“Hey, Curmudge, will this be the ‘last hurrah’ for our
discussion of SINTEF report A24071?”
“That’s the plan, Julie. We’ll touch upon a few conclusions and then move on to a
couple of additional aspects of the global warming issue.”
Conclusions,
Observations, and Comments
“The SINTEF report’s first conclusion was that Ms.
Brundtland’s assertion that ‘doubt has been eliminated’ on anthropogenic global
warming is plainly wrong. Their
second conclusion is that scientific
debate may be considered healthy.
The report also mentioned multiple on-going scientific debates on such
topics as ‘whether the greenhouse warming effect is a reality; if the warming
after the Little Ice Age will continue; the significance of the sun on climate
warming; if warming means better or worse conditions on earth; and the extent
to which man contributes to the changing climate. These may be continued as scientific—not quasi-religious—debates’ (hopefully following
further research, which is clearly needed).”
“This observation—found in many sources—is sufficiently
evident to be considered a conclusion: Emerging and growing nations will not
forgo use of cheap fossil fuel energy if it will hinder their growth and keep
millions of their people in poverty.”
“This observation is rather
frightening: ‘Anthropogenic global warming has been forcefully imposed by means
of a barrage of scare stories and indoctrination that begins in the elementary
school textbooks.’ (Geraldo Luis Leno, SINTEF report, p. 59)”
“Listen, Julie, to these astute
comments by Fred
Singer: ‘The only thing we are concerned about is carbon dioxide levels
becoming too low. If they were to fall below one-half the
present level, then plants would be in real trouble. Without carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, plants would
disappear. So would animals. And so would human beings.’ ‘High levels of carbon dioxide should
not concern us. They will make
plants grow faster.’ “
“I presume, Curmudge, that you
have your own observation to share.”
“Of course, Dear Student. If the vitality of the world’s economy
is sacrificed to reduce CO2 emissions in order to mitigate a false
anthropogenic global warming, future historians may view it as the greatest
boondoggle in the history of mankind.”
“Here, Old Guy, is a neat quotation: ‘Whenever you hear
(that) the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your
wallet, because you’re being had…consensus is the business of politics.’
(Crichton, p.67)”
Other
Priorities
“In the years just before ‘climategate’ blew up the case for
anthropogenic global warming (in the minds of many), several scholars began to
consider the relative merits of spending billions of dollars to reduce CO2
emissions. One such scholar is a
Dane, Bjorn Lomborg, who wrote op-ed articles for the Wall Street Journal. ‘A plan proposed by the G-8 nations
would cost the world $40 trillion a year in lost economic growth by the
year 2100.’ In contrast, Lomborg
said that ‘$3 billion per year spent on mosquito nets, interior DDT
sprays, and new therapies would cut malaria infections in half within 10
years.’ (Lomborg, WSJ, 12/15/09)”
“Curmudge, do our readers recall just how much a trillion
is? Here are two examples: If we
counted backward for a trillion seconds, what would the date be? Answer: 30,000 B.C. Here’s another: If we lined up a
trillion 6-inch bananas, they would reach from the earth to the sun.”
“Julie, a trillion dollars is mind-boggling to everyone
except a politician. Here are some
facts that are shocking and that suggest better ways to spend money than for
reducing CO2 emissions: Somewhere in the world a child dies every 20
seconds from lack of clean water.
A billion people in the world do not have access to even an outhouse and
might not know how to use it if they had one. (Data from Rotary International and from Doc Mack’s
observation in Afghanistan.)”
Energy from
Other Sources
“Hey, Prof, my collection of clippings says that the
government wants to cut CO2 emissions 80% by 2050. Lots of luck! Their favorite replacements for fossil fuels are wind and
solar. But the wind doesn’t always
blow and the sun doesn’t shine at night.
So to keep the beer cool in my refrigerator, conventional power plants
will need to stay on line to cycle up and down as needed. Very
inefficient.”
“You’ve got it, Julie.
Here’s another interesting tidbit: ‘In 2011 the world had 240,000
megawatts of wind–generation capacity.
To keep up with the growth in global electricity demand—while not
displacing any of the existing need for coal, oil, or natural gas—would require
the countries of the world to install as much wind-generation capacity as now
exists and do it every year. That would cover 48,000 square miles of
land with wind turbines, an area about the size of North Carolina.’ (Bryce,
WSJ, 12/17/12)”
“I’ve read the same article, Old Guy, and the forecast for
solar energy is also dismal.
‘Germany has more installed solar-energy capacity than any other
country. Last year (2011) Germany
produced 19 tera-watt-hours of electricity from solar. Just to keep pace with the growth in
global electricity demand, the world would have to install about 23 times as
much solar-energy capacity as now exists in Germany and do it year after year.’
“
“Despite the common irrational, intractable fear of
radiation, nuclear power remains the best alternative to the use of fossil
fuels. We discussed radiation at
length in our series of postings titled Unconventional
Wisdom starting on 2/28/13, and included nuclear power in the series finale
on 4/24/13. Authoritative discussions of
nuclear power, breeder reactors, and radioactive waste are available on Wikipedia and in Chapters
21 and 22 of Hiserodt’s book referenced in our 2/28/13
posting. Breeder
reactors have been used for power generation in France and Russia and are being
constructed in China and India. Robinson et al. have contended
that, ‘Current nuclear technology can produce abundant inexpensive energy if it
is not politically suppressed.’ “
“Curmudge, I sense that you’d love to write more about
nuclear power and breeder reactors, but a discussion of nuclear chemistry would
definitely reduce the readership of our blog. However, the issue of anthropogenic global warming isn’t
going away. So when the urge to say
more on that subject becomes
irresistible, we’ll be back.
Right, Old Guy?”
“Right as usual, Julie.”
Kaizen Curmudgeon
Link to posting from blog archives: Patient Safety—Overview 12/30/08
No comments:
Post a Comment