London "Climate" Protests

[MiJ]

I remember voting for Greens back in the early 80’s. Didn’t later and wouldn't now.
Global Warming and other Bol locks, Prof Feldman well worth reading.

 

[wr.]

Patrick Moore is another worth a listen to.

 

[renewablejohn]

But do you really think that reducing the world to be being dependent on a communist regime with global ambitions is in anyway sensible or just about price? Why is it you lads can't see beyond your own narrow agenda and take in a much wider picture?

We keep hearing about alternatives, there is always going to be one along next week, but funnily enough they never actually appear. Why not? Maybe it's because we have already reached the limits of what is possible or, and more conspiratorially, the Chinese keep buying them out and shutting them down to preserve their investment in Lithium.

Now do tell us about how glad you are that children are being exploited to mine cobalt so the greens can feel smug about themselves.

Of course the alternatives come along but in the past Lithium has been far to cheap. Its only now that it is more expensive and supply is starting to be controlled that alternatives make sense. It was just the same with PV starting out very expensive with expensive materials now there as cheap as chips.

 

[Scribus]

Of course the alternatives come along but in the past Lithium has been far to cheap. Its only now that it is more expensive and supply is starting to be controlled that alternatives make sense. It was just the same with PV starting out very expensive with expensive materials now there as cheap as chips.

Sodium has always been cheaper than lithium, sodium batteries have also been around longer than lithium, by ten years at least, so why are they not in use already?

 

[Scribus]

Patrick Moore is another worth a listen to.

Two points he makes stand out.

1. Despite the lad Attenborough declaring the world is ending because polar bears are pictured swimming between ice floes the total mass of polar ice is in fact increasing. Now, I find the idea of bears suffering as distressing as anyone, but pointing the finger at us wretched humans as the sole agents of their discomfort may well be misguided and helps no one.

2. The idea that if it wasn't for us humans increasing CO2 levels then plants would go on to kill off life on earth as we know it is an intriguing one and suggests that humans might not be the only flaw in nature's great plan.

 

[renewablejohn]

Sodium has always been cheaper than lithium, sodium batteries have also been around longer than lithium, by ten years at least, so why are they not in use already?

Because the initial solutions where easier with Lithium. Now the limits of Lithium have been reached the increased charging rate and improved charge density of Sodium makes it a real alternative to Lithium. But then you would know this being an expert.

 

[Scribus]

Because the initial solutions where easier with Lithium. Now the limits of Lithium have been reached the increased charging rate and improved charge density of Sodium makes it a real alternative to Lithium. But then you would know this being an expert.

Now we are getting somewhere, an admission that lithium batteries are reaching their limits is a welcome breath of honesty from the battery brigade. But how does sodium take us forward? Well, if they can be made to last then they offer a similar performance at a better price, but there is little to indicate that they will provide an increased energy density, which is the fundamental problem of all batteries and even in this bang up to date survey of the situation no mention is made of overcoming it -

https://energymetalnews.com/2019/04...loser-to-saving-you-from-a-mobile-phone-fire/

 

[wanton dwarf]

2. The idea that if it wasn't for us humans increasing CO2 levels then plants would go on to kill off life on earth as we know it is an intriguing one and suggests that humans might not be the only flaw in nature's great plan.

Most resources have been locked into the Earths crust thanks to weather and natural processes.

These resources should "Bubble" to the surface with geological activity .. hence renewing the process. But that activity - volcanos - has reduced significantly during the lifetime of the Earth. Some of this is due to the Moons orbit increasing, some of it due to the Earth cooling naturally.

Humans have brought the easy materials to the surface to renew the process .. of which Carbon is just one. Remember that CO2 levels were far higher than todays 400ppm during the Earths life time of billions of years. It's not natural for the Earth to have such low CO2 levels nor is it natural for the Earth to have Ice caps .. Ice caps are directly linked to Ice Ages.

IMHO humans should be recycling nutrients sent down rivers into the seas .. otherwise it will take future humans to dig those resources from the ocean floor.

Humans .. in fact "Intelligence" has been the saviour of life.

 

[renewablejohn]

Now we are getting somewhere, an admission that lithium batteries are reaching their limits is a welcome breath of honesty from the battery brigade. But how does sodium take us forward? Well, if they can be made to last then they offer a similar performance at a better price, but there is little to indicate that they will provide an increased energy density, which is the fundamental problem of all batteries and even in this bang up to date survey of the situation no mention is made of overcoming it -

https://energymetalnews.com/2019/04...loser-to-saving-you-from-a-mobile-phone-fire/

There you go. It was not difficult doing a quick google was it. Now just do a bit more and you will then be able to answer your question on how sodium takes us forward. I have already told you the answer in quicker charging and increased power density but you dont have to take my word for it

 

[Scribus]

There you go. It was not difficult doing a quick google was it. Now just do a bit more and you will then be able to answer your question on how sodium takes us forward. I have already told you the answer in quicker charging and increased power density but you dont have to take my word for it

Sigh.... You are missing the point completely, but hey, I've enough experience of the battery boys to know that they will wriggle and squirm rather than adhere to the basic principles of debate.

Now go and read my post again and you will note how I pointed out that increased power density does not appear to be what they offer at all. Again, I ask you to show that it is.

 

[Pond digger]

I believe the group is called Extinction Rebellion. All of you who are so quick to admonish these protestors should stop and think about those words carefully: I can’t believe that any of you are so stupid as to think that extinction is an inconsequential matter.

As for climate change, who the hell knows! However, it’s not illogical to go with the scientific consensus, and as I’ve said before, there’s a lot to be said for the precautionary principle.

One things for certain, mankind is responsible for many extinctions. The protesters might not have all the answers, and some of their thinking may be misguided, or incorrect, but I’m just so glad that there are people out there that care enough to protest!

 

[Devil's advocate]

I believe the group is called Extinction Rebellion. All of you who are so quick to admonish these protestors should stop and think about those words carefully: I can’t believe that any of you are so stupid as to think that extinction is an inconsequential matter.

As for climate change, who the hell knows! However, it’s not illogical to go with the scientific consensus, and as I’ve said before, there’s a lot to be said for the precautionary principle.

One things for certain, mankind is responsible for many extinctions. The protesters might not have all the answers, and some of their thinking may be misguided, or incorrect, but I’m just so glad that there are people out there that care enough to protest!

I do agree with your post.

But what a disgrace Emma Thompson was.

The real protest that will work. Is forgetting keeping up with the Jones, live a modest happy life & only two kids per couple as a max.

 

[Pond digger]

I do agree with your post.

But what a disgrace Emma Thompson was.

The real protest that will work. Is forgetting keeping up with the Jones, live a modest happy life & only two kids per couple as a max.

It riles me no end, that no one in a position of influence has the courage to mention population.

On edit: David Attenborough has, but only tentatively.

 

[renewablejohn]

Sigh.... You are missing the point completely, but hey, I've enough experience of the battery boys to know that they will wriggle and squirm rather than adhere to the basic principles of debate.

Now go and read my post again and you will note how I pointed out that increased power density does not appear to be what they offer at all. Again, I ask you to show that it is.

You really do not understand batteries at all do you. High density sodium batteries where first used in the power industry back in 2002 and have been used ever since. The problem with them for portable application has always been the high temperature in excess of 300C. What is new is the ability to achieve similar results at room temperature which is ground breaking and allows the technology to be used for portable applications.

 

[Scribus]

You really do not understand batteries at all do you. High density sodium batteries where first used in the power industry back in 2002 and have been used ever since. The problem with them for portable application has always been the high temperature in excess of 300C. What is new is the ability to achieve similar results at room temperature which is ground breaking and allows the technology to be used for portable applications.

My understanding of batteries certainly extends to appreciating that the chemistry of molten metals is somewhat different to that of the same metals in solid or compound form. I see no evidence that solid state sodium batteries offer the same performance in terms of energy density as molten sodium batteries. Can you demonstrate otherwise?

 

[wanton dwarf]

I believe the group is called Extinction Rebellion. All of you who are so quick to admonish these protestors should stop and think about those words carefully: I can’t believe that any of you are so stupid as to think that extinction is an inconsequential matter.

As for climate change, who the hell knows! However, it’s not illogical to go with the scientific consensus, and as I’ve said before, there’s a lot to be said for the precautionary principle.

One things for certain, mankind is responsible for many extinctions. The protesters might not have all the answers, and some of their thinking may be misguided, or incorrect, but I’m just so glad that there are people out there that care enough to protest!

I think you are nuts.

It's not a scientific concensus that we are heading into Extinction from a slight increase in CO2 .. if it was the case the planet would have boiled 100s of millions of years ago.

Grow up and at least understand the science of the world around you.

"Climate Science" is little more than a money making scheme for the rich and a tax on the poor.

Mankind is NOT responsible for many extinctions .. a few greedy people, usually very rich are responsible.

 

[Pond digger]

I think you are nuts.

It's not a scientific concensus that we are heading into Extinction from a slight increase in CO2 .. if it was the case the planet would have boiled 100s of millions of years ago.

Grow up and at least understand the science of the world around you.

"Climate Science" is little more than a money making scheme for the rich and a tax on the poor.

Mankind is NOT responsible for many extinctions .. a few greedy people, usually very rich are responsible.

Well Professor Dwarf, I’m pleased you’ve got it all sorted.

However; I think you’re post is a perfect illustration of why we need environmental protesters.

 

[czechmate]

Always the agenda.

100 years of manipulated temperature figures .. but the "Problem" is not resolved by action such as making those who pollute the most reduce their pollution.

Instead the poorest in the West are made to pay. Whilst the richest avoid tax and continue to pollute even more.

It's just another get rich quick scheme for those at the top of the tree .. just another excuse to take money off the poor and give it in Mega Yachts, Super Cars and Massive Mansions to the rich.

I'm always amused about a supposed 0.5 degree increase in temperature .. when for months we've had far higher movements, probably in the order of 7+ degrees, both +ve & -ve just because clouds are currently not over the UK.

Perhaps I should create a "Cloud Change" policy so I can get rich as well.

But don't worry .. CO2 has been far higher than todays 400ppm .. for 100s millions of years it was above 1000 ppm and at it's highest 8000ppm.

Personally I worry more about another iceage as each successive Ice age has got worse .. 1km of Ice on top the UK with the sea dropping 200 metres and most life dying out is far worse IMHO. Oh BTW that was only 50,000 - 200,000 years ago.

Do you have the data readily to hand of how many humans were living on the planet when CO2 was 8000ppm?

 

[Scribus]

Do you have the data readily to hand of how many humans were living on the planet when CO2 was 8000ppm?

Not many, other than Davd Attenborough of course. Mind you, it might be worth mentioning that the concentration of CO2 in human breath is around 40,000ppm, just to put things in perspective.

 

[manhill]

Not many, other than Davd Attenborough of course. Mind you, it might be worth mentioning that the concentration of CO2 in human breath is around 40,000ppm, just to put things in perspective.

Maybe less co2 driving a mile than running? Any calculations available?