This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Just 85 days to go before COP 26

I am sort of excited , its like seeing what arrives at the Rainhill trials all over again (ok I don't time travel) , and we await the big government on heating , and the EV systems are still getting ironed out . I hope i have outlined in previous posts , why we need large scale efficiencies, particularly as we venture to green hydrogen new places , so is there anything new and exciting arriving yet … Well it depends where your start is , if you know who Rachel Carson is and her book silent spring , then your start is real ecology thinking , and your not tub thumping the bath asking for drill baby drill , the pollution problems are real , and we are finding stuff out about just how delicate and interrelated, the organic chemistry of life , really is , so I guess i am with the eco thinkers on pollution , if your an economic thinker and worried about not having a job , then you believe high tech will get us of the problem of impairment of the natural life systems of the planet , mmm which unfortunately i can only argue as such views being deluded , natural habitat loss , is just that, loss and all the fruit cakes who wanted sodium hydroxide trees removing CO2 , I think we are going to argue that . CCS has problems , both technically and in terms of trajectory , and even though George Monbiot has advocated nuclear , I dont really agree , and he hasnt explained the trajectory very well at all , but maybe hes hoping Fusion reactors work (which i dont think they do) , so its all getting a bit exciting in the tin foil hat and expensed wonk stakes , in technology choice awards , some bits can be nailed down but they are to do with infrastructure , and some quite massive changes can be achieved , with redesigning some aspects considering how the EV will work. The liquid fuels believers so called SAF fuels have appeared , and an interesting idea on electrifying HGVs by fitting them with a pantograph , to draw from an overhead line on the motorway , still a problem in HGV weight , and i think Sweden has looked at a centre rail in the road , mmm well problem there is stuff , roadkill getting washed into your concealed live conductor ,duct , still driving along and the kids saying , whats that smell as another bird or mammal is cooking on the centre again , had a biref fun moment . 

Anyhow been as I have designed some eco tech ,(starts rubbing hands feverishly) were reading for the wonk and tin foil hat market makers , the rules are you produce some (not necessarily perfect engineering figures , no more of this Hydrogen gas turbine hopey change thing ) , seems fair enough as alot of tax payers money will be going on some aspects of eco thinking , some are already self sustaining , for transport as LNG is doing well as a transport fuel .

Not happy with some of things the so called cop 26 climate ambassador has been saying so far , not the COP 26 panel (i am hard pushed to find any member truly knowledgeable on natural life system dynmaics and chemistry ) , but as they say only 85  days to go , and who knows anyhting could happen ? 

      

Parents
  • Unfortunately COP26 will be just as pointless as the previous efforts. What did the Paris agreement actually say? Business as usual for the developing world including India and China and demands for lots of money from the developed world. James Hansen, the father of climate change, saw through it immediately.

    “It’s a fraud really, a fake,” he says, rubbing his head. “It’s just incorrect for them to say: ‘We’ll have a 2C warming target and then try to do a little better every five years.’ It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud

    There is no change for COP26. Thousands (Tens of Thousands??) will fly into Glasgow for a big party. The developing nations and the climate scientists will demand yet more money, which may be pledged but won’t be forthcoming. Nothing will actually be committed to.

    There are two problems:

    1) To be successful, as with any project plan, there needs to be a plan with timescales, costs and benefits. 

    The time scales have been simply made up. There is no actual science behind 1.5°C or 2.0°C. There are some pseudo-scientific models used to predict temperature rise with CO2 levels that are drifting further away from reality as they move away from their calibration period (which happened to be during a fairly rapid ~1°C rise between 1975 and 2000).

    The costs in monetary and resource terms are completely ignored.

    Benefits???

    2) The focus is on the wrong subject. If we ignore CO2 as irrelevant and concentrate on actual pollution, reducing our consumption of finite resources and better management of our lands and oceans we might stand a chance.

    This is taken from the World Climate Change Organisation.

     

    2de1811f3544835b9cdd350d8bfdd548-original-reduce.jpg
Reply
  • Unfortunately COP26 will be just as pointless as the previous efforts. What did the Paris agreement actually say? Business as usual for the developing world including India and China and demands for lots of money from the developed world. James Hansen, the father of climate change, saw through it immediately.

    “It’s a fraud really, a fake,” he says, rubbing his head. “It’s just incorrect for them to say: ‘We’ll have a 2C warming target and then try to do a little better every five years.’ It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud

    There is no change for COP26. Thousands (Tens of Thousands??) will fly into Glasgow for a big party. The developing nations and the climate scientists will demand yet more money, which may be pledged but won’t be forthcoming. Nothing will actually be committed to.

    There are two problems:

    1) To be successful, as with any project plan, there needs to be a plan with timescales, costs and benefits. 

    The time scales have been simply made up. There is no actual science behind 1.5°C or 2.0°C. There are some pseudo-scientific models used to predict temperature rise with CO2 levels that are drifting further away from reality as they move away from their calibration period (which happened to be during a fairly rapid ~1°C rise between 1975 and 2000).

    The costs in monetary and resource terms are completely ignored.

    Benefits???

    2) The focus is on the wrong subject. If we ignore CO2 as irrelevant and concentrate on actual pollution, reducing our consumption of finite resources and better management of our lands and oceans we might stand a chance.

    This is taken from the World Climate Change Organisation.

     

    2de1811f3544835b9cdd350d8bfdd548-original-reduce.jpg
Children
No Data