Speaker: There's a word for that ...
100 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
wasn't Project Aqua going to be a dam on the Lower Waitaki not anywhere near the Cook Strait cable......
The Inter-island HVDC link of which the Cook Strait cable is part runs from Benmore Dam to Haywards in the Hutt Valley. It transmits power at higher efficiency than conventional AC cables, especially on the underwater bit.
My point is that losses from medium distance (<1000km) power transmission are not significant, so the argument that only resources close to large power consumers should be exploited isn't valid. (On energy grounds that is. There is obviously a cost to building transmission lines, but basically it's too late for us to scrimp on the work we need to do to get to 100% renewable energy).
-
"You missed out that baby boomers had free university education....
Bastards."Actually, it was never free. I went to the University of Canterbury for 4 terms, and then I had to quit. I couldnt afford the textbooks any more, and I couldnt afford the living expenses or other fees (and women were especially limited in the holiday jobs they could get.) So, I quit, and after becoming a good fishnchip cook and a postie, migrated to the Coast as a senior postie, and -well, I dont think I was cut out to be a lawyer or an academic anyway, so small loss to those tribes.
But I do get annoyed by "babyboomers had it sooo sweet" type statements. Nah mate, we didnt-
-
Back OnT- oceanic wave power. Some very interesting developements taking place in the Orkneys right now (check out BBC news) - and we have some equivalent areas-
-
I don’t know how these (mainly) old sods can sleep in their bed knowing that such irrational, ignorant ramblings serve to feed the greatest barrier to getting on and finding a solution to our problems. I wondered whether they had grandchildren… but I realise now that they do. Their delusions have extended to the point where their selfishness and desire to protect some imaginary god-given right to a motor car and a filament light bulb has overridden their love for their children.
In Copenhagen a lot of rich world, white, same old dominating pricks (culturally us) who have shat all over the planet for the past 200 years are proposing a "solution" to climate change. We are delusional on a societal scale if we think we can convince the world of an honest intent to save the planet, when all they have to do is look at our proposed solution.
Us lot have a solution called Cap and Trade, as in you cap emissions and then buy allowances on our markets that give you access to air. It is a solution designed to protect right of consumer societies to consume. It is a solution that if implemented would garner us advantage over the poor world. It is abject arrogance.
This is currently the largest barrier to progress, not the skeptics.
-
Ur "abject arrogance"? It's extremely arrogant, and it's at an abject level of policy-making but-
humans have ALWAYS trashed their environments: it's part of us as a species. How do we change minds? I rather suspect that *this* is the essential factor (and it's been hinted at all through this thread.) How do we change an exploitative dominance-prone xenophobic not-fully-rational homonim- with a severely limited life span - into
something else?
Ah right. Evolution will continue and I, for one, welcome our cockroach
overlords- -
That would be surprising. How much energy does it take to produce a wind turbine?
I was thinking of this article, which talks about lifetime CO2, rather than lifetime energy, which is different.
"These studies have shown a large variation in the expected CO2 payback periods from a few months in good locations to situations where they never pay back, in poor locations," the report says.
Which is of course still interesting and relevant.
-
Thanks George- wasn't meaning to be snarky.
Siting is critical, and altitude also a big part of that. Most cities- and the council we come under is no exception, even though we live in the country- don't want 20m towers all over the place, often for good reasons.
Generally NZ has 'good' winds, but we suffer from too much (for many small-scale/cheapo generators) as well as the general problem of intermittant wind-flows. Despite various 'feathering' techniques, 4 I know of were blown to bits in Canterbury the summer we looked into it first (1998- a big el niño year, IIRC).
I'm still interested... but as we're not on-the-grid it's very much a non-standard situation. -
Thanks George- wasn't meaning to be snarky.
No problems, it wasn't taken that way!
Micro-wind can be very worthwhile, when used appropriately. But giving every suburban home owner large amounts of money in the form of subsidies, rebates, or other instruments would be a waste of time.
-
Interesting fact of the day: a hairdryer powered by coal electricity delivers the same heat punch from incurred CO2 as the heat output of two fully loaded 747s at takeoff.
-
People with hair destroy the environment. I've been saying that for YEARS.
-
And those of us with the right amount of body hair should be able to have a carbon credit due to the less energy required for heating.
-
Okay, thanks to those that posted links specific to the questions I asked. Some fascinating stuff.
Thanks Andrew C for the link to the Willis Eschenbach blog, with all the bollocks about the Darwin temperature records. What a nutter. I skimmed through some of the comments, and was slightly appalled to see that the vast majority of his readers seem to agree wholeheartedly. There I go, being surprised at idiocy again, I've got to stop that.
I know it's a pure troll, but I couldn't stop myself posting the following in his comments:
"So, you guys all know better than thousands of actual scientists? Global warming is actually not happening?
So...
Why are all those glaciers melting?
Why have the sea levels risen?
What has happened to the billions of tons of CO2 that HAS been pumped into the atmosphere by human activities?
Would you dispute the science that shows CO2 has a warming effect in the atmosphere?
Would you dispute that there is now significantly more CO2 in the atmosphere than prior to the industrial revolution?
So... according to you denial types, somehow, maybe by magic, the CO2 that humans put into the atmosphere doesn't add any additional warming.
Well, that's okay then. Lets all just assume everything is ok, and not take any action.
Brilliant. I feel much better with you geniuses around."I know, it's a bit juvenile, and very probably a complete waste of time, but I couldn't resist.
-
How do we change an exploitative dominance-prone xenophobic not-fully-rational homonim- with a severely limited life span - into
something else?
Or accept that this human nature thing is actually human nature and work with it to save the planet.
Perhaps we could tax rich people more than poor people. Taxing consumption not emission.
A radical departure from our ETS agenda of a worldwide flat tax, which apparently all Greens know is the only totally fair way forward.
-
(Warning: contains hazardous levels of Jim Hopkins)
-
Kyle: check the costs and the necessary distance from the house for a worthwhile sized windmill.
Cheers for that, interesting. Solar water heating it is.
Actually, it was never free. I went to the University of Canterbury for 4 terms, and then I had to quit. I couldnt afford the textbooks any more, and I couldnt afford the living expenses or other fees (and women were especially limited in the holiday jobs they could get.)
Enrolling in a university in New Zealand was essentially free (some universities had administration fees).
Students these days pay all of the above, plus $4 - $10K more, plus they are less likely to find work these days, plus there is less living support than there was 30 years ago. It's a classic case of one generation taking something and then charging the next generation for it through the nose.
-
I despair.
That doesn't even have a topic. If he's going to be foolishly wrong, can he at least be it about one thing at once, rather than six unconnected rambles?
-
Actually, there already is a Crafarms of both the above...
Filmed in New Zealand, too. Possibly the only film starring both Bruno Lawrence and John Ratzenberger.
-
That doesn't even have a topic. If he's going to be foolishly wrong, can he at least be it about one thing at once, rather than six unconnected rambles?
Oh, he has a topic all right. It's that the fake threat of global warming is damaging local retailers this Christmas not the, you know, recession, while those dodgy climate scientists in East Anglia are getting off lightly compared to Tiger Woods. Does any of this make sense? Of course not.
The first time I've ever got to the end of a Hopkins column. And the last, I expect.
-
It's that the fake threat of global warming is damaging local retailers this Christmas not the, you know, recession, while those dodgy climate scientists in East Anglia are getting off lightly compared to Tiger Woods. Does any of this make sense? Of course not.
And the New Zealand cricket team, and Pakistan's catching woes, and then a poem. I'm still on six topics.
-
Not sure what you mean by "less living support than there was 30 * years ago" Kyle.
In my case the only "living support" was what my widowed mother - with 5 kids still at home to support and none of the benefits available today- could provide.
*nearly 45 years ago actually. -
Well 45 years is two generations.
30 years ago you could get a bursary which was almost enough to live on. Only about a third of current students get an equivalent now. The comparison between those who changed the rules in the late 80s and 90s (many of whom got qualifications in the 70s and 80s funded by the taxpayer), and the situation that they put the next generation in, all the while telling that generation that tertiary education was vital... is instructive.
-
Thanks for the clarification Kyle. I wasnt aware of the bursary - and yes, now your comments make good sense.
-
I'm not surprised Australian politics steers away from sustainability. Most of their economy is founded on mining.
I would expect that people, who have to deal with environmental issues for economic reasons would be quiete keen on limiting the impact these activities have.
-
Just been reading the reader comments on a Stuff story about Copenhagen, here:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3150804/New-Zealand-gets-climate-fossil-awardAmongst the intelligent discourse about the article (something like 95% of it "authoritatively" debunking climate change), is this comment:
"Claudio #160 10:37 am Dec 11 2009
It's quite impossible to have carbon emissions here in Welly, with winds around 60 km/h the whole year, I would bet that there is no carbon emissions here."Ok, now I officially despair...
-
that's really a good one...;)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.