Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
New IPCC Climate Change Mitigation Report coming monday...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave645" data-source="post: 8352950" data-attributes="member: 55822"><p>Our climate is the result of the balance of energy delivered by the sun balanced against the energy escaping from it to space, over the span of the last 120 years to deliver what we have now including all the energy we release while burning fossil fuels and the 2 degrees is what’s predicted to happen in the next 80 years. That 2 degrees is over the best part of 200 years of time so yes small shifts in the balance over 200 years is what climate change and co2 is all about. So even a small 0.0001% increase in energy retained by the planet by CO2 over what’s lost to space over the size of our planet, times a total of 200 years at which point it’s predicted will increase the earths average temp by 2 degrees. Yes that sounds total possible.</p><p>You could heat an Olympic size swinging pool by a few degrees with a candle if you have 2 hundred years to do so! And that’s the point changes that naturally could take thousands of years are happening in hundreds.</p><p></p><p>let’s make a hypothetical experiment.</p><p></p><p>we will setup 2 identical tests each has an an air mix starting at 300ppm of CO2 , an Olympic size swimming pool and 10 acres of dome covering it, full of soil, and full of plants, and animals, to sustain the plants life cycle this will include artificial rain that will all be drawn from inside the domes closed environment, the domes are sealed perfectly for this experiment, and they both get an identical amount of sunlight, the only factor that will change is one will have a burning source of fossil fuel being burn inside it to accurately replicate our burning of fossil fuels and our increasing levels of CO2 ppm we then run this experiment for 120 years to get it to the present day inside dome 1 the air is still has a CO2 level of 300ppm the pre industrial level, and dome 2 is at our current levels of CO2 with is 416ppm.</p><p></p><p>Now the experiment has been running for 120 years do you expect the results of the internal temp of the domes to be the same?</p><p></p><p>In dome one no man made influance, in dome 2 we replicate the effects of us burning fossil fuels in scale and the release of CO2 and increasing the C02 to 2022 levels, and you think that even after 120 years the experiments would still be identical?</p><p></p><p>Because that’s what your saying in your posts is that even small changes over 200 years have no effect and can have no effect.</p><p>Like you said the co2 has a tiny effect it maybe only retains an extra watt of the suns energy per square m2 of our and m3 of our atmosphere over our entire planet, so times that effect by the size of the planet and then by 200 years that is how you get to a 2 degree warming effect. It’s the accumulation of energy we are releasing and the accumulation of energy CO2 is trapping over the 200 years since the industrial revolution. That will deliver a 2 degree rise in climate temp by 2100, at best.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>it’s simpler to capture energy with solar panels, and wind and waves, than try to trap energy with CO2. At concentrations of 1000,000ppm</p><p></p><p> CO2 is a green house gas, so you would get the same effect from building a green house over your house. The problem is that creates as many problems than it can solve, as over heat is just as much a problem as the need for heat in winter.</p><p>In effect solar water on your roof is doing exactly what your saying but the green house is with glass not gas, gas is very difficult to retain cheaply, it’s cheaper to build a artificial greenhouse and put your solar water collector in that, I know it works because I can get 60 degrees of water off my roof on a sunny day even when the air temp is -5 degrees. That is your 1000,000 ppm co2 in action but protected from any wind and direct air losses because it uses a box covered in glass and south facing on a roof. It’s only works when the sun shines so it’s intermittent at best.</p><p></p><p>Yes you can heat your home I do but all these things cost money I have a large thermal store a large solar hot water system on my roof and it still only helps heat my nearly passive house, a normal houses heat demand would not be covered.</p><p> and these tricks will not boost a heat pumps efficiency, as like I said the heap pumps efficiency, is more effected by the required delivery temp of the water in the radiators than the air temp outside, it’s not much harder to take 10 degrees out of the air when it’s starting at 10 degrees, than if the air is 0 degrees and the heat pump is chilling it to -10 degrees.</p><p>It’s the fact the radiator temp requirment has jumped from 30 degrees when it was 10degrees outside to 40-50 degrees radiator temp when it’s -10 degrees outside. To keep the house warm, thats what cuts heat pumps efficiency.</p><p></p><p>it’s cheaper to insulated than make any other change to a house. And that’s simpler than playing with co2 gas at concentrations that would Suffocated anything that breathed it. And the expense of trying to trap the gas in boxes or panels. Solar thermal does what your saying we could do with 1000,000 ppm of CO2 but I speak from experience in winter when we need heat in the uk, it has only a small effect, and only when it’s a nice sunny day at best. And it’s simplest to directly use the heat in the home to pre heat the cold feed for a hot water system or in a low temp underfloor system like I do, even then it’s Limited in winter. And in summer I am dumping heat from it, and wishing it was solar electric I had on my roof. Which I could use to cut my electric bill.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave645, post: 8352950, member: 55822"] Our climate is the result of the balance of energy delivered by the sun balanced against the energy escaping from it to space, over the span of the last 120 years to deliver what we have now including all the energy we release while burning fossil fuels and the 2 degrees is what’s predicted to happen in the next 80 years. That 2 degrees is over the best part of 200 years of time so yes small shifts in the balance over 200 years is what climate change and co2 is all about. So even a small 0.0001% increase in energy retained by the planet by CO2 over what’s lost to space over the size of our planet, times a total of 200 years at which point it’s predicted will increase the earths average temp by 2 degrees. Yes that sounds total possible. You could heat an Olympic size swinging pool by a few degrees with a candle if you have 2 hundred years to do so! And that’s the point changes that naturally could take thousands of years are happening in hundreds. let’s make a hypothetical experiment. we will setup 2 identical tests each has an an air mix starting at 300ppm of CO2 , an Olympic size swimming pool and 10 acres of dome covering it, full of soil, and full of plants, and animals, to sustain the plants life cycle this will include artificial rain that will all be drawn from inside the domes closed environment, the domes are sealed perfectly for this experiment, and they both get an identical amount of sunlight, the only factor that will change is one will have a burning source of fossil fuel being burn inside it to accurately replicate our burning of fossil fuels and our increasing levels of CO2 ppm we then run this experiment for 120 years to get it to the present day inside dome 1 the air is still has a CO2 level of 300ppm the pre industrial level, and dome 2 is at our current levels of CO2 with is 416ppm. Now the experiment has been running for 120 years do you expect the results of the internal temp of the domes to be the same? In dome one no man made influance, in dome 2 we replicate the effects of us burning fossil fuels in scale and the release of CO2 and increasing the C02 to 2022 levels, and you think that even after 120 years the experiments would still be identical? Because that’s what your saying in your posts is that even small changes over 200 years have no effect and can have no effect. Like you said the co2 has a tiny effect it maybe only retains an extra watt of the suns energy per square m2 of our and m3 of our atmosphere over our entire planet, so times that effect by the size of the planet and then by 200 years that is how you get to a 2 degree warming effect. It’s the accumulation of energy we are releasing and the accumulation of energy CO2 is trapping over the 200 years since the industrial revolution. That will deliver a 2 degree rise in climate temp by 2100, at best. it’s simpler to capture energy with solar panels, and wind and waves, than try to trap energy with CO2. At concentrations of 1000,000ppm CO2 is a green house gas, so you would get the same effect from building a green house over your house. The problem is that creates as many problems than it can solve, as over heat is just as much a problem as the need for heat in winter. In effect solar water on your roof is doing exactly what your saying but the green house is with glass not gas, gas is very difficult to retain cheaply, it’s cheaper to build a artificial greenhouse and put your solar water collector in that, I know it works because I can get 60 degrees of water off my roof on a sunny day even when the air temp is -5 degrees. That is your 1000,000 ppm co2 in action but protected from any wind and direct air losses because it uses a box covered in glass and south facing on a roof. It’s only works when the sun shines so it’s intermittent at best. Yes you can heat your home I do but all these things cost money I have a large thermal store a large solar hot water system on my roof and it still only helps heat my nearly passive house, a normal houses heat demand would not be covered. and these tricks will not boost a heat pumps efficiency, as like I said the heap pumps efficiency, is more effected by the required delivery temp of the water in the radiators than the air temp outside, it’s not much harder to take 10 degrees out of the air when it’s starting at 10 degrees, than if the air is 0 degrees and the heat pump is chilling it to -10 degrees. It’s the fact the radiator temp requirment has jumped from 30 degrees when it was 10degrees outside to 40-50 degrees radiator temp when it’s -10 degrees outside. To keep the house warm, thats what cuts heat pumps efficiency. it’s cheaper to insulated than make any other change to a house. And that’s simpler than playing with co2 gas at concentrations that would Suffocated anything that breathed it. And the expense of trying to trap the gas in boxes or panels. Solar thermal does what your saying we could do with 1000,000 ppm of CO2 but I speak from experience in winter when we need heat in the uk, it has only a small effect, and only when it’s a nice sunny day at best. And it’s simplest to directly use the heat in the home to pre heat the cold feed for a hot water system or in a low temp underfloor system like I do, even then it’s Limited in winter. And in summer I am dumping heat from it, and wishing it was solar electric I had on my roof. Which I could use to cut my electric bill. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
New IPCC Climate Change Mitigation Report coming monday...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top