US coasts sea level rise 10 to 12 inches by 2050

[Idaho]

Put a Soletta at the Earth-Sun L1 point.

Make it big enough to cover at least 10% of the Sun, as viewed from Earth.

Make it with adjustable slats, so its shading effect to Earth is a controlled variable.

Since humans are soooo smart, we should have no trouble adjusting how much sunlight reaches Earth to tame Climate Change.

So what do we get? Climate Change averted. A space-faring civilization with the ability to tap the enormous resources of our solar system.

Its a win-win.

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by Tupaia

This is a very narrow view that might apply to a few. Many boaters need professional help to change their oil, in case non OEM varieties invalidate their warranty. Not saying your take is a bad idea, just that if the population at large switched to vegetable oil the prices

This is just an idea for newhaul to help wean him off diesel. he clearly knows how to change oil, I do not. I am completely against diesel engines, but he flatly refuses to stop using one so this is the best suggestion i have. Do you have a better one that will result in less emissions and less harmful particulates? It is also at least a talking point and a step toward doing something different which is better than nothing. The emissions from diesel especially without catalytic converters are harmful, using canola reduces this considerably as does adding ethanol to gas powered ones. This is a good enough reason and the real reason people actually do it, not to reduce co2. It is reported that using coconut oil for example is better for the engine but I have no experience.

would escalate and producers would start to use vast swaths of agricultural land, or rain forests, for the cultivation of fuel oil rather than food.

he said 20 gallons a year. I was hoping at $9 a gallon would encourage to reduce down to 10 gallons a year. How much land is that? At 160 gallons per acre, it is 0.1% of the land area in the US to produce 10 gallons a year for every citizen. We have more land for golf courses currently.

A larger and better contribution to conservation would be to not buy foods or fuel that is derived from the use palm oil. Read the food ingredients labels on the packets you have on your boat. Palm oil's prevalence in food stuffs is so big that I bet you have at least some examples on your own engine less boat.

I do not buy products with palm oil. I have a 1 liter of canola oil since march 2021 that is half full now, to lubricate my saw for cutting already dead trees to power my heater and a gram or two at a time to help start the fire. I am using < 1 liter of canola per year.

Furthermore you cannot just put veg oil in your fuel tank, a process of adding alcohol and removing glycerine is necessary to ensure reliability and longevity, a process that is

I just watched mythbusters pour veg oil right in a tank and it worked fine I dont think you have to do all this fancy stuff with glycerine but go ahead if it helps.

Originally Posted by newhaul

Oh forgot to say that most of that is in my furnace . it doesnt like biodiesel . ( dont know exactly why but wont run for diddly on the stuff. ) the Mitsubishi doesn't care . but both run off the same tank so long dead plants it is.

Something is wrong with your "furnace" its not difficult to build an efficient oil burner. It is better to burn wood that I take off "burn piles" that people would otherwise just burn for nothing.

Originally Posted by Baby tug

How much oil was used to make your vegetable oil ,what surprises me the most how many people buy into this poppycock probably don’t even own a boat . I call them liars and hypocrites driving a SUV and live in a house made out of cedar and lecture everybody else

The production of ethanol and oil has a net energy gain. Just as wind turbines cause emissions in their production, the net energy produced exceeds this. The ratio is not all that great but it is considered net positive vs burning the fossil oil. Further, they could produce the oil by burning some of the oil or using electric equipment but do not usually do this (yet) but this decision is outside of your direct control. I do not drive or ever own a car, and only make suggestions to people who are causing more emissions than me, so you need to tell al gore this, not me.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Bycrick

"The issue is consumption and the revolution of rising expectations. The rest of the world knows how we live."

Absolutely true. The problem though is that the people who have improved their lifestyle, even a little bit, still want more. And they’re unlikely to vote for schemes that tell them to cut back and go back to what they fought so hard to escape. Especially when those schemes are being driven by a bunch of rich, privileged foreigners who have a lifestyle beyond the worldwide many's wildest dreams.

Bringing them up to current first-world levels is impractical and taking away what they’ve got to avoid projected problems decades down the road is politically impossible.

Your post exemplifies the latest research on those who dismiss climate science. You do not like the solutions, so you reject the science. Just like those who claim that Covid is a hoax because they do not like wearing masks.

https://grist.org/politics/study-cha...limate-policy/

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by conchaway

This planet is WAY over the "carrying capacity" for people.

If everyone wants to live like 2-vehicle suburb-dwelling North-Americans, then yes, it's going to be over carrying capacity. If us North Americans can dial it back to European levels of consumption, the carrying capacity goes up. If efficiency continues to improve, there's some thoughtful movement towards sustainability, and the rate of population growth continues to decline... I'm not that worried yet about the planet's carrying capacity.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Idaho

Put a Soletta at the Earth-Sun L1 point.
... A space-faring civilization with the ability to tap the enormous resources of our solar system.

That would be cool, but we're not exactly a space-faring civilization yet. Our space-faring mainly consists of flinging aluminum bits into near-orbit... like a mobile home surrounded with a halo of beer cans.

[Idaho]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

That would be cool, but we're not exactly a space-faring civilization yet. Our space-faring mainly consists of flinging aluminum bits into near-orbit... like a mobile home surrounded with a halo of beer cans.

"You can't get there from here."

Basically, that is what you said. I think you are mistaken. Agreed it wouldn't be easy.

What if the sun-side of the Soletta had solar cells, and the Earth-side had energy beaming to the ground power grid.

Would 100s of terrawatts of free, green energy change your mind?

ITS GREEN!!! Greta would approve!

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

This is just an idea for newhaul to help wean him off diesel. he clearly knows how to change oil, I do not. I am completely against diesel engines, but he flatly refuses to stop using one so this is the best suggestion i have. Do you have a better one that will result in less emissions and less harmful particulates? It is also at least a talking point and a step toward doing something different which is better than nothing. The emissions from diesel especially without catalytic converters are harmful, using canola reduces this considerably as does adding ethanol to gas powered ones. This is a good enough reason and the real reason people actually do it, not to reduce co2. It is reported that using coconut oil for example is better for the engine but I have no experience.

he said 20 gallons a year. I was hoping at $9 a gallon would encourage to reduce down to 10 gallons a year. How much land is that? At 160 gallons per acre, it is 0.1% of the land area in the US to produce 10 gallons a year for every citizen. We have more land for golf courses currently.

I do not buy products with palm oil. I have a 1 liter of canola oil since march 2021 that is half full now, to lubricate my saw for cutting already dead trees to power my heater and a gram or two at a time to help start the fire. I am using < 1 liter of canola per year.

I just watched mythbusters pour veg oil right in a tank and it worked fine I dont think you have to do all this fancy stuff with glycerine but go ahead if it helps.

Something is wrong with your "furnace" its not difficult to build an efficient oil burner. It is better to burn wood that I take off "burn piles" that people would otherwise just burn for nothing.

The production of ethanol and oil has a net energy gain. Just as wind turbines cause emissions in their production, the net energy produced exceeds this. The ratio is not all that great but it is considered net positive vs burning the fossil oil. Further, they could produce the oil by burning some of the oil or using electric equipment but do not usually do this (yet) but this decision is outside of your direct control. I do not drive or ever own a car, and only make suggestions to people who are causing more emissions than me, so you need to tell al gore this, not me.

Just an FYI. My furnace is on my boat. I will not put a whatever homemade unit that burns a liquid fuel on a vessel that i live on. Just not safe to do.

My furnace as installed 5kw output and 12v

[AKA-None]

Originally Posted by jackdale

The population growth rate has declined from 2.1% in the 1960 to just over 1% today.



The issue is consumption and the revolution of rising expectations. The rest of the world knows how we live.

Ok so then rephrase this

We’re over carrying capacity for how we currently live in many places

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by newhaul

...Btw Michael Mann is not a climatologist either
What is your point .

Dr. Michael E. Mann is Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science at Penn State, with joint appointments in the Department of Geosciences and the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute (EESI). He is also director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center (ESSC).
➥ Michael E. Mann — Penn State Meteorology and Atmospheric Science
My point was, that your point, that fish are not animals mammals was pointless, and irrelevant.

[Bycrick]

I don’t "reject" the "science." I simply don’t care whether it’s right or wrong. What I reject is the zealots "change the world solutions." Change the entire economic system. Right. Overnight. Get people to cut back. Right. Overnight. Eliminate fossil fuels. Most of the world cooks with them. Eliminate plastics. And replace their functions with what?

I’ve already cut way back. When you get enough other people to do it, I’ll applaud. Until then your preaching to the choir, which isn’t enough people to change the world.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Bycrick

I don’t "reject" the "science." I simply don’t care whether it’s right or wrong. What I reject is the zealots "change the world solutions." Change the entire economic system. Right. Overnight. Get people to cut back. Right. Overnight. Eliminate fossil fuels. Most of the world cooks with them. Eliminate plastics. And replace their functions with what?

I’ve already cut way back. When you get enough other people to do it, I’ll applaud. Until then your preaching to the choir, which isn’t enough people to change the world.

quod erat demonstrandum

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

Ok so then rephrase this

We’re over carrying capacity for how we currently live in many places

That is true.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Dr. Michael E. Mann is Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science at Penn State, with joint appointments in the Department of Geosciences and the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute (EESI). He is also director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center (ESSC).
➥ Michael E. Mann — Penn State Meteorology and Atmospheric Science
My point was, that your point, that fish are not animals mammals was pointless, and irrelevant.

His PhD is in geology. But my point is you can be knowledgeable in subjects that are not your doctoral specialty .

As to my mails comment well you must have missed the post I was referring to and even quoted . Try reading that exchange again . It actually does make sense.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

Nice try, but quit dancing on the table and admit you were wrong. Your original statement was
I live about 50 miles south of Glacier National Park and have seen the continuing receding of the glaciers and the effect of such loss of cold water flow on the streams, river and lakes.
.

When a glacier is receding, it produces MORE cold water, not less. Period, end of sentence.

Then you follow it up with The further water flows downhill the more it warms. This is a statement like "The more fossil fuel you burn, the warmer the planet gets".

I suppose you never swam in snow melt, which will shrivel your gonads 50 miles from the snow pack it originated from. The argument is not whether the planet will get warm, it is HOW MUCH.

Glacier's water can be considered the headwaters of the entire continent. From Triple Divide Peak, a droplet can theoretically split three ways and eventually make it to the Pacific, Atlantic and Hudson Bay watersheds.

I have swam across Swift Current lake at Many Glacier Lodge located on the east side of the park abutting the Blackfeet Indian Reservation which is about 4 miles from the Grinnell Glacier into which the melt water flows. Reference the first image below of Swift Current. The Grinnell Glacier is in the background, a wonderful 10.6 mile round trip hike from the lodge. I have also attached a picture of the lodge in winter; note the entrance is almost covered by about 14 feet of snow, coming close to the balcony of the second floor.

I routinely swim in Lake McDonald at Apgar at west entrance of Glacier National Park. This lake is supplied by McDonald creek which initiates at Logan Pass just up the Going to the Sun Road. Reference two images from Apgar during winter, the one with the dock is the primary swimming beach and the one with the close up the colorful rocks is when the lake is iced over; the ice and the water are crystal clear, also taken from the Apgar beach.

I wade into Flathead Lake from which the waters of Glacier Park flow to launch the smallest of our three sailboats to celebrate my birthday at the beginning of May and the surface water temperature is typically about 44 F, wherein we are the first sailboat on the lake for the season. Seemingly the only one's crazy enough to get into the cool water that early in the season to push the boat from its trailer on the boat ramp. Present water temperature is a balmy 35.3 F, a good portion of the bays of the huge lake has frozen over in the last week.

Cool water is rather the norm for Montanans.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by newhaul

I stand corrected I should have specified mammals.
That eat plants .

ALL land based animals. WIthou plants, none of them will survive since all land based animals either use plants for food or rely on other animals that use plants for food.
If CO2 were to drop below 150ppm all land based plants would die and consequently so would all land bsed animals.