The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[oil pan 4]

When it comes to man versus the sea the seas always win.
Any so called victory is only temporary.

[freebeard]

http://archeyes.com/plan-tokyo-1960-kenzo-tange/

Kenzo Tange ‘ 1960 plan for Tokyo was proposed at a time when many cities in the industrial world were experiencing the height of urban sprawl.... Tange attempted to impose a newphysical order on Tokyo, which would accommodate the city’s continued expansion and internal regeneration. The scheme, featuring a linear series of interlocking loops expanding Tokyo across the bay, has. often been regarded as initiating the decade-long megastructural movement. Its theoretical contribution to contemporary urbanism, however, remains understudied.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Oh when the power goes out for a few days the people will be rioting and burning their city to the ground people will forget all about the hyped bads of nuclear power.
Considering wind and solar power only make up about 2 to 3 percent of all the energy used in the United states it's almost pointless to think they will make up the majority any time soon.
In less than 30 years nuclear power went from 0% market share to 9%.
In 10 years solar went from a 0% market share to what effectly rounds rounds down to a 0% market share and it's going to be less than 1% for the forsee able future.

Some climatologists believe that we won't go from the frying pan,to the fire,for 30-years,so,perhaps we'd have a 'window of opportunity' to continue building out load capability.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2016,we lost the equivalent of 350,000 new tiny homes to drought,which would have remarkably impacted housing-related energy consumption,which in turn impacts the overall 'load' we need to build for with renewable energy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we were to lose that kind of potential each year,we'd be talking about the loss of 10,500,000 homes by the time we really needed to cut the fossil-fuel umbilical cord (or as my neighbor says,our 'diabolical cord.'

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

None.
Nothing but nuclear could even begin to replace some of the the 4 trillion kwh of energy used by the United states.
Those idiot democrats pushing the new green deal can't even comprehend the scale of the issue. They are so stupid they think a few years of building solar panels and wind turbines will replace fossil fuel power.
The CBO says the green new deal will cost 93 trillion dollars.

What does the CBO say the cost of inaction will be?That would be the more important question.
And are we talking about $93-trillion in new business and jobs?
Is that a problem?

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by sendler

That is the big problem with anyone trying to make wise decisions. Very few people have any understanding of the scale of trying to replace even half of human primary energy use. Do the math. But we have only two modes: Complacency and Panic.

According to the CBS piece,we had the math for 50-years and didn't act.
We've been shooting at the scout/snipers and sentries for 50-years,and now the White House is trying to destroy radio communications,so forward air controllers can't even call in artillery support and air strikes to protect the infantry and cavalry who are out battling British thermal units.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I see a complete failure on the part of the Supreme Court to protect the nation from Washington lobbyists.
As our 'reason of last resort',and the American Bar Association appears to sanction creatures with truly bizarre varieties of reason.
I'll bet George Santayana lays awake in his coffin,watching.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by sendler

Keep in mind that 25 GW of installed solar capacity will average only 6.25 GW with 4 times this amount for a few hours on some days, and nothing every night. Steel, aluminum, and cement production require uninterrupted energy. And energy consumption in India is growing at the fastest rate on the planet as millions of people get home electricity for the first time and a rising middle class get their first chance at a car.
.
I couldn't find any charts newer than 2016 for India. And this one doesn't take into account the 25% of India's primary energy from biomass and dung that appears on the chart from 2013.
.
.

.
.

.
.
This is the big picture
.
.

.
.

With international grid connections,South-Hemispheric,long,summer days,can be broadcast to northern Winter, as well as trans-oceanic cable connections across the Bering Strait into Russia,with 11-time zones.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by aerohead

What does the CBO say the cost of inaction will be?That would be the more important question.
And are we talking about $93-trillion in new business and jobs?
Is that a problem?

The cost of "inaction" is purely speculation.
Going to about 6 times gdp in debit the country will financially implode and there will be no new green deal bs.
There will be no money to buy solar panels or put up wind turbines and improved building efficiency.
Everyone will be poor and using dirty energy like russia after the fall of the soviet union or Venezuela.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by sendler

Factory farming has freed most of us from growing our own food as we traded fossil energy and fertilizer for human work. But the robots are taking our manufacturing jobs.
.
.

.
.

Since the Industrial Revolution,we've degraded 1/3rd of all soils,moderately to highly.
We've done the same to over half of all agricultural soils.
Each year we degrade another 12-million hectares.
That's quite a legacy for 'factory' farming.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robotics tend to significantly reduce consumer prices,which improves the economic situation for those not displaced by robots.Which would be the majority.Perhaps those,whom are under threat from being displaced by modern technology should have their ears to the rails,maintain vigilance, making contingency plans in advance.
If your job is important,you'll pay attention to your environment,and be aware of potential dynamics which would impact you directly.Otherwise,shame on you.
They don't call it economic Darwinism for nothing.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

There is no surplus of wind or solar in any developed nation.
It would be better to use the wind and solar to displace coal and natural gas first.
Just power everything with nuclear and the surplus can make synthetic coal at night, since breeder reactors don't like to be turned off and on.

The second law of thermodynamics and transparent accounting for all energy inputs/per unit output will decide the day.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Part of diversity (of humans) is sustaining a large number of them at various levels of health, genetic predisposition, skills, and environment. Returning to less productive means of farming will certainly cause the death of many people. That may be good from a "survival of the fittest" standpoint, but it's not humane and works against diversity.

Current factory farming is a miracle and works wonderfully to produce an unprecedented amount of food. The world is nearing toward practically no starvation, which I'll probably see within my lifetime.

Nothing is sustainable, and the need for eventual adaptation to changing circumstances is assured. It may be that some of your proposed solutions are what is needed, but that comes at the expense of increased labor and energy inputs. We'll need to solve the energy and labor problems first.

There's this romantic idea that a small local farm with a guy gathering produce in his pickup truck is more energy efficient than the huge combines that harvest produce and the large trucks/ships that send it to far reaches of the world, but that simply isn't the case. Enormous machines are more energy efficient than a bunch of smaller, less energy intensive machines. The number of miles the product has to travel is almost irrelevant.

Besides that, who's going to give up fresh produce in the winter? We'll all go back to boiling/canning our fruits and veggies to make it through the 10 months of the year the produce isn't locally available?

This 'reality' is only germane,within the context/conditions with which it presently operates.
There is mounting evidence that we must either modify, or abandon our present farm practices,as what fails to reach the current spreadsheets,will make the difference of our undoing.
And we continue to breed additional victims.