Climate change and human responsibility

[PeteMoss]

It was an 80 page answer from top scientists which was better than anything that I, random message board poster, could provide. If you really wanted to know the answer - its in there.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yet foreign investment in Canada is 180 degrees from the US. Certainly I can't be the only person that's made a lot of money on my US investments this decade while being forced to invest as little in Canada as possible. As a Canadian it's not something ideally I want to do but if I want to retire at a decent age Justin kind of forced my hand chasing out foreign investment in the country.

No, your not the only one, I thought it was just me.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Definitely not cherry picking there. I can go pick some Gulf of Mexico cities and show you the rise if that is needed. Or I can just go look at the overall sea levels globally
https://www.climate.gov/news-feature...obal-sea-level

It’s interesting that the rate of sea level rise in that graph is essentially constant, dating all the way back to 1880. What were CO2 levels in the mid 1800s (it’s estimated there’s a 40-year lag between cause and effect)? CH4? N2O?

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

It’s interesting that the rate of sea level rise in that graph is essentially constant, dating all the way back to 1880. What were CO2 levels in the mid 1800s (it’s estimated there’s a 40-year lag between cause and effect)? CH4? N2O?

The google machine says:

1850
CO2 - 285 ppm
CH4 - 774 ppb
N2O - 270 ppb

2015
CO2 - 400 ppm
CH4 - 1834 ppb
N2O - 328 ppb

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

It’s interesting that the rate of sea level rise in that graph is essentially constant, dating all the way back to 1880. What were CO2 levels in the mid 1800s (it’s estimated there’s a 40-year lag between cause and effect)? CH4? N2O?

If you go to that site and zoom in you can see it's not that constant. It stays pretty much the same from 1880 (the first year the graph has data for) until the end of that century. Then it starts rising gradually until around the 40s. The rise really picks up after that, especially in the last 20 years.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Going to have to move pretty far inland



https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...e=sectionfront

Vietnam will disappear at high-tide, in 2050?

I’ll take the under.

[Fuzz]

An interesting new entrant on the carbon capture front:

The technique, based on passing air through a stack of charged electrochemical plates, is described in a new paper in the journal Energy and Environmental Science, by MIT postdoc Sahag Voskian, who developed the work during his PhD, and T. Alan Hatton, the Ralph Landau Professor of Chemical Engineering.
The device is essentially a large, specialized battery that absorbs carbon dioxide from the air (or other gas stream) passing over its electrodes as it is being charged up, and then releases the gas as it is being discharged. In operation, the device would simply alternate between charging and discharging, with fresh air or feed gas being blown through the system during the charging cycle, and then the pure, concentrated carbon dioxide being blown out during the discharging.
As the battery charges, an electrochemical reaction takes place at the surface of each of a stack of electrodes. These are coated with a compound called polyanthraquinone, which is composited with carbon nanotubes. The electrodes have a natural affinity for carbon dioxide and readily react with its molecules in the airstream or feed gas, even when it is present at very low concentrations. The reverse reaction takes place when the battery is discharged -- during which the device can provide part of the power needed for the whole system -- and in the process ejects a stream of pure carbon dioxide. The whole system operates at room temperature and normal air pressure.

Sounds like this one might be practical. Set it up in places with "free" energy and let it do it's thing. My quick mental math may be wrong, but I think that works out to around $20/t-cCO2 at cheapish electricity rates. Right about what our carbon tax is currently.

[Ryan Coke]

Once something like this was large scale commercially viable, you could power it via part time power sources like wind or solar, then these batteries could be used as the power buffer. When the wind blows, they collect carbon, when the wind stops, they discharge onto the grid.

[Fuzz]

I think ultimately tech like this is going to be the short term answer, as it is a lot more easily implemented than removing carbon from our economy. It's obviously not ideal, but for the next 50 years or so could really help moderate our emissions. Plus it's a good look for the first world who has higher per capita emissions, and if we are the ones spending on this tech as a solution, it allows the developing world to catch up without economically handcuffing themselves with carbon polices.

[Enoch Root]

Yes, new technologies will be the answer.

In the 1960s, the math said that wide scale famine and starvation were inevitable and unavoidable - within only a decade or so. The math was indisputable: X amount of food could be produced, even after applying all available technology, and there was going to be more than X people in the world very soon.

But new technology changed how much food could be produced. The shortages never happened, and now, despite even more people, we (are fortunate enough to be able to) waste a despicably high percentage of the food we produce.

I expect that there will be many new technologies forthcoming to help save the environment, simply because there has to be.

Back to food: I once read that 35% of all of the food produced globally is wasted. That seems impossibly high to me, but whatever the number is, reducing the amount that is wasted seems like a really easy way to improve things environmentally.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

An interesting new entrant on the carbon capture front:


Sounds like this one might be practical. Set it up in places with "free" energy and let it do it's thing. My quick mental math may be wrong, but I think that works out to around $20/t-cCO2 at cheapish electricity rates. Right about what our carbon tax is currently.

It sounds more like a carbon battery - stores it when charging, releases it when discharging. I guess it would be easier to capture the concentrated CO2 but this is not a solution by itself.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by edslunch

It sounds more like a carbon battery - stores it when charging, releases it when discharging. I guess it would be easier to capture the concentrated CO2 but this is not a solution by itself.

Yes, but you get 100% CO2 on the discharge cycle. This can be sequestered or used in other processes that neutralize it, or things like enhanced oil recovery. Lots of industries currently make CO2 for use, so instead, they could capture this directly.

[PeteMoss]

Did this get posted - https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...limate-change/

impact of climate change on Quebec islands with raising water levels.

[Azure]

Capturing and utilizing carbon is going to be the only solution going forward. We simply won't be able to lower emission rates quick enough.

Nice to see some different technologies being talked about.

[troutman]

World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency

https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/...biz088/5610806

Scientists have a moral obligation to clearly warn humanity of any catastrophic threat and to “tell it like it is.” On the basis of this obligation and the graphical indicators presented below, we declare, with more than 11,000 scientist signatories from around the world, clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency.

Mitigating and adapting to climate change while honoring the diversity of humans entails major transformations in the ways our global society functions and interacts with natural ecosystems. We are encouraged by a recent surge of concern. Governmental bodies are making climate emergency declarations. Schoolchildren are striking. Ecocide lawsuits are proceeding in the courts. Grassroots citizen movements are demanding change, and many countries, states and provinces, cities, and businesses are responding.

As the Alliance of World Scientists, we stand ready to assist decision-makers in a just transition to a sustainable and equitable future. We urge widespread use of vital signs, which will better allow policymakers, the private sector, and the public to understand the magnitude of this crisis, track progress, and realign priorities for alleviating climate change. The good news is that such transformative change, with social and economic justice for all, promises far greater human well-being than does business as usual. We believe that the prospects will be greatest if decision-makers and all of humanity promptly respond to this warning and declaration of a climate emergency and act to sustain life on planet Earth, our only home.

[delayedreflex]

Originally Posted by Azure

Capturing and utilizing carbon is going to be the only solution going forward. We simply won't be able to lower emission rates quick enough.

Nice to see some different technologies being talked about.

I am hoping things such as accelerated weathering of olivine end up working out - a few sites I've see indicate that this is the primary mechanism that high CO2 levels have been reduced in the past (causing ice ages, etc.) so it seems like it would be a potentially lower impact option compared to various other geo-engineering options. It also helps mitigate ocean acidification.

Project Vesta has a really great breakdown of this option - the site seems overly optimistic about how easy it will be ("we only need to duplicate the coal mining industry in China to offset the world's current emissions") but on the face of it, it seems very promising.

[VintageMilanLucic]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Not only does that avoid answering the question, you managed to frame that in the most arrogant, elitist and chest-thumping way possible. Bravo, sir.

Not sure why you would be so triggered over his post. Many of us have moved our investments over to the US side and have reaped the rewards. Probably one of the best things I have done with my cash and portfolio. Hopefully things can remain relatively smooth on their political front so a lot of our money isn't lost!

[FireGilbert]

This meme has possibly never been more relevant than to describe Australian political leadership right now.

[Muta]

Secretive energy startup backed by Bill Gates achieves solar breakthrough

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/19/busin...tes/index.html

The breakthrough means that, for the first time, concentrated solar energy can be used to create the extreme heat required to make cement, steel, glass and other industrial processes. In other words, carbon-free sunlight can replace fossil fuels in a heavy carbon-emitting corner of the economy that has been untouched by the clean energy revolution.

Well this is interesting. As an energy hub, I wish Alberta incubated companies and innovations like this.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Muta

Well this is interesting. As an energy hub, I wish Alberta incubated companies and innovations like this.

Alberta doesn't have the climate for concentrated solar power. You need areas like the American SW desert:





And even then, they can be fickle. The one American plant designed for 10 hours of storage has seen numerous outages since it began operation in 2015.