VehiclesFashionRecipesBlogsHuntTravelsSportFunHandmadeITEducation
Mini-Games
x

x
zakruti.com » Blogs and People » Philip DeFranco
The Invisible NOW Problem And How Different Countries Are Fighting It.

The Invisible NOW Problem And How Different Countries Are Fighting It.

FBTwitterReddit

video description

Rating: 4.0; Vote: 1
The Invisible NOW Problem And How Different Countries Are Fighting It. John Coffey: Since 1880, which is the measure most people use, on average the CO2 level has gone up less than 1 part per million per year and the temperature has gone up less than 1/100th of a degree celsius per year. You could argue that since about 1970 things have accelerated a little, but a little less than double. The temperature went up on average of 0. 016 degrees celsius pear year. It is going take a very long time to reach the five degrees needed to melt the polar ice caps, which are according to every source going to take 5, 000 years to melt. Meanwhile we will be out of most fossil fuels by the year 2100 and coal will be gone by the 2150. The only thing that will save us from running out of energy will be nuclear fusion, which fortunately is not that far off. Three years ago I wrote this: The amount of carbon on planet Earth by definition remains pretty much the same. Man has been burning fossil fuels, which puts carbon into the atmosphere. Where did the carbon in the fossil fuels come from? It mostly came from plants and bacteria that got buried underground due to geological processes. Over millions of years natural processes turned the plants and bacteria into fossil fuels. Where did the plants and bacteria get their carbon from? They got it from the atmosphere. The carbon that we are now putting into the atmosphere originally came from the atmosphere. To better understand this, we have to understand the complete history of atmospheric carbon dioxide on planet Earth. The original earth atmosphere was an amazing 43% carbon dioxide compared with the roughly. 04% that we have now. That original atmosphere had so much pressure that it could crush a man flat. About 2. 5 billion years ago, cyanobacteria began using photosynthesis to convert carbon dioxide into free oxygen, which lead to the creation of our oxygen rich third atmosphere 2. 3 billion years ago. At that time the carbon dioxide levels were about 7, 000 parts per million, but it went into a somewhat steady but uneven decline because geological processes would sequester carbon underground. The decline was uneven because as part of the carbon dioxide cycle, sometimes geological processes like volcanoes would cause massive amounts of carbon dioxide to be released back into the atmosphere. Thirty million years ago during the Oligocene Epoch, the average temperature of the earth was about 7 degrees Celsius warmer than it is now. There was no ice on the poles, but the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was in rapid decline during this epoch. About 23 million years ago, at the beginning of the Neogene period, ice began to form on the poles. About ten million years ago, a series of intermittent ice ages began that continue to this day. I found one source that said that we are still technically in an ice age because we still have ice at the poles. These ice ages helped create human evolution. The ice ages caused Africa to dry up which lead to some deforestation. This forced some arboreal (tree dwelling) apes to venture onto land. About 7 million years ago, the first apes that could comfortably walk upright appeared. They had evolved a new type of pelvis that allowed upright locomotion, which is about three times more efficient when trying to cross land. The first tool making ape that resembled modern humans, Homo habilis, arose 2. 5 million years ago. It would be soon followed by Homo erectus, and then about 200, 000 years ago, modern humans, Homo sapiens would arise. However, Homo sapiens almost died out. About 50, 000 years ago an ice age in Europe had caused Africa to almost completely dry up. The total human population had dropped to 7, 000 individuals living on the southern coast of Africa. During this period humans learned how to fish, make new tools, and create permanent dwellings. When the ice age abated, these humans with their new tools spread out to rest of the world at a pace of about a mile per year. This was the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic (Late Stone Age) period. More ice ages would follow, and during each ice age human population would decline. It is no coincidence that all of human civilization (i. e. agriculture, use of metals) would arise during a brief warm period between two ice ages starting about 10, 000 years ago. I have heard that no matter what we do, we will enter a new ice age in about 10, 000 years from now, but I have also heard speculation that the next ice age will be delayed by global warming. This actually should be our goal, since humans have always declined during the ice ages and always prospered during the intermittent warm periods. During the geological time period of the earth, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been on an uneven decline and mostly disappeared. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is necessary for plant growth, and I have read that we were running dangerously low on atmospheric carbon dioxide, about 00. 02%, before mankind at least temporarily reversed the trend. I just read a wikipedia article that said that atmospheric carbon dioxide will eventually get so low that all plants and animals will die off. What mankind has done is put carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere that was previously there, thus possibly delaying the next ice age. Currently the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is about 00. 04%. Carbon dioxide by itself cannot cause significant global warming. There are diminished returns. Carbon dioxide has to double again to produce the same effect as the last doubling. The effect is not linear but logarithmic. What the alarmists are worried about, and they could be correct, is positive feedback. The warming of the earth causes more water vapor to enter the atmosphere, and water vapor is a much stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, thus causing more warming. If this were true, however, the last warming period around the year 2000 should caused a continuous positive feedback, a runaway greenhouse, which didn't happen. Instead temperatures went into a major decline and hit a really big low point in the year 2007. The skeptics believe that increased cloud cover reflects sunlight back into space thus causing a negative feedback. The skeptics are not global warming deniers, which is a pejorative phrase used by global warming theorists to make the skeptics sound like holocaust deniers. These skeptics actually believe in global warming. At least, the legitimate skeptical scientists do. They just think that global warming is happening at a rate slower than predicted by the theorists. I can point you to an article that shows that the positive feedback models have been contradicted by the actual temperature data, which in reality has been closer to the negative feedback models. The worst case scenario is that the polar ice caps will melt. If that happens we will lose some coastlines and all of Florida due to sea level rise. However, according to what I just read, it will take 5, 000 years for the polar ice caps to melt. In other words, these are processes that take a very long time to happen. In this century we are only looking at modest temperature increases. In the meantime, humans are very adaptable. We are only five to ten years away from creating the first workable prototypes of nuclear fusion. It might take 25 years for this to be practical, but at that point if we wanted to get rid of fossil fuels altogether, we could. I think that we will also see advances in solar power, which is already happening, and battery technology to store the energy created by solar. In other words, we have it within our means to avoid any possible disasters that might be coming. -- Best wishes, John Coffey
Date: 2019-11-01

Comments and reviews: 9


Hey Phil, I've been a fan for over a decade and love that you're doing these deep dives. I'm a huge supporter of renewable energy, and really try to reduce my carbon footprint where I can. However, there's been a lot of craziness in our local news over building a hydro electric damn in Labrador around First Nations land. I live in Newfoundland, the island next to Labrador which is home to many First Nations people and our province (ever do creatively named) Newfoundland & Labrador the provincial government is based out of Newfoundlan and has basically gone grossly over budget for this project in Labrador with a public investigation currently on-going. Throughout this investigation, evidence of previous studies show that when this damn comes to fruition, it's highly likely the toxin methylmercury will seep into the land and can cause massive damage to the wildlife, as well as generations to come. There's the possibility of severe effects on the people, as well as their future children where this toxin will stay in your system and can cause fetal deformities. There have been many protests. and people getting hauled away from those protests by police. I would honestly love to see another deep dive on this topic in the future. Although the government and CEO of Nalcor at the time thought the benefits of becoming a producer of renewable energy to other Candian provinces, it's concerning that they may have overlooked the very real risk of health concerns to those First Nations people caught up in this mess.
reply

Its not easy for everyone to make the changes necessary to help the fight against global warming and climate change. Not everyone has the time or resources to carpool, walk places, upgrade to a more fuel efficient vehicle, buy products with less plastic, etc. And some people just dont want to give up the convenience. However, one thing we can all do is inform ourselves about who is running for election and vote for those who care about global warming and climate change and want to make laws, regulations, incentives, etc for cleaner renewable energy. It wont fix the issue overnight or fix everything, but it will be a step in the right direction. I dont know if everyones electricity provider offers the option to pay a certain amount a month for access to renewable energy, or to contribute to building and investing in it, but if it is possible and/or available that is a great option as well because as the electric companies come to see a higher demand, it will drive them to change since they will obviously care about making profits. I live in Texas and my electricity provider has a green plan, as well as an add on that costs 10 a month to purchase renewable energy to power my home. Back when the electricity contract was up for renewal they didnt have the green plan yet, just a green charge so that is what I opted for, so change ARE being made. I definitely plan on looking into and getting the green plan when the current contract is up though.
reply

This world is going down the toilet in a few years. All this won't matter. I've seen those wind mills where I used to live years ago. Their are some windy areas in Texas. You'd be surprised. But, it's to late The world has been completely changed forever. And, God has his own plan. Which most of us are not a part of. You see his intention for the Earth was not for us to destroy it by ravaging it's natural resources like we have been doing. Because of our greed. He intended for all of us to live in peace and harmony in a paradise with others. But, most people are not worthy. Because, their violent. And have natural bad intentions all the time. Either, greed, lust, violence, indifference, pride, haughtiness which is similar to pride and in some extreme cases bloodlust if your a serial killer or Dictator. They have an air of haughtiness. That's why they kill people. Other peoples lives are not important to them. They believe themseves to be better than other people. And others spread rumors destroy your reputation. Attack you physically. Or demean you. That's where bullys come into play. They kill you inside or out. That's why the End has to come these people have to be destroyed. Others rape people and mutilate them. All these people have to be eliminated. They cannot live with peaceful people. They would destroy them. Neither here nor in in Heaven.
reply

Also the ice shelfs have grown bigger than they were for the past few decades and we now have a temperature lower than we did during the ice age, so yeah, global warning. I dont think anyone denies climate change, but there is little evidence that it is really cause by man and it is only a biased assumption that its a bad thing. The climate moves in cycles and has been doing so as long as we can measure, not sure that its cause for alarm. And since it cant be exactly linked to human activity, theres no reason to think that the temperature will constantly increase. Were still in an ice age after all, Im sure well be fine. Isnt the world supposed to be destroyed already according to climate alarmists a decade ago? Sorry if I dont believe alarmists today who cant back up their claims with solid science. Not that Im against renewable energy, Im all for going clean energy. But its probably not going to work everywhere equally. Some places dont have natural resources enough to be self-sufficient and need gas to run the economy smoothly. If we were Iceland, wed be set, but America is much bigger and more diverse in people and climates. I refuse to give up my freedom and rely on other people, more less the government, to support me.
reply

what's interesting about texas, is that it's been quick - in most major cities - to put in electric car charging stations in places like movie theaters, convention centers, malls, and other places where people tend to spend upwards of an hour. despite the rise in electric friendly areas, texas does not allow for tesla vehicles to be purchases at a dealership within the state. and yet there are tens of thousands of teslas driving around across the state. there is a desire by the public for electric vehicles, and more sustainable energy sources, but that HUGE presence of oil keeps oil companies in control of the state's government. sadly, it's been a game of tug-of-war in getting approval and more funding for charging areas, and things such as solar panels to be used within major cities for public buildings (like schools, for example, or other government buildings. i think that the powerlines could be a huge help to getting the wind into the more populace areas of the state, but i wish it were through better means. powerlines are time consuming to put up, and expensive to maintain. especially in areas in the western region of the state.
reply

There's too much money and corruption out there and until that's sorted we're going to continue battling environmental issues because the money is more important to the powers that be. Even if it was the last our of the last day of the world, someone would be out there trying to make a profit. We're banging our heads against walls having these discussions, we need to solve this from more than one angle. One thing that always annoys me when people talk about this stuff is countries like China with massive populations and manufacturing regions are left out. Most of the stuff in the world comes out of China and do you think they have the same environmental policies we have? We increase costs and apply new policies to business out here to be cleaner, all that does is force them to relocate to China where they don't have that so they can keep making their money. We need to step back and look at the whole picture here to solve this problem, no one talks about it.
reply

Yes, but we can't just rely on solar or wind power. The way to get to 100% renewable energy is through nuclear fission energy. Fission power has been refined for decades now, and new alternatives to plutonium are being developed. Look, with solar and wind, the capacity is at the mercy of the weather. If the weather is bad the output is bad, that's why we have power plants. Sure, you can build giant batteries to store the energy, but for that, you need a LOT of lithium, more lithium than you'd need uranium. Nuclear power is already a tried and trusted energy source, no need to spend millions in R&D for a new battery. Now, for countries that are already 100% renewable, the bigger nations do it through hydro, while the small nations use lots of solar and wind. The only reason they can do this is because their populations are low. A big country like the US can't rely solely on hyrdo, wind and solar. WE NEED NUCLEAR.
reply

As a note about Brazil's energy grid and expenses, do bear in mind, as Phil has covered before, that a large part of the expenses and environmental disasters caused by the hydropower grid in Brazil were and still are driven by corruption and poor engineering. Itaipu did not just take 18 years to build because it was tough, it was also kept mostly shut down for a majority of that time period and construction was extended as long as possible as it was a major source of corruption money (over-priced and unnecessarily slow civil construction jobs are the primary method of corruption in Brazil. Taking all of that into consideration, it is not unreasonable to imagine that IF the same availability of natural resources was to be located in places with a more stable and transparent government (such as the USA, the financial and environmental costs would be vastly diminished.
reply

Climate Change is BS. If the Earth is going to turn into a giant fireball then it was going to happen even if we never existed. The Earth has gone through multiple cycles of burning and freezing before we existed. That doesn't mean I'm against renewable energy, I just have different reasons for liking it. I respect Mother Earth and try to keep her clean. Oil spills happen too frequently and renewable sources tend to be cheaper in the long run. I have solar panels on my house that produce more energy then I consume. My monthly bill from the gas and electric company is about 10 (i use space heaters that run on electricity. I like renewable sources because they are a cheaper and smarter choice. Climate Change is just a way for people to prey on idiots. The Earth's climate has been in flux for billions of years and there's nothing we can do to stop it
reply
Add a review, comment






Other channel videos