The Environment Thread

[blue_gold_84]

11 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

So this MMA fighter tries to troll Thunberg, and after she destroys him about as badly as you can on Twitter, he stews for about 10 hours before responding back with her catch phrase “How dare you” which is the internet equivalent of “I know you are but what am I”. Cue the Twitter-verse responding en masse with “bro, take the L” comeuppance for him, after he basically confirmed his “small **** energy” and snowflake status by trying to fight back against Greta’s wicked burn. 

And when you think it couldn’t get any better, turns out this guy is actually a horrible human being involved in sexual trafficking young girls, and police were looking for him. And in his attempt at a face-saving comeback post, he was seen with a pizza box (complete with his name and phone number visible on it) in his livestream tweet that allowed the local Romanian authorities to track his location and place him under arrest. Rian Johnson  couldn’t write this stuff. 

The real PizzaGate!

Andrew Tate is a prime example of when wealth, stupidity, and narcissism collide to make an insufferable oxygen thief. Unfortunately, there are so many examples out there and social media has given each of them a platform to spew their disgusting vitriol.

The best part in all of this? He was banned from Twitter but reinstated after Musk's takeover. His "freedom of speech" basically resulted in his being arrested.

[Tracker]

9 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

The real PizzaGate!

Andrew Tate is a prime example of when wealth, stupidity, and narcissism collide to make an insufferable oxygen thief. Unfortunately, there are so many examples out there and social media has given each of them a platform to spew their disgusting vitriol.

The best part in all of this? He was banned from Twitter but reinstated after Musk's takeover. His "freedom of speech" basically resulted in his being arrested.

                                        

[FrostyWinnipeg]

https://insideevs.com/news/629064/five-seat-tesla-model-y-does-not-qualify-for-new-federal-tax-credit/

My New Years resolution is to convince @Wanna-B-Fanboyto rename this The Environment Thread.

 

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

1 hour ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

https://insideevs.com/news/629064/five-seat-tesla-model-y-does-not-qualify-for-new-federal-tax-credit/

My New Years resolution is to convince @Wanna-B-Fanboyto rename this The Environment Thread.

 

 

Very convincing- Your Resolution is intact.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

20 minutes ago, Wanna-B-Fanboy said:

Very convincing- Your Resolution is intact.

My resolution to cut down on the wine tho...

 

Edited January 2, 2023 by FrostyWinnipeg

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

47 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

My resolution to cut down on the wine tho...

 

One resolution per year is good enough- go forth and drink to your heart's content!

[Tracker]

Oxford study warns of extreme heat and drought impacting 90 percent of Earth's population

As interlinked extreme heat and drought events grow in intensity and frequency amid the ruling class' ongoing failure to adequately slash planet-heating fossil fuel pollution, over 90% of the global population is projected to suffer the consequences in the coming decades, according to peer-reviewed research published Thursday in Nature Sustainability.

Compound drought-heatwave (CDHW) events are "one of the worst climatic stressors for global sustainable development," states the paper, but their "physical mechanisms" and "impacts on socio-ecosystem productivity remain poorly understood."
"Using simulations from a large climate-hydrology model," nine scholars—working at universities in China, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan—found that "the frequency of extreme CDHWs is projected to increase by tenfold globally under the highest emissions scenario, along with a disproportionate negative impact on vegetation and socio-economic productivity by the late 21st century."

According to the study: "Terrestrial water storage and temperature are negatively coupled, probably driven by similar atmospheric conditions (for example, water vapor deficit and energy demand). Limits on water availability are likely to play a more important role in constraining the terrestrial carbon sink than temperature extremes."

Put plainly, drought and extreme heat are intertwined. Increasingly arid and hot conditions are undermining the capacity of land-based ecosystems to absorb carbon dioxide, with a lack of water considered even more consequential than higher temperatures.

Not only are CDHWs hurting the ability of biodiverse regions to absorb a key greenhouse gas but these increasingly intense and frequent events also threaten to exacerbate socioeconomic inequalities.

The study estimates that even under the lowest emission scenario, "over 90% of the global population and gross domestic product could be exposed to increasing CDHW risks in the future, with more severe impacts in poorer and more rural areas."

https://www.alternet.org/oxford-study-heat-and-drought/

[FrostyWinnipeg]

I'm like 2/3rd into my life span. Best of luck to the younglings.

[Tracker]

13 hours ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

I'm like 2/3rd into my life span. Best of luck to the younglings.

And I am at the point where I buy underwear one at a time rather than in a three-pack, because one might be enough.

[blue_gold_84]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/2022-global-temperature-rise-1.6708219

Quote

2022 was the fifth-warmest year on record, the European-based climate service Copernicus reported on Tuesday.

It was 0.3 C above the 1991–2020 average, and 1.2 C above the pre-industrial average (1850–1900), making it the eighth consecutive year that global temperatures were more than 1 C above the pre-industrial average. NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will release their joint findings on Jan. 12, which will likely be the same ranking or similar, as in previous years.

The fact that it was another year in the top 10 likely isn't a surprise for most people, but experts say it's concerning that the warming trend continues even in light of a cooling phenomenon called La Nina.

"It is unusual that with La Nina, which should bring cooler temperatures, that we are right now about to be confirmed [as one of the] warmest years," said Mélie Monnerat, project manager at the University of Waterloo's Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation.

"Even if 2022 was maybe not as warm as 2021, it's still ridiculously high."

 

[Tracker]

Just now, blue_gold_84 said:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/2022-global-temperature-rise-1.6708219

 

It is the warmest winter in Europe for several decades. More bad news for Putin.

[the watcher]

 Scary stuff 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/11/oceans-were-the-hottest-ever-recorded-in-2022-analysis-shows

[Mark H.]

On 2023-01-10 at 12:08 PM, Tracker said:

It is the warmest winter in Europe for several decades. More bad news for Putin.

And his deluded supporters...who think all of Europe is freezing to death because of the sanctions

[Tracker]

4 hours ago, Mark H. said:

And his deluded supporters...who think all of Europe is freezing to death because of the sanctions

Ironically, it was -22 in Moscow this morning. God has a sense of humour.

[blue_gold_84]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/exxon-mobil-predicted-global-warming-1.6712899

Quote

Scientists with oil and gas giant Exxon Mobil made remarkably accurate predictions about global warming, even as the company made public statements that contradicted its own scientists' conclusions, a new study has found.

The study published in the journal Science finds that research funded by Exxon not only confirmed what climate scientists were saying at the time, but also used more than a dozen different computer models that forecasted the coming warming with precision equal to or better than government and academic scientists.

This was during the same time that the oil company publicly doubted that warming was real and dismissed climate models' accuracy.

Exxon has defended itself, saying its understanding of climate change evolved over the years and that critics are misunderstanding the company's earlier research.

[JCon]

1 minute ago, blue_gold_84 said:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/exxon-mobil-predicted-global-warming-1.6712899

Oh, well! It's only the environment. Those O&G companies are so silly. 

[blue_gold_84]

Just now, JCon said:

Oh, well! It's only the environment. Those O&G companies are so silly. 

Won't somebody think of shareholders?!

Greedy sociopaths run the world.

[Wideleft]

Minerals are crucial for electric cars and wind turbines. Some worry whether we have enough.

Minerals are crucial for electric cars, wind turbines, and solar panels. Some worry whether the future supply can meet the rising demand.

 

By Shannon Osaka

February 2, 2023 at 6:30 a.m. EST

 

Over 20 years ago, two geologists made a stark prediction in Scientific American: “Probably within 10 years,” they wrote, “global production of conventional oil will begin to decline.” This argument, which became known as “peak oil,” captured public attention for well over a decade, sparking worries that abundant reserves of oil would give way to scarcity, runs on gas stations and sky-high inflation.

Peak oil, however, never came to pass. U.S. oil production increased far beyond the peak oil predictions, thanks to the increased use of “fracking” and other production methods. The term faded out of use, and concerns about oil shifted from a fear of running out of oil to fears of runaway global warming.

Now, as the world begins to slowly shift to renewable energy sources, there is a new focus on the materials that will be required to build electric vehicles, solar panels, wind turbines and much more. According to the International Energy Agency, the average electric car requires six times the mineral inputs of a conventional gas-powered car; an offshore wind-turbine, meanwhile, requires nine times the mineral inputs of a typical gas-fired power plant.

So, will we run out?

There is no doubt that clean energy — that is, solar, wind, geothermal, nuclear and other sources that do not produce greenhouse gas emissions — requires more mineral inputs than power plants run on fossil fuels. The IEA estimates that if the world builds enough renewable energy to meet the goals established in the 2015 Paris Agreement, mineral demand will double or quadruple in the next 20 years. Countries will need copper for power and transmission lines, lithium for batteries, silicon for solar panels and zinc for wind turbines.

But there are a few reasons to think that — even as the world prepares to mine huge quantities of minerals — we won’t run out anytime soon.

Abigail Wulf, vice president of critical minerals for Securing America’s Future Energy (SAFE), a D.C.-based energy think tank, says that when minerals become valuable enough, people get motivated.

“It all has to do with economics,” she said. “If people get super desperate for these minerals, they will find very creative ways to find them.”

The first is that there is a difference between the available reserves of a mineral and the resources of that mineral. Reserves are the amount of a mineral that humans know they can efficiently and economically mine. Resources are a best guess of the total amount of that mineral available in the world — whether they are cost-effective to mine or not.

Take cobalt, for example — a key ingredient in the lithium-ion batteries that power electric cars, smartphones and other electronics. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, there are approximately 7.6 million tons of cobalt reserves worldwide. But the total cobalt resources far exceed this number: The USGS estimates that there are 25 million tons of cobalt resources available from the earth’s surface and 120 million tons of cobalt on the sea floor.

And those numbers tend to increase. Ten years ago, world cobalt reserves were estimated at 7.5 million tons and resources were only estimated to be about 15 million tons. As a commodity becomes more valuable, two things happen simultaneously: Reserves increase, as previously uneconomical resources become economical. And resources increase as well, as governments and companies put more effort into mapping and exploring minerals in the earth’s crust and on the sea floor. In 2012, the world’s lithium reserves sat at 13 million tons; now, they’re around 22 million tons. During that same period, the world’s estimated lithium resources more than doubled — from 40 to 88 million tons.

Companies are already touting the discoveries of new deposits of critical minerals. A Swedish state-owned mining company last month announced a deposit of 1 million tons of rare earth metals in the Lapland province. U.S. companies have also recently claimed discoveries of new deposits in Wyoming and Montana.

Recent research has also shown that the amount of minerals required for the shift to renewable energy is significant — but falls well within the amount of reserves available. A study released recently by scientists at the University of California at Irvine and MIT found that current reserves of minerals like aluminum, copper, manganese, silver and more should support building enough wind and solar power to meet climate targets.

What’s more, the mining from those operations would not have an outsize impact on global warming. (One repeated critique of renewable energy is that the intensity of mining might counteract the emissions benefits of wind and solar.) According to the study, the materials required for the transition to low-carbon electricity would take up somewhere between 1 and 9 percent of the remaining carbon budget: a significant amount but one that wouldn’t undercut overall climate goals.

“The emissions to produce a refined ton of steel or aluminum to meet all of this demand would not really threaten global carbon budgets,” said Seaver Wang, the co-director of climate and energy at the energy think tank the Breakthrough Institute and the lead author on the paper. (The study focused on electricity generation. The researchers did not look at the mineral requirements for transportation or electric vehicles.)

The larger problem may be not whether the world as a whole has enough critical minerals — but whether they are available quickly enough and in the right places. Minerals are not distributed equally around the globe — for example, much of the cobalt mined right now is from the Democratic Republic of Congo, most of the rare earths are mined in China, and much of the lithium is mined in Australia. China also dominates the world’s processing of critical minerals: 80 percent of rare earth metals, over 60 percent of cobalt and over 50 percent of lithium are processed there. According to a recent analysis by the USGS, the United States relies on imports for almost 50 percent of the minerals it consumes.

Wang said that there will probably be enough minerals — and that the environmental impacts of mining them should pale in comparison to the damages of fossil fuels. (Humanity “mines” billions of tons of fossil fuels from the ground every year; even a huge increase in mineral mining will only be millions of tons.)

But much still has to be done to ensure mining is safe for ecosystems and the people that will surround them. “The bottom line is that if a lot of these commodities are really going to be as hot as people say, there ought to be enough economic benefit to ensure that more goes to the community and to the workers,” Wang said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/02/02/critical-minerals-run-out-shortage/

[blue_gold_84]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/big-oil-profits-climate-1.6739808

Quote

Financial results from the biggest energy companies in the world this week show that last year was their most profitable year ever, prompting many of them to scale back previous commitments to pivot more toward renewable energy.

All in all, profits at those five major oil conglomerates likely topped $200 billion last year, according to data analytics firm Refinitiv.

...record profits at oil giants illustrate "the fundamental dilemma between climate targets and a world that can't do without hydrocarbons."

[JCon]

Just now, blue_gold_84 said:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/big-oil-profits-climate-1.6739808

Trudeau!!!

[HardCoreBlue]

28 minutes ago, JCon said:

Trudeau!!!

Ahh that's 'F Trudeau' to you good sir.

[Wideleft]

 

 

[blue_gold_84]

[bluto]

The silence over that train derailment is beyond suspicious. Anything in the media regarding it is in very innocuous, anodyne terms. No pun intended, but this thing glows in the dark.

[Tracker]

8 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Superbowl weekend. Bread and circuses. Enough said.