company I trust. Colonizing the Artic is ontopic for the coming Ice Age.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GusIC3RMhbI

[sendler]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

A lot of information covering a wide swathe about climate change and energy.

I'm not going to spend a lot of time discussing this video point by point other than to say to viewers, please be cautious and aware of some of the common misconceptions about solar and wind energy that are being repeated.
.
Germany, California, South Australia, ect have seen the price of electricty on their bills go up over the last ten years to become the most expensive in their respective regions.
.
Many of the same common ways of distorting the discussion of rebuildables are at play here. Such as stating that a region intends to get xx% of their "energy" from wind and solar, when they should say xx% of "electricity". Which is only 20% of energy in Germany.
.
Lack of context of scale is another common issue. Raving about the largest solar farm East of the Mississippi being in Michigan: It is 60 MW name plate.
Which brings up another actively abused concept that is intentionally used in the press to mislead. Capacity factor is never mentioned. The farm in Michigan will average about 16% of it's nameplate with many days and possibly weeks near zero in the winter. It takes 100 of these farms to average the same energy as 1 nuclear plant. And solar farms output 0 for 14 hours a day.
.
Rebuildables, that are mined, manufactured, and installed with fossil fuels, are fossil fuel extenders. Not replacements. Pollyanna views of future energy production serve to distract us from the social changes that must be addressed.
.
I couldn't find a chart of primary energy production by source for California but Germany's is well documented. I saw one the newest ones from 2017 which was essentially the same mix but here is 2015 showing that they still get twice as much energy from burning wood as from wind and solar put together:
.
.

.
.

.
.

[oil pan 4]

Well what do you expect.
When electricity becomes stupid expensive people are going to chop down trees and burn them.
I like how they "almost doubled the price of electricity in 10 years" and only have 1.2% of solar power to show for it.
What's going to happen when 10% of their power comes from solar?
It's going to be down right unaffordable to most people.