ClimateGate busts things wide open

[GT93]

Now now papafarang. You're posting for the wrong audience. That kind of adult evidence based reasoning will be water off the duck's back to Drumpf's tribe. So that won't be considered a home run and the the map's great carnival will continue. You gotta expect this kind of thread in the trophics.

[ronan01]

ps.

I cant help but wonder how much of Papafarangs business is powered by renewable energy - care to enlighten us Papafarang?

Probably fair to assume 0% is powered by renewables.

[GT93]

Now now Ronan, we know you're only pretending to be in the Ted Kaczynski club. You're way more fun when you're acting like a spokesman for a coal company or the map's flat earth society.

[ronan01]

NOAA has released new U.S.A tide gauge data through to 2015.

The data is for over 200 coastal locations and records data over 50 years.

None of these tide gauges show sea level rise acceleration anywhere on the U.S. coasts or Pacific or Atlantic island groups.

http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltren ... nds_us.htm

[noosard]

ps.

I cant help but wonder how much of Papafarangs business is powered by renewable energy - care to enlighten us Papafarang?

Probably fair to assume 0% is powered by renewables.

Been to Papa's, seems a like a fair bit is renewables
All that muscle power

[ronan01]

ps.

I cant help but wonder how much of Papafarangs business is powered by renewable energy - care to enlighten us Papafarang?

Probably fair to assume 0% is powered by renewables.

Been to Papa's, seems a like a fair bit is renewables
All that muscle power

I am told:

- mains power in Thailand is unreliable.
- renewables are efficient, reliable, cheap and cutting edge technology. And good for the environment.
- renewables provide "free" energy.

One has to wonder why a modern and efficient business would not use renewables to provide 100% of their energy needs.

It cant be too hard to install enough solar panels and wind power to provide for business needs, and disconnect from the main power provider.

Surely nothing could go wrong and there would be no risk to the business using ultra modern renewables.

The same can be said for transport. Surely smart business owners would be using electric vehicles, powered by their own solar and wind generators.

One can only wonder why those who advocate renewables and denounce fossil fuels so strongly are not putting their money where their mouth is. Some might say that smacks of hypocrisy, I would not go that far.

[papafarang]

ps.

I cant help but wonder how much of Papafarangs business is powered by renewable energy - care to enlighten us Papafarang?

Probably fair to assume 0% is powered by renewables.

Been to Papa's, seems a like a fair bit is renewables
All that muscle power

actually commercial use of energy in Thailand is 7.2% ,renewables as of 2014 was 7.1%. which I claim for myself. someone pass Rowland a calculator

[ronan01]

ps.

I cant help but wonder how much of Papafarangs business is powered by renewable energy - care to enlighten us Papafarang?

Probably fair to assume 0% is powered by renewables.

Been to Papa's, seems a like a fair bit is renewables
All that muscle power

actually commercial use of energy in Thailand is 7.2% ,renewables as of 2014 was 7.1%. which I claim for myself. someone pass Rowland a calculator

How much renewables have you installed yourself to obtain "free" energy.

Have you put your money where your mouth is?

At this stage I would say 0%

[papafarang]

I don't have to. the government does it for me, no need to generate electricity for this. just asked the daughter where was the power lead, she looked confused. we are a bakery not a power company you fool

[ronan01]

I don't have to. the government does it for me, no need to generate electricity for this. just asked the daughter where was the power lead, she looked confused. we are a bakery not a power company you fool

One has to wonder why a modern and efficient business would not use renewables to provide 100% of their energy needs.

It cant be too hard to install enough solar panels and wind power to provide for business needs, and disconnect from the main power provider.

Surely nothing could go wrong and there would be no risk to the business using ultra modern renewables.

The same can be said for transport. Surely smart business owners would be using electric vehicles, powered by their own solar and wind generators.

Renewables are supposedly efficient, reliable, cheap and cutting edge technology. And good for the environment. And renewables provide "free" energy.

One can only wonder why those who advocate renewables and denounce fossil fuels so strongly are not putting their money where their mouth is. Some might say that smacks of hypocrisy, I would not go that far.

[Lone Star]

.

[papafarang]

point taken lone star, but theres different ways to decrease power use, obviously I cook with gas, electricity is too unreliable here. one step I did take was increasing the oven side of things , small, medium and large ovens so I can use the appropriate oven when needed. not only saving energy ,also saving time, any business should be cost conscious of it's energy consumption, one oven can cook 24 rolls every 15 mins, the medium 48, and the large 96. all using different amounts of gas, also I have 3 sizes of mixers, using appropriate when needed, or even had mixing when needed. as I said I don't deliver, we shop local, all this helps my pocket and profits. as for building my own power company just to bake bread , well best left to power companies, same when the bike needs a tyre, it would be ridiculous to build a tyre factory.
I have to say LS, at least your posts have realistic questions based on reality and what is and is not possible.
my house is fitted with 3w led bulbs ,i have one air con in the bedroom, I cold shower. my biggest cost is refrigeration which sadly apart from anything is unavoidable for health and safety reasons . if I ever make enough money I would invest in solar

[ronan01]

point taken lone star, but theres different ways to decrease power use, obviously I cook with gas, electricity is too unreliable here. one step I did take was increasing the oven side of things , small, medium and large ovens so I can use the appropriate oven when needed. not only saving energy ,also saving time, any business should be cost conscious of it's energy consumption, one oven can cook 24 rolls every 15 mins, the medium 48, and the large 96. all using different amounts of gas, also I have 3 sizes of mixers, using appropriate when needed, or even had mixing when needed. as I said I don't deliver, we shop local, all this helps my pocket and profits. as for building my own power company just to bake bread , well best left to power companies, same when the bike needs a tyre, it would be ridiculous to build a tyre factory.
I have to say LS, at least your posts have realistic questions based on reality and what is and is not possible.
my house is fitted with 3w led bulbs ,i have one air con in the bedroom, I cold shower. my biggest cost is refrigeration which sadly apart from anything is unavoidable for health and safety reasons . if I ever make enough money I would invest in solar

The government provides 7.1% renewables, so surely an ardent climate change worrier like yourself would volunteer to close the gap by providing your own renewable power, taking the load off non-renewable sources and reducing CO2 outputs.

Also,the average householder uses non-renewable power to provide for the bare necessities of life, whereas you use non-renewable power to make a profit.

And why no electric vehicles powered by your own renewable power source?

[rick]

I use solar power to charge mobile phones, torches and provide emergency lighting. Capital investment required for next step - which would cover pumping water and some fans. Current capital tied up by bureaucracy but maybe available next year. My wife was a convert after the recent 2 and a half day black out following the big storm a couple of weeks ago - the emergency lighting was welcomed and recharged each day.

But the big issue is capital investment. Not all of us have a lot.

[ronan01]

I use solar power to charge mobile phones, torches and provide emergency lighting. Capital investment required for next step - which would cover pumping water and some fans. Current capital tied up by bureaucracy but maybe available next year. My wife was a convert after the recent 2 and a half day black out following the big storm a couple of weeks ago - the emergency lighting was welcomed and recharged each day.

But the big issue is capital investment. Not all of us have a lot.

So far we have been told how great renewables are, but now it seems they are too expensive, and some would have us believe the government will deliver renewables for us - you know provide all that clean "free" energy.

Government money does not grow on trees - it comes from taxpayers, and even with economies of scale government supplied renewable energy is as expensive as it gets.

Governments get around this by taxing people or applying surcharges - but suffering taxpayers still foot the bill.

Some might say that government can charge industry, but industry just pass costs on to consumers, and taxpayers foot the bill in the end.

The push for renewables is to save the planet from overheating and rising seas - but none of the predictions have come true.

And here is the relationship to climategate - then it was about dodgy deals being based on dodgy data, and nothing has changed.

Dodgy deals based on dodgy are still being presented to solve what may not be a problem, or may not be solvable.

Lone Star posed some very interesting questions, and despite a lot of waffle from the usual suspects, including the resident Koch brothers conspiracy theorists, none have attempted to answer those questions.

So here are the questions posed by Lone Star again:

I don't think it's a matter of whether we want to do anything about it. I think it's a matter of whether or not we can do anything about it. Even scientists who are believers acknowledge that one volcanic eruption, and other natural events that are uncontrolled, can wipe out years of any progress that believers hope to make.

The things that always make me wonder about all of this is who is qualified enough to determine how much tax anyone should pay regarding their emissions. And then, just what will be done with that money to offset those emissions in a measurable way? How can we be sure that the emissions are being offset? What measurable changes will be witnessed as a result of all of this revenue-producing taxation? I've yet to read anything that answers any of these questions in a specific way. It's as if everyone is just supposed to get on board because.


Any takers?

[GT93]

Cheese eating surrender monkey questions from ronan01. Let's not bother trying to mitigate the explosion of diabetes across the world as well etc. We'd still be living in caves if we all took this approach to life's challenges.

[GT93]

Drumpf, the denialist in chief, on the 5 year drought in California - there is no drought:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/0 ... o-drought/

I love his line that environmentalists are trying to protect a three-inch fish. He's a very clever communicator.

The editor's note at the end of the link suggests he might not be fair and balanced to this Republican candidate.

[ronan01]

Cheese eating surrender monkey questions from ronan01. Let's not bother trying to mitigate the explosion of diabetes across the world as well etc. We'd still be living in caves if we all took this approach to life's challenges.

If you could read you would understand they are questions from Lone Star. You are a bit slow so I will repeat them - it does take you a few times to understand things:

I don't think it's a matter of whether we want to do anything about it. I think it's a matter of whether or not we can do anything about it. Even scientists who are believers acknowledge that one volcanic eruption, and other natural events that are uncontrolled, can wipe out years of any progress that believers hope to make.

The things that always make me wonder about all of this is who is qualified enough to determine how much tax anyone should pay regarding their emissions. And then, just what will be done with that money to offset those emissions in a measurable way? How can we be sure that the emissions are being offset? What measurable changes will be witnessed as a result of all of this revenue-producing taxation? I've yet to read anything that answers any of these questions in a specific way. It's as if everyone is just supposed to get on board because.

[ronan01]

Drumpf, the denialist in chief, on the 5 year drought in California - there is no drought:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/0 ... o-drought/

I love his line that environmentalists are trying to protect a three-inch fish. He's a very clever communicator.

The editor's note at the end of the link suggests he might not be fair and balanced to this Republican candidate.

Here's a task for you Dimwit, lets see if you can do one useful thing in life:

1] Supply evidence that shows NOT using a large proportion of fossil fuel reserves, the most cost effective sources of energy, will be less damaging to humankind than a rise of more than 2ºC

2] Supply evidence that leaving these fossil fuel reserves in the ground will prevent a rise of 2ºC, given that at least half of the warming since 1850 has been demonstrably NOT caused by human emissions of CO2

[noosard]

Got to love how the media puts spin on the damages
In one article today
"since 1985 some 50 per cent of hard coral had been lost"
That is terrible
Read further down same article

“The reef is 2300km long and the bottom three-quarters is in strong condition, but as we head north, it becomes increasingly prone to bleaching,” Mr Hunt said on May 21.
“Essentially what you could see was patches of coral bleaching as you approached Lizard Island.”

Question you might ask is where is Lizard Island
Answer an inshore part of the reef