0
   

Inconvenient Science News

 
 
yitwail
 
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 11:29 am
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 893 • Replies: 18
No top replies

 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 11:35 am
Oh, dear, Mr. Turtle. I had rather hoped Gore was over-stating. I just got another quote from my windstorm insurance people and that news is bad, too.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 11:59 am
well, until continental ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica melt and raise sea level, requiring tens of millions to evacuate, there's still hope. *but*, as Gore stresses, weather is non-linear, meaning, there can be a tipping point when just a little change in the atmosphere can cause a vast change in climate. on the positive side, the government of Japan is considering liquifying CO2 and storing it underground, but that's just 1/6 of Japan's emissions by 2020.

Associated Press 09:00 AM Jun, 26, 2006

Japan hopes to slash greenhouse gas emissions and fight global warming with a plan to pump carbon dioxide into underground storage reservoirs instead of releasing it into the atmosphere, an official said Monday.

The proposal aims to bury 200 million tons of carbon dioxide a year by 2020, cutting the country's emissions by one-sixth, said Masahiro Nishio, an official at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. Introduced last month, the plan is still under study.

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71242-0.html?tw=wn_index_5
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 12:14 pm
I do not discount global warming, but I have confidence that there are solutions to the problem.

Example: a strain of algae was created recently that scrubs CO2 from smokestacks very efficiently. The aglae can then be converted into biodiesel.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 12:38 pm
DD, that's good info. i found a related article here:

Quote:
Scientist Searches Yellowstone Park for Carbon Dioxide-Eating Microbe
by Annette Trinity-Stevens

1/10/01 BOZEMAN -- Wanted: Algae of the most adventurous type. Must grow in slime on scratchy plastic discs. A willingness to be periodically purged in favor of new recruits required. Above all, must have a hearty appetite for carbon dioxide and a tolerance for scalding temperatures.

This is roughly the job description Keith Cooksey, professor of microbiology at Montana State University-Bozeman, carries with him as searches the hot springs of Yellowstone National Park this winter.

Cooksey's on a mission, of sorts. Well, a subcontract, really. He's part of a three-member team looking for ways of naturally lowering carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants.

Besides Cooksey, the threesome includes David Bayless, a mechanical engineer at Ohio University, and researchers from Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. Helping Cooksey at MSU is postdoctoral researcher Igor Brown.

Together, the group has $1-million from the U.S. Dept. of Energy. Cooksey and Brown's portion of the project is about $100,00 a year for three years. Brown also has support from the MSU Thermal Biology Institute, which similarly studies unique microbes from Yellowstone.

While the coal-fueled power industry has reduced particulate and sulfur emissions, it still produces high amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, now believed to be undesirably warming the planet.

Ohio University is experimenting with ways of absorbing carbon dioxide with algae. Like other plants, algae use the gas as part of their metabolic process called photosynthesis.

Ohio University has piloted Bayless's technology using algae from the desert. But they believe there's a better organism out there, and now it's Cooksey's job to look.

"If you want thermotolerant, we're in a good place to look," Cooksey says, referring to Yellowstone National Park. The park is well known for heat-loving organisms that live in and around park hot springs.

"They must be thermotolerant because the gases from these coal-fired power plants--which are about 14 percent carbon dioxide--are hot," Cooksey said. "The gases have been through the scrubbers to get rid of the ash, but they still have lots of CO2."


http://www.montana.edu/wwwpb/univ/CO2scrub.html

still, this doesn't address auto emissions. also, if a solution is found, it's academic unless it's widely adopted, not just in the US but in other industrial nations, and it might encounter resistance if perceived as a US proposal, unless the US is willing to improve auto gas mileage to a level at least comparable to other developed countries.
0 Replies
 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 02:05 pm
Ok, I'm going to try again, yit and DrewDad. Lost the last response.

Here is the paradox as I see it. One of the most critical problems facing our planet is the shortage of water. Supposedly, the very thing that wreaks havoc ,such as violet hurricanes, renews the supply and thus is nature's attempt at balance.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 03:25 pm
Letty, that's an excellent point. unfortunately, there's no guarantee that warmer weather will produce precipitation in the places where it's needed. it's as likely to increase flooding in places that have water & exacerbate drought in places that lack it.
0 Replies
 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 03:51 pm
You're right, yit. I have been really getting into this recently. (not that I can do one thing about it.)

Just looking at this info:

http://technocrat.net/d/2006/5/27/3840

Well, I do wonder who will run in the next presidential election.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 04:49 pm
thanks for the interesting article.

on the political side, there *is* a precedent for a vp running for president but losing a close election, and then running again 2 terms later & getting elected.
0 Replies
 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 05:01 pm
Hmmm. Well, I think that I will nominate you, yit, as a favorite son, but you will need an avatar, so:

http://www.seawear.com/images/sea-turtles/green-sea-turtle~104.jpg
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 05:58 pm
i didn't know there was an a2k election upcoming, but i will do my best to uphold the agnostic moderate party platform. Laughing
0 Replies
 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 06:56 pm
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 07:12 pm
Re: Inconvenient Science News
yitwail wrote:
to woiyo and others who deride "An Inconvenient Truth," some inconvenient news from AP:

Scientists OK Gore's movie for accuracy [..]

The former vice president's movie [..] mostly got the science right, said all 19 climate scientists who had seen the movie or read the book and answered questions from The Associated Press.

The AP contacted more than 100 top climate researchers by e-mail and phone for their opinion. Among those contacted were vocal skeptics of climate change theory. Most scientists had not seen the movie, which is in limited release, or read the book.

But those who have seen it had the same general impression: Gore conveyed the science correctly


Not to quibble, but - so - out of 100 climate scientists, only 19 had sen the movie - and they all agreed with Gore. Isnt that kind of a self-confirming sample? Wouldnt the 19 scientists who did go out to see the movie kinda by definition be the ones likely to agree with it?

I'll note that "Among those contacted were vocal skeptics" - my emphasis - but among the 19 who answered, there were apparently none. Well, of course there werent - they wouldnt be going to see it, would they?

Sorry, but this AP survey says more about movie-going preferences than about the scientific value of the movie..
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Jun, 2006 10:29 pm
Re: Inconvenient Science News
nimh wrote:

Not to quibble, but - so - out of 100 climate scientists, only 19 had sen the movie - and they all agreed with Gore. Isnt that kind of a self-confirming sample? Wouldnt the 19 scientists who did go out to see the movie kinda by definition be the ones likely to agree with it?

I'll note that "Among those contacted were vocal skeptics" - my emphasis - but among the 19 who answered, there were apparently none. Well, of course there werent - they wouldnt be going to see it, would they?


we don't know, but i don't necessarily see it that way. at a2k for instance, there's a lot of people who disagree with the Bible, but those who can do so in an intelligent fashion *have* to have considerable familiarilty with it, perhaps not chapter & verse, but certainly with parts they disagree with. so, by analogy, a global warming skeptic may want to see the movie. so they can make specific criticisms, rather than simply denying that there's global warming. woiyo, for instance, claims to have seen it, even though he mocks Gore. also, the article critical of the movie that woiyo cites in his thread--
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2094507#2094507
--quotes exactly 2 "climate experts" who take issue with the film's science. so it's Gore 19, skeptics 2, basically. and supposing you *are* right, that vocal skeptics chose not to see it, how do you propose forcing them to see it & comment on it?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 02:51 pm
Re: Inconvenient Science News
test
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 02:52 pm
gawd trying to post anything longer than one line here is a friggin nightmare ..
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 02:53 pm
yitwail wrote:
supposing you *are* right, that vocal skeptics chose not to see it,

Well, we can more or less deduce from the article that the vocal skeptics whom AP contacted did not see it. It makes sure to explicitize, after all, that among those it contacted were vocal skeptics. But when moving on to what those who viewed the film thought of it, it notes that the 19 who did all agreed with its science, quotes some opinions of those who already agreed on its general message beforehand, and doesnt mention anything anymore about what any of those vocal skeptics thought of it. I'd deduce that apparently none of the ones it contacted saw the film.

yitwail wrote:
how do you propose forcing them to see it & comment on it?

I wouldnt.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 02:54 pm
(trying to post little bit by little bit instead now..)

--
Note that I myself would probably agree with Gore's movie, in as far as I know anything about the subject - I would in any case watch it with a agreeing disposition. I'm not a skeptic on global warming myself, thats not the point. Just that the research AP touts here is pretty much meaningless, because its tautological. It shows what it does because it would.

Of 100 top climate scientists, the 19 who went to see Gore's movie agreed with it, but then, judging on the ones quoted and the absence of mention of any others, turn out to be ones who generally agreed with him before they saw the movie too. What's that prove?

The opening paragraph of the article, in that context - "The nation's top climate scientists are giving .. Al Gore's documentary on global warming, five stars for accuracy." - is very sloppy journalism, absolutely unfounded by what's in the article.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jun, 2006 03:13 pm
sloppy, or even slanted, perhaps. but the skeptics let the public down by passing up the chance to critique it. i suppose it was beneath their dignity to watch it, but it's too important a question to be on the sidelines on a high horse, as far as i'm concerned.

by the way, the a2k glitches seem to have been addressed, as far as i can tell. if you're still having problems, it may be non-a2k related.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Inconvenient Science News
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/27/2022 at 08:23:38