Have you looked at the North Pole lately?

[St. Phatty]

So you admit that the sun drives the climate.

The one part of Geography that they sort of glossed over when I was in my K-12 years, was how the Earth's core is warmed.

They always said, "oh, Compression due to Gravity".

More recently, I am hearing, it's because that's where the heavy metals are, including Uranium Thorium Radium & Polonium.

Of course they usually decay slowly, i.e. not much heating.

If only Human kind was smart enough to balance the cooling off of the Earth's core, as radioactive materials cycle through their half lives, with man-made heating, to achieve an actual equilibrium.

 

[igrowone]

the September melt intensified, scarcely thought it possible
hurricane remnant perhaps, hell of a whack
3 more days till October, we may see some October melt

 

[Three Berries]

I'll start with the last first, given what we've witnessed so far from man's impact on the weather I would say weather modification is a bad thing even if done for good reasons, like increasing rainfall in an area that doesn't get enough rain. Weather is an expression of the force of nature and in my opinion it is too powerful and insufficiently understood for mankind to be playing around with. What we are witnessing in terms of Climate Change demonstrates that the weather is a global thing rather then a bunch of isolated incidents and it all operates on a delicate balance that when disrupted can have significant unforeseen consequences.

News of the Great Barrier Reef expanding to me is just that, news. This is the first time I've heard anyone say that is happening. Which is pretty surprising given that the Great Barrier Reef is considered one of the natural wonders of the world. When it was first being reported that it was dying that was big news being reported world wide and you would have to be living under a rock to have not heard it. The same would be true of it expanding, that's big news and it should be hard to miss hearing reports of it. I do not live under a rock so it's surprising to me I've not heard of it expanding yet. I just did a search on it and what I found does confirm that it has been expanding but it's still a long ways from being restored to it's former glory. There are a couple of possible explanations for this although no story I found gave any speculation on why it has rebounded the past couple of years. One possible explanation is the impact the earth experienced during mankind's response to the pandemic most notably the lock downs. The reduction to air and subsequently water pollution from everyone staying at home and not driving had significant impacts around the world. Skies almost constantly filled with smog cleared up, waters that were murky with pollution cleared up and in places like Venice there were reports that not only did the waters clear up by sea life was seen returning to those waters, so potentially the barrier reef expanding could be a result of that which if true would be evidence in favor of cutting global CO2 emissions. Another possibility is that in the past couple of years there were a number of volcanic eruptions not terribly far from that region of the world. Volcanos are known among other things for spewing massive amounts of ash into the atmosphere and that ash can cause an effect of shielding large areas effected by the ash from the sun penetrating, something much like nuclear winter. Depending on how much ash is put into the air it can cause a cooling effect either globally in cases of extremely large amounts of ash (usually the result of super volcanos). In smaller episodes where less ash is put up in the air the cooling effect can be more localized and what area is effected depends more on the direction winds carry it. Given that the big eruptions were not terribly far from Australia it's possible the Great Barrier Reef experienced a cooling effect. Since the main thing killing the coral was higher then normal water temperatures it's possible the volcanic activity played a role? That would require more research to determine though. If it proves to be the case though that again would be evidence in favor of doing what we can to reduce the carbon footprint since it would seem that small changes lowering the temperatures even a little bit can give life enough to start bouncing back. Finally it could just be a result of the adaptability and resilience of life. During the planet's history there have been many mass extinction events but always some life has managed to survive and flourish again once the event causing the extinction passed. The reporting I saw when I did a quick search says that the expansion only happened in some areas though and only returned to about 33%-36% of normal, while good news and better then getting worse it in no way means we can just say, "Oh okay, false alarm, go back to business as usual". Instead of looking at it as a sign that there is nothing to worry about we should look at it as a reprieve giving us a little breathing room to work on meaningful permanent change.

As far as hurricane Activity in the Atlantic, first off the hurricane season isn't over yet, we just had a serious hurricane hit Puerto Rico and then swing up the Atlantic and pound Bermuda and continued on and do substantial damage to Eastern Canada. At the same time we are bracing for another hurricane to develop in the Gulf with some forecasts saying it could become a Cat 5 by the time it makes landfall in the US depending on how it tracks. Hurricane Sandy that devastated New York and New Jersey in 2012 didn't hit until the end of October so we still got quite a bit of time for this year's hurricane activity to increase. That being said just because we get a year with lower then normal activity doesn't mean the crisis is over. Climate Change is just that weather patterns change from their normal behavior causing the climates of the areas they effect to change. If one year that means we get colder then normal weather or less named storms then normal it doesn't mean Global Warming or Climate Change isn't happening it just means it's becoming less predictable. Less predictable = more dangerous because it's harder to prepare when you don't know what's coming until it happens. During the past several decades that we've been tracking Global Warming and Climate Change there have been individual years that were less severe or better then others but the overall average when looking at decades has still shown a steady trend towards worsening.

Polar bears have been hanging in there but just like the Great Barrier Reef or fewer hurricanes in the Atlantic it's only an improvement relative to recent years and not a complete reversal of the problems they face. Just like those other things might be improving due to recent changes caused by the pandemic or volcanic activity the same could prove true for the polar bears. While the polar bears are doing better this year they are not out of the danger of extinction just yet.

So nothing is out of normal then.....

I've lived in the same spot for 40 years and the climate isn't changing. They still grow corn and soybeans and at greatly increased yields. They said we would be deserts here in Central Illinois and the corn belt would move into Canada. Not even close. Almost had a frost a month early yesterday.

And sorry if you didn't hear about the Barrier Reef. It seems it's only the news that follows the narrative that gets publicized.

What about the problems we face when we have no energy? And talking about batteries to replace base load generation only show you have no clue of the amount of electricity required for daily use at current levels. What happens when you increase the need for electricity 10000 fold when the fossil fuels are gone?

Plastics, coatings, pharmaceuticals, fertilizer, no solar panels or windmills will make them.

Doomfags

 

[St. Phatty]

What about the problems we face when we have no energy? And talking about batteries to replace base load generation only show you have no clue of the amount of electricity required for daily use at current levels. What happens when you increase the need for electricity 10000 fold when the fossil fuels are gone?

Eventually some people will realize the wrong-ness of judging the safety of nuclear by the examples of Chernobyl & Fukushima.

Removing all the control rods from a nuclear reactor is the same thing as sabotaging it, very completely.

It's like judging a Ford V6 by seeing what happens when you remove the drain plug - and it has no oil.


There is more to the Fukushima story than it getting hit by a big wave.

But maybe plant designers will learn to put their energy plants far enough inland that they can't get hit by big waves.

 

[armedoldhippy]

yup. that is like saying that all cars are unsafe because Corvairs burst into flames when hit from behind.

eventually some people will realize the wrong-ness of judging the safety of nuclear by the examples of Chernobyl & Fukushima.

 

[Three Berries]

Eventually some people will realize the wrong-ness of judging the safety of nuclear by the examples of Chernobyl & Fukushima.

Removing all the control rods from a nuclear reactor is the same thing as sabotaging it, very completely.

It's like judging a Ford V6 by seeing what happens when you remove the drain plug - and it has no oil.


There is more to the Fukushima story than it getting hit by a big wave.

But maybe plant designers will learn to put their energy plants far enough inland that they can't get hit by big waves.

Some say they have a earthquake machine and Fukushima was done because Japan would not invest their pension funds in the World Bank.

 

[trichrider]

let's be getting back to arctic doings
and doing it is, southern greenland is just not quitting with its melt
4 more days and melting in october? off the charts my frères

Windy as forecasted

Wind map and weather forecast

www.windy.com

please explain how ice melts at 15*, which looks to be the warmest temperature there now...today.... per the link provided.
and you are fully aware of the AMO, correct?

 

[HempKat]

So nothing is out of normal then.....

I've lived in the same spot for 40 years and the climate isn't changing. They still grow corn and soybeans and at greatly increased yields. They said we would be deserts here in Central Illinois and the corn belt would move into Canada. Not even close. Almost had a frost a month early yesterday.

And sorry if you didn't hear about the Barrier Reef. It seems it's only the news that follows the narrative that gets publicized.

What about the problems we face when we have no energy? And talking about batteries to replace base load generation only show you have no clue of the amount of electricity required for daily use at current levels. What happens when you increase the need for electricity 10000 fold when the fossil fuels are gone?

Plastics, coatings, pharmaceuticals, fertilizer, no solar panels or windmills will make them.

Doomfags

You know, lucky for you you happen to live in a region of the country that many experts are now recommending people move to in order to minimize their exposure to the impact of climate change. People have said all sorts of things over the years. Some times they get their predictions wrong and sometimes they don't. There are people who lived on islands that had to be moved sooner then predicted because the islands they used to call home are now under water. I'm sure they wished the people predicting their fate were as wrong as the people forecasting Central Illinois fate. Maybe that's just the difference between predicting sea level rise vs predicting a change in weather patterns? Then again I notice you tend to twist things to suit the argument you try to make.

Like here, I never said it wasn't publicized not even close. In fact in the course of replying to you I did a search and found lots of stories about it. When I talked about not hearing about it I was referring more to people like you, you know, climate deniers, getting up on roof tops and shouting to the world that the barrier reef is growing so climate change can't be real. That's what I wasn't hearing. I don't know maybe you scour the internet daily looking for anything you can use to deny climate change? I don't do the opposite of that. When the threats of climate change emerge there are all kinds of people letting the world know about it. Then again you left out key details like it's not the whole barrier reef that's growing again just in two isolated areas also you made it seem like it was all back to normal when it's only recovered by about 1/3rd and only in those isolated areas or that it's only been during the last year or two. Maybe people are just waiting to see if it's going to continue to improve or if this is just a blip on the radar?

When you say "What about the problems we face when we have no energy?" what do you mean? Do you mean like in Texas when they lost power because they failed to protect their grid from what could happen when it gets cold and there is a lot of ice because Texas winter's usually don't get that bad? Or are you referring to an imagined thing in the future when/if we ever get off of fossil fuels completely? If you meant the Texas thing well that was a matter of them not taking the potential risks seriously. It's also worth noting that the renewable sources of power continued to work just fine but since Texas gets only a small percentage of it's total power from renewable sources they could carry the load for the fossil fuel and coal powered systems that failed. If you meant in the future well we'll have to see when we get there. If we ever gave up fossil fuels entirely I'm sure it will only be after we've created enough to cover our needs with the ability to scale up as society grows. I guess you think we'll just put up barely enough windmills and solar panels to barely squeak by and then just stop there like the job is all done? As for batteries, I guess you didn't read what I posted. Every time they set up a wind farm or solar farm, right next to it the set up a farm of batteries able to match what the wind mills and solar panels can produce when they're working and it can be scaled up as needed. Clearly it is you who does not know what you are talking about.

"Plastics, coatings, pharmaceuticals, fertilizer, no solar panels or windmills will make them" No shit Sherlock nor was anyone saying they could or should. We got by without all those things before we discovered the uses of petrochemicals or more accurately we had alternatives to all those things many of which occur naturally. Granted they weren't always as effective as more modern more synthetic stuff but hey if putting up with some minor inefficiencies meant the human race could survive longer, I think that's a fair trade.

 

[Three Berries]

You know, lucky for you you happen to live in a region of the country that many experts are now recommending people move to in order to minimize their exposure to the impact of climate change. People have said all sorts of things over the years. Some times they get their predictions wrong and sometimes they don't. There are people who lived on islands that had to be moved sooner then predicted because the islands they used to call home are now under water. I'm sure they wished the people predicting their fate were as wrong as the people forecasting Central Illinois fate. Maybe that's just the difference between predicting sea level rise vs predicting a change in weather patterns? Then again I notice you tend to twist things to suit the argument you try to make.

Like here, I never said it wasn't publicized not even close. In fact in the course of replying to you I did a search and found lots of stories about it. When I talked about not hearing about it I was referring more to people like you, you know, climate deniers, getting up on roof tops and shouting to the world that the barrier reef is growing so climate change can't be real. That's what I wasn't hearing. I don't know maybe you scour the internet daily looking for anything you can use to deny climate change? I don't do the opposite of that. When the threats of climate change emerge there are all kinds of people letting the world know about it. Then again you left out key details like it's not the whole barrier reef that's growing again just in two isolated areas also you made it seem like it was all back to normal when it's only recovered by about 1/3rd and only in those isolated areas or that it's only been during the last year or two. Maybe people are just waiting to see if it's going to continue to improve or if this is just a blip on the radar?

When you say "What about the problems we face when we have no energy?" what do you mean? Do you mean like in Texas when they lost power because they failed to protect their grid from what could happen when it gets cold and there is a lot of ice because Texas winter's usually don't get that bad? Or are you referring to an imagined thing in the future when/if we ever get off of fossil fuels completely? If you meant the Texas thing well that was a matter of them not taking the potential risks seriously. It's also worth noting that the renewable sources of power continued to work just fine but since Texas gets only a small percentage of it's total power from renewable sources they could carry the load for the fossil fuel and coal powered systems that failed. If you meant in the future well we'll have to see when we get there. If we ever gave up fossil fuels entirely I'm sure it will only be after we've created enough to cover our needs with the ability to scale up as society grows. I guess you think we'll just put up barely enough windmills and solar panels to barely squeak by and then just stop there like the job is all done? As for batteries, I guess you didn't read what I posted. Every time they set up a wind farm or solar farm, right next to it the set up a farm of batteries able to match what the wind mills and solar panels can produce when they're working and it can be scaled up as needed. Clearly it is you who does not know what you are talking about.

"Plastics, coatings, pharmaceuticals, fertilizer, no solar panels or windmills will make them" No shit Sherlock nor was anyone saying they could or should. We got by without all those things before we discovered the uses of petrochemicals or more accurately we had alternatives to all those things many of which occur naturally. Granted they weren't always as effective as more modern more synthetic stuff but hey if putting up with some minor inefficiencies meant the human race could survive longer, I think that's a fair trade.

I'm sorry if you fail to see that they are outlawing fossil fuels and have no backup. Many are going to die. All you have to do is watch the EU this winter.

Have a good day.

 

[HempKat]

Eventually some people will realize the wrong-ness of judging the safety of nuclear by the examples of Chernobyl & Fukushima.

Removing all the control rods from a nuclear reactor is the same thing as sabotaging it, very completely.

It's like judging a Ford V6 by seeing what happens when you remove the drain plug - and it has no oil.


There is more to the Fukushima story than it getting hit by a big wave.

But maybe plant designers will learn to put their energy plants far enough inland that they can't get hit by big waves.

Well the problem with the older more traditional types of plants producing them far inland and far removed from water sources created too many problems. With the advances they've made more recently with modular designs and using safer fuels with shorter half-life's much of those problems are removed from the equation.

 

[HempKat]

I'm sorry if you fail to see that they are outlawing fossil fuels and have no backup. Many are going to die. All you have to do is watch the EU this winter.

Have a good day.

That has nothing to do with Climate Change. All of that is due to Putin's war. I'm sorry you fail to see the difference. If people die this winter in the EU it will be because of Putin. Of course nobody needs to die there are ways to survive cold, if there weren't man never would have evolved far enough to develop fossil fuels. Sure it will be tougher then what people are used to but you don't just throw your hands up in the air and say "We're all going to die" like some chicken little. You do what you have to do to survive.

 

[Three Berries]

That has nothing to do with Climate Change. All of that is due to Putin's war. I'm sorry you fail to see the difference. If people die this winter in the EU it will be because of Putin. Of course nobody needs to die there are ways to survive cold, if there weren't man never would have evolved far enough to develop fossil fuels. Sure it will be tougher then what people are used to but you don't just throw your hands up in the air and say "We're all going to die" like some chicken little. You do what you have to do to survive.

So the human race is going extinct? Kerry was saying we had 12 years 2 years ago. What a bunch of BS.

While the US and the EU outlaw fossil fuels (can't call that Putin's war) China is expanding with new coal and steel plants. But their slave labor makes a lot of solar panels and windmill parts.

China approves 15 GW of new coal-fired power in H1 - research

China approved 15 gigawatts of new coal-fired power capacity and another 30 million tonnes of coal-based iron-making capacity in the first half of this year, despite falling power and steel demand over the period, new research showed on Wednesday.

www.reuters.com

Chinese coal production over the first eight months of the year reached 2.93 billion tonnes, up 11% on the same period last year, offsetting a decline in imports. The country has also raised annual production capacity at its coal mines by 490 million tonnes since last year. read more

 

[Three Berries]

Well the problem with the older more traditional types of plants producing them far inland and far removed from water sources created too many problems. With the advances they've made more recently with modular designs and using safer fuels with shorter half-life's much of those problems are removed from the equation.

When will the US start using waste nuclear fuel for power generation? Unfortunately it takes 20 years to build a new nuke plant.

 

[HempKat]

So the human race is going extinct? Kerry was saying we had 12 years 2 years ago. What a bunch of BS.

While the US and the EU outlaw fossil fuels (can't call that Putin's war) China is expanding with new coal and steel plants. But their slave labor makes a lot of solar panels and windmill parts.

China approves 15 GW of new coal-fired power in H1 - research

China approved 15 gigawatts of new coal-fired power capacity and another 30 million tonnes of coal-based iron-making capacity in the first half of this year, despite falling power and steel demand over the period, new research showed on Wednesday.

www.reuters.com

Chinese coal production over the first eight months of the year reached 2.93 billion tonnes, up 11% on the same period last year, offsetting a decline in imports. The country has also raised annual production capacity at its coal mines by 490 million tonnes since last year. read more

Who said the human race is going extinct other then you and supposedly Kerry 2 years ago. You got to stop living in the past. This is a dynamic issue you can't be some little pissant on the side lines saying, "Well so and so said 20 years ago" I don't know where you're getting the US and EU making fossil fuels illegal either. I can go down the street less then a mile and find half a dozen places I can buy gas. There's a doomsday type on YouTube talking about how gas prices are going up (which in my area they're going down) from a national average of over $5 a gallon (fake news todays national average is $3.78 a gallon) Yet in my area it's $3.24 a gallon. He says we are dangerously low on supply because certain refineries haven't come back online (which is true to help gas companies justify high prices by manipulating damned by deliberately reducing supply). Also because we are sending as much fuel as we can to Europe to help them get thru their shortage. Except that's just LNG. Which we have in abundance. So it sounds like you're listening to a bunch of fake news because out here in the real world gas is very much still legal and will remain so for years to come yet.

As for China why are you so worried about what they're doing with coal? You're of the position all this Climate Change stuff isn't real and mankind is to insignificant to effect the climate. So why on earth should you care one bit what China is doing with coal? Unless you're saying that when it suits your argument human caused climate change is real and it's only not real when it's inconvenient? Hmmm maybe that's why Gore called his documentary "An Inconvenient Truth"? Okay probably not you're too insignificant for Al Gore to notice you let alone name anything after you.

 

[HempKat]

When will the US start using waste nuclear fuel for power generation? Unfortunately it takes 20 years to build a new nuke plant.

They will probably never use waste fuel for power generation since it is too dangerous. I get it, you're hoping we can just get rid of all that big mean old nuclear waste by using it for fuel, okay time to come back to reality. What they are talking about is switching to smaller modular nuclear reactors the use fuels whose waste on has a half life of about 50 years. Because they're modular the can be mad smaller, built for less, built faster (1-2 years) and they can be built in place the older 20 year to build reactors can't go. You really should ready up on it. "Modular Reactors, it ain't your Grandpa's Nuclear Energy."

 

[Three Berries]

They will probably never use waste fuel for power generation since it is too dangerous. I get it, you're hoping we can just get rid of all that big mean old nuclear waste by using it for fuel, okay time to come back to reality. What they are talking about is switching to smaller modular nuclear reactors the use fuels whose waste on has a half life of about 50 years. Because they're modular the can be mad smaller, built for less, built faster (1-2 years) and they can be built in place the older 20 year to build reactors can't go. You really should ready up on it. "Modular Reactors, it ain't your Grandpa's Nuclear Energy."

Processing of Used Nuclear Fuel​

(Updated December 2020)

• Used nuclear fuel has long been reprocessed to extract fissile materials for recycling and to reduce the volume of high-level wastes.
• Recycling today is largely based on the conversion of fertile U-238 to fissile plutonium.
• New reprocessing technologies are being developed to be deployed in conjunction with fast neutron reactors which will burn all long-lived actinides, including all uranium and plutonium, without separating them from one another.
• A significant amount of plutonium recovered from used fuel is currently recycled into MOX fuel; a small amount of recovered uranium is recycled so far.

https://world-nuclear.org/informati...ecycling/processing-of-used-nuclear-fuel.aspx


You need updated script writers.....

 

[igrowone]

Windy as forecasted

Wind map and weather forecast

www.windy.com

please explain how ice melts at 15*, which looks to be the warmest temperature there now...today.... per the link provided.
and you are fully aware of the AMO, correct?

I am but a humble reporter
the NSIDC has not yet issued a statement on this event
but the post mortem will be interesting

 

[trichrider]

yeah i failed to see the areas around the west coast that were in the 40s.
i'm human too.
i suppose hempcat hasn't heard about California and NY outlawing combustion engine cars...
cali goes so far as to ban lawnmowers with combustion engines also. agenda 2030 coming in hot. pun intended.
EU in for a dismal winter. some of those entities are restarting their coal power plants and delaying shutting down nuclear power plants also. they did this after they thought they would get the Nordstream pipelines delivering fuel, and they did it before Putin began his special operation. people scrambling to find firewood now that the pipelines have been neutered/destroyed.

 

[trichrider]

oh balls. double post instead of an edit...

 

[St. Phatty]

Processing of Used Nuclear Fuel​

(Updated December 2020)

• Used nuclear fuel has long been reprocessed to extract fissile materials for recycling and to reduce the volume of high-level wastes.
• Recycling today is largely based on the conversion of fertile U-238 to fissile plutonium.
• New reprocessing technologies are being developed to be deployed in conjunction with fast neutron reactors which will burn all long-lived actinides, including all uranium and plutonium, without separating them from one another.
• A significant amount of plutonium recovered from used fuel is currently recycled into MOX fuel; a small amount of recovered uranium is recycled so far.

https://world-nuclear.org/informati...ecycling/processing-of-used-nuclear-fuel.aspx


You need updated script writers.....

U238 is extremely fissile.

But it has absorbs neutrons in a way that is different than U235.

U235 can be persuaded to go into an exponential growth mode, with about 80 doubling cycles, from 1 neutron to
1208925819614629174706176
neutrons.

In an H-bomb, they use the massive flux of neutrons from the fusion part of the explosion (which is started using Plutonium and a neutron source), to bombard U238 in an outer wrapper.

An H-bomb without the outer wrapper is the proverbial "Neutron Bomb", with a typical output of 400 kilotons. Less explosive force but a massive and temporary amount of Neutron radiation.

An H-Bomb with the outer wrapper of U238, has a typical output of 1 Megaton, 1000 kilotons.

Since the thread already WAAAY off topic -
I'm watching CSI Miami -
why don't they have a CSI Humboldt or CSI Mendocino, or CSI Emerald Triangle ?
Where, as in Real Life, the free market Pot Growers are the Good Guys.