Reply to: More evidence of global warming.

[EternalOptimist]

can someone give me a hand with this goalpost please ? it's getting heavy

-pj

[pjclarke]

RealClimate: The lag between temperature and CO2. (Gore’s got it right.)
CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?
Climate myths: Ice cores show CO2 increases lag behind temperature rises, disproving the link to global warming - environment - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist
The "Temp Leads Carbon" Crock: Updated - YouTube

[EternalOptimist]

Principally, yes. blah blah blah blah
blahblah
....
...

er..can some one get me down off this petard please ?

blah blah blah
....

[pjclarke]

must be a bit of out-gassing going on from the oceans

Principally, yes. The glacial/interglacial cycles are caused by peturbations in Earth's orbit , but these are insufficent on their own to explain the change in temperatures. So in a warming phase the initial rise in temperatures, caused by the change in insolation from by the orbital shift, causes the release of CO2 from the oceans mainly, which enhances the greenhouse effect, which causes more CO2 which gives more warmth and so on until the orbital cycle goes into a cooling phase and the carbon gets sequestered back into its long term stores.

This all happens gradually over millenia; on this time scale the CO2 is a feedback rather than a forcing. But what happens when you short-circuit the natural cycle, dig up the carbon and release Gigatonnes of it into the atmosphere over a few decades, that we're about to discover ....

[EternalOptimist]

pj's too


hahahahahahahha
hooothoot hoot

co2 follows temperature.

must be a bit of out-gassing going on from the oceans . eh?

[EternalOptimist]

nice graphs ir35fanclub



they clearly show that the co2 concentrations come after the temperature spikes.

i.e. your own data shows that warming cause co2, and not the other way around

[EternalOptimist]

You make an interesting point about the creationists (I am not one btw) ir35fanclub. They do indeed claim that evolution is an unproven theory and they are right.
How do you falsify the theory of evolution ? it's damned hard to think of an experiment that you could run that would falsify the theory.
The same with man made global warming. The true believers say that if temperatures stabilise for 15 years, the models are proven wrong. When the temperatures do , indeed, flat line for 16 years they say, no wait.. we meant 20 years. My guess is that they will learn their lesson and that they will stop making statements like this, pretty soon it will be, by the year 2100...........

as far as your efficiency hobby horse is concerned, good luck. There is a great need for good ideas and innovation and I wish you well.
Having said that, you need to pay attention to what is happening to energy prices in other countries.
In the USA they are falling fast as the country embraces new gas resources, In Germany they are rising fast as the country embraces a supersized green deal.

I have no idea which direction this country will take, but we would be mad not to follow the American lead. in my humble opinion

[pjclarke]

WHS. We have a record of atmospheric CO2 concentrations trapped in ice cores going back around 800K years, during that time it oscillated in a band from around 180-300 ppm as ice ages came and went.

Then we came along....

[IR35FanClub]

I'm interested how you know something like that without a source to tell you. Are you an immortal with a 6th sense of measuring CO2 and a very good memory?

Actually I'll be more serious... this is from one of the favoured sketpic sites so must be more accurate than one from a scientific site ...

Comparing CO2 in warm and cold periods in geologic history | Watts Up With That?

Since I meant in the last 40,000 years since we walked out of East Africa. I wasn't there to see it - so it may just be scientists to making it up to resolve racial tensions by saying we all have a common ancester. But I've been there and it gives you a feeling that you are home. Especially when you go to the Rift Valley.

Current as measured accurately levels are about to go ove 400ppm. CO2 Now | CO2 Home.

So we've gone from oscilating around 200-300ppm on hundreds of thousand year cycles, to a rapid increase to 400ppm.

That is undisputedly caused by burning stuff. They have wored out how much we have burned and what it would do to the atmospheric levels. And why it's not all still in the air.

So what we can all agree to argue on - is what is the effect of this. Did it cause the temperature rise? Well yes. Most likely after they've taken away all the other causes. Will this cause more extreme weather events, and economic losses. Most Probably. But I'll agree this is where evidence gets flaky as we are trying to predict the future based on past evidence. But as models get better, and older models have been show to be too optimistic compared to what has happened, you have to realise the cautions of the IPCC mean things could be worse than current consensus allows them to publish.

But as I've given arging around climate change, I'll take the arguing about how much should you spend to save money and how do you quantify the future savings. That's what , as someone who likes maths and technology I seem to be most suited to. So am probably heading out of IT into energy services so people don't get conned by companies selling any old tat as something that can save money.

[IR35FanClub]

I'm interested how you know something like that without a source to tell you. Are you an immortal with a 6th sense of measuring CO2 and a very good memory?

At last - someone has realised I am DOG. My nose is very sensitive to CO2 Levels. I was was born when man was still swinging around in the trees.

[IR35FanClub]

Sounds like you'll be spending a fortune on a scheme that will never pay back.

Another alternative would be to burn pound notes in your stove.

Exactly - but I don't care. What is the payback on a 50" Plasma? Or Upgrading a Subaru Imprezza to Rally spec? Some people spend money on stuff that never has any sort of payback. Mine might... By my reckoning I might save money in the long run (on the heat storage system - not the automation system). But If I don't - I'll still be able to get the house heated if there's a gas shortage one winter. I'm stuffed if the electric goes as well. Although a genny hired from HSS would sort me out. Either that or by the time I get on to it - I might be able to tap into a used prius for a few Kw of standby power. I know most people aren't interesting in tinkering with electronics systems, but then they don't work in IT either.

[BlasterBates]

Posted by IR35FanClub...
LOL....etc

Sounds like you'll be spending a fortune on a scheme that will never pay back.

Another alternative would be to burn pound notes in your stove.

[d000hg]

What a pile of post-modernist crap.

But you ARE a post-modernist.

[d000hg]

LOL. I'm staying out of this one. I don't need any blogs or opinions to tell me one fact. CO2 is higher than its ever been since the evolution of modern man

I'm interested how you know something like that without a source to tell you. Are you an immortal with a 6th sense of measuring CO2 and a very good memory?

[IR35FanClub]

LOL. I'm staying out of this one. I don't need any blogs or opinions to tell me one fact. CO2 is higher than its ever been since the evolution of modern man, [edit - I hope BB and EO are not creationists or we'll be told evolution is only a disputed theory and never hear the end of it, LOL] and that is not normal. Whatever you decide to tell yourself after that is your own opinion. But lets face it, if the oil companies can sponsor some contrarian blogs and people like EO and BB keep repeating it - it's best not to argue with them. It just provides more airtime to the conspiracy theorists.

You are better off spending your time writing a business plan on how to make money from the opportunities provided by the global consensus amongst governments that they need to do something. That's what I'm doing at the mo. Well not on the plan stage yet, just doing the research on competitors and looking at opportunities. The retrofit industry is going to be worth billions over the next few years - and this is nothing to do with climate change - it based solely on the efficiency improvement MUST pay for themselves or they won't get funding. Check out the Green Deal. So spending money to save money is a green light in my book = [pardon the pun]. I gave up arguing about climate change about 3 years ago.

My own observation are there are 3 types of people who make efficiency improvements -

1) Those that do it for altruistic reasons because they understand the science and the risk of not doing anything. These people are likely to consider compositing toilets, growing their own food and cutting car use as much as possible. Buy clothes from charity shops and take holidays by using the train.
2) People who do it to save money as it makes economic sense. These are people like my dad, who has been looking at PV because the rate of return on FiT is better than his savings account. He's bought a 1.6TDi golf to replace the Discovery. Etc.
3) People who like gadgets and eco bling - regardless of the cost. This is me. I'm putting in a whole house automation system that can turn of the lights from my arm chair and and fire up the heating from my phone before I get home, or turn it off when I leave the house and switch on the burglar alarm. The cost of the system can't be justified on a payback basis - as I could get up and turn off the lights at the switch. But that isn't a challenge.

In future I'm going to try to build an inter-seasonal heat store in my garden (well some final year MSc/PHD student is - with me sponsoring the costs of equipment). Thikn of a large solar thermal system with a heatpump burying the heat down a borehole, which can then be reversed in winter. Yes some heat will escape - but it will lift the surrounding ground temps enough to get a much better heating efficiency from the heat pump during the winter. I see this as the future of home heating - using the summer time sun stored up to heat your home in winter. Just as some people spend thousands on customising a car, or building a home theatre, this is going to be my project. I could save somewhere around £1,000 a year at current prices. The first thing though is to super-insulate the house to get an idea of heating requirements. The more of that I do now, the less heat I'll have to store - and with borehole costing about £1000/kw to install - it could save £10-20k on the borehole. What I'm trying to do is become independent of energy prices as much as possible...

Which brings me on to - forget climate change. The real reason to drive energy efficiency is resource usage/depletion. Forget those climate graphs... here's the one you need to see.... this is unfettered, objective and one most people can relate to as they pay bills every month.

The Changing Costs of Utility Prices in the UK

Have a play and you can overlay gas and electric. Who thinks those graphs are going back down, either soon, some time in the distant future, or more likely - NEVER! So system may have a payback of 10 years now, but by year 5 that payback might only be 6 years at the energy price has risen again and again.

Or some raw data staticstics...
Energy price statistics - Department of Energy and Climate Change

So forget about trying to prove or disprove whether we need to act on climate change. We definitely can save money now and in future by doing stuff.

PS The future of home heating is electric - not burning stuff in a boiler - as we're running out of cheap stuff to burn. Oil gas and coal. It's not running out - but it is getting to expensive. Solar PV is about 18 months away from the price point where it's life time costs are comparable to grid electric. That's a game changer. Shame it doesn't work all year round though.

I do think the gov got some stuff wrong. They shouldn't have put PV on houses - it should have gone on offices and factories where it can get used in the day time.