After 8 years, next IPCC report on climate change on its way

[mindfulzen]

Of course when Chinese money is involved, you can trust worldly companies to be honest I'm not. Specially when they have mutual agreement with China working on salt water nuclear reactors

What does that have to do with anything? And who are they? Why would it be a problem with clean energy now, in a thread about cutting emissions? This does not make sense.

 

[BeyondET]

What does that have to do with anything? And who are they? Why would it be a problem with clean energy now, in a thread about cutting emissions? This does not make sense.

they was who the poster mentioned to me about Oak Ridge National labs, who just happens to be in a business relationship with china, they are not going to say anything to hurt china. china puts more co2 out than most all other countries combined. and its not because they build parts equipment for the world.

 

[mindfulzen]

they was who the poster mentioned to me about Oak Ridge National labs, who just happens to be in a business relationship with china, they are not going to say anything to hurt china. china puts more co2 out than most all other countries combined.

Mkay, why should they say anything negative? When they are allowed to do a nuclear energy project that cuts emissions in said country? And of course not badtalking partners, that is betrayal. It is a thread about the envirnoment and cutting emissions, so I do not understand the gripe. Nuclear power will replace coal, if there is not big increase in demand, right? Is that not good?

 

[BeyondET]

Mkay, why should they say anything negative? When they are allowed to do a nuclear energy project that cuts emissions in said country? And of course not badtalking partners, that is betrayal. It is a thread about the envirnoment and cutting emissions, so I do not understand the gripe. Nuclear power will replace coal, if there is not big increase in demand, right? Is that not good?

for one china as of 2020 now has three times the amount of coal fired plants up and running than the whole world combined with plans of new ones in the near future. coal plants life span is about 50 years. there is no reducing the threat of global warming if china doesn't stop building them and running them and that will not happen for at 50 years from now.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

Of course when Chinese money is involved, you can trust worldly companies to be honest I'm not. Specially when they have mutual agreement with China working on salt water nuclear reactors

Take it to the conspiacy forum unless you have some evidence.

 

[BeyondET]

Take it to the conspiacy forum unless you have some evidence.

it is not conspiracy climate change is on its way and china is leading the pack with no end in sight. i am sorry you believe the most clever beast of the field china.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

it is not conspiracy climate change is on its way and china is leading the pack with no end in sight. i am sorry you believe the most clever beast of the field china.

No I am questioning your simplistic argument of placing blame in one place. I it not only contrafactual, but also useless in actually solving the problem.

 

[Gene2memE]

China doesn't not produce 27% renewable energy

Ignoring the double negative - China does produce around 27% of its energy from renewable sources. It's been above 20% for more than a decade.

Don't argue with me, take it up with the IEA - they're the people who measure this sort of thing.

China is lying to you if you think it's leading the world wanting to clean up its act.

China is the world's leading investor in renewable energy and renewables R&D. It is the world's largest producer of solar and wind power, and I think it will also be the largest producer of hydroelectric power by the end of the year.

 

[BeyondET]

Ignoring the double negative - China does produce around 27% of its energy from renewable sources. It's been above 20% for more than a decade.

Don't argue with me, take it up with the IEA - they're the people who measure this sort of thing.



China is the world's leading investor in renewable energy and renewables R&D. It is the world's largest producer of solar and wind power, and I think it will also be the largest producer of hydroelectric power by the end of the year.

they got a long way to go, we will see in the near future if these numbers below will drop. been at plus 20% for more than a decade and still leading in carbon output huh it looks good on paper but the coal plants are far more than renewable energy like a grain of sand to a mountain of coal. and i never started arguing with you, you started with me your post that you quoted me hehe.

Carbon Footprint by Country 2021

• China (9.3 GT)
• United States (4.8 GT)
• India (2.2 GT)
• Russia (1.5 GT)
• Japan (1.1 GT)
• Germany (0.7 GT)
• South Korea (0.6 GT)
• Iran (0.6 GT)

 

[mindfulzen]

for one china as of 2020 now has three times the amount of coal fired plants up and running than the whole world combined with plans of new ones in the near future. coal plants life span is about 50 years. there is no reducing the threat of global warming if china doesn't stop building them and running them and that will not happen for at 50 years from now.

Yes, so why are you complaining about the alternatives to coalplants? nuclear plants. You pretty much answer yourself, reducing the risk of global warming is out of your hands. You can blame the lefts glo0balists for that, they wanted western industry shipped off, now it is gone. Not in our hands anymore.

 

[BeyondET]

Yes, so why are you complaining about the alternatives to coalplants? nuclear plants. You pretty much answer yourself, reducing the risk of global warming is out of your hands. You can blame the lefts glo0balists for that, they wanted western industry shipped off, now it is gone. Not in our hands anymore.

I'm not complaining about alternatives to coal plants dude. I'm done later

 

[mindfulzen]

I'm not complaining about alternatives to coal plants dude. I'm done later

You did complain about oak ridge that had a partnership in said country, setting up salt water reactors, which I guess has to do with thorium reactors, and is supposedly the cleanest nuclear plants you get, with least dangerous waste, and also safest. So seems like a great thing from an envirnomental standpoint.

 

[Goonie]

Well the Biden regime has responded to the clamate change report by calling for a massive increase in production of oil.
By pushing for more oil production, the US is killing its climate pledges | Adam Tooze

 

[renniks]

Yada yada. I'm not worried about the climate changing. And we can not do anything about it anyway.

 

[Goonie]

Deleted.

 

[BeyondET]

You did complain about oak ridge that had a partnership in said country, setting up salt water reactors, which I guess has to do with thorium reactors, and is supposedly the cleanest nuclear plants you get, with least dangerous waste, and also safest. So seems like a great thing from an envirnomental standpoint.

i didn't complain about the cleaner reactor itself, but that they are not going to give a bad report on china's issues. when they got a partnership with china. if you read what the poster said about oak ridge report on china pollution of coarse the company isn't going to report something negative.

 

[sjastro]

One of the paradoxes about climate change modelling is that the atmosphere behaves as a fluid and therefore is treated as a problem in fluid mechanics.
Traditionally fluid mechanics is a branch of applied mathematics and one of the most famous equations which climate models utilize is the Navier-Stokes equations.
The first equation based on the conservation of mass is.

v is the velocity.
The second equation in more detail in based on Newton's second law F=ma.

Mathematicians have never been able to prove for the three-dimensional system of equations, and given some initial conditions, that smooth solutions always exist.
A smooth solution f(x,y,z) for the equations is where the derivative of f (x,y,z) exists for each point x, y and z.
This is called the Navier–Stokes existence and smoothness problem and one of the seven great unsolved problems in mathematics constituting the Millennium Prize.
Solve any one of the problems earns you a million dollars.

The paradox is that while mathematicians struggle with the equations, physicists have no problems in utilizing the equations in their climate change models.
A fluid is treated as a set of points which forms a vector field where each point has both a magnitude and direction such as in the case of a circulating fluid.

The mathematician will look at each point individually whereas the physicist will break down the fluid in a series of localized regions where in each region the points are averaged.
This is basically a smoothing procedure which eliminates any “stray” points.
This is an approximation and by making the regions progressively smaller a more accurate approximation is obtained.

This numerical method approach requires massive computer power and it is no coincidence the increasing accuracy of climate change models is related to improvements in computer hardware.

 

[Belk]

Yada yada. I'm not worried about the climate changing.

Your personal incredulity is noted.

And we can not do anything about it anyway.

Actual experts say otherwise.

 

[sjastro]

One of the paradoxes about climate change modelling is that the atmosphere behaves as a fluid and therefore is treated as a problem in fluid mechanics.
Traditionally fluid mechanics is a branch of applied mathematics and one of the most famous equations which climate models utilize is the Navier-Stokes equations.
The first equation based on the conservation of mass is.

v is the velocity.
The second equation in more detail in based on Newton's second law F=ma.

Mathematicians have never been able to prove for the three-dimensional system of equations, and given some initial conditions, that smooth solutions always exist.
A smooth solution f(x,y,z) for the equations is where the derivative of f (x,y,z) exists for each point x, y and z.
This is called the Navier–Stokes existence and smoothness problem and one of the seven great unsolved problems in mathematics constituting the Millennium Prize.
Solve any one of the problems earns you a million dollars.

The paradox is that while mathematicians struggle with the equations, physicists have no problems in utilizing the equations in their climate change models.
A fluid is treated as a set of points which forms a vector field where each point has both a magnitude and direction such as in the case of a circulating fluid.

The mathematician will look at each point individually whereas the physicist will break down the fluid in a series of localized regions where in each region the points are averaged.
This is basically a smoothing procedure which eliminates any “stray” points.
This is an approximation and by making the regions progressively smaller a more accurate approximation is obtained.

This numerical method approach requires massive computer power and it is no coincidence the increasing accuracy of climate change models is related to improvements in computer hardware.

Here is a mathematician discussing the Navier-Stokes equations in more detail.
The guy is a bit of a zealot having tattooed the Navier-Stokes equations on his body.

 

[Nithavela]

Well the Biden regime has responded to the clamate change report by calling for a massive increase in production of oil.
By pushing for more oil production, the US is killing its climate pledges | Adam Tooze

Seems a bit superfluous at this point, but I appreciate the effort.