Burchey
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 01:43pm PT
|
I love logic. I love reason. I can't stand hysteria. Unfortunately, this whole issue is tainted with a sh*tload of hysteria, mostly by those who would mock or shout-down anyone who dares to question the theories of MMGW. It's the same way a lot of my friends were hysterical over candidate Obama, but couldn't really provide solid arguments as to why he was so great. A lot of these same folks had graduate degrees. A lot of them had graduate degrees in science. Lovely people, but not immune to letting politics shape the way they view/spew the facts surrounding an issue.
I hate that we pollute, and most of us could improve on the amount of waste we create. That being said, I don't think that every law coming down the pike to "control the warming" makes sense, nor do I think that man is the main reason we have cyclical warming/cooling cycles on the earth.
|
|
Bruce Kay
Gym climber
BC
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 01:43pm PT
|
Granite, I think you're right. Malemute already mentioned the dunning Kruger effect.
nor do I think that man is the main reason we have cyclical warming/cooling cycles on the earth.
Fair enough, but why? When there is so much compelling evidence and expert opinion supporting the opposite, then why do you believe this, that which has so little suport?
And I'm not being hysterical
|
|
rectorsquid
climber
Lake Tahoe
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 01:52pm PT
|
Warming brings the snow down from the NW?
I don't know the details of it all, but we at Tahoe seem to get the most snowfall when the storms blow in from the mid pacific and not from the north. The warmer air to the south picks up more moisture then mixes with the cold jetstream that moves the storms in to the area. When the jetstream is coming from further north, the air is drier and we get less snow.
The position of the jetstream changes with changes in atmospheric and ocean temperatures. The amount of moisture that can be held in a storm is directly related to the temperature of the air which is affected by temperature of the ocean. These things are true regardless of their being man made climate change.
Temperature changes of the entire earth can manifest themselves in less than obvious ways to a layman. Global warming can bring lessen snowfall to an area to the north while the area to its south gets more. In other places, they might get more rain than before while others will get drought.
Dave
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 01:53pm PT
|
That being said, I don't think that every law coming down the pike to "control the warming" makes sense, nor do I think that man is the main reason we have cyclical warming/cooling cycles on the earth.
Burchey, try reading back through the non-chiefified parts of this thread. I don't think you'll find anyone, anywhere claiming that every law makes sense, or that man is the main reason for cyclical warming and cooling. With some reading you could get a better sense of what scientists actually do think, and maybe enter a discussion that is not about straw men.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 01:59pm PT
|
Here in New England the ski industry is well aware of how their winters are changing -- becoming warmer but more importantly shorter. Snowmaking helps compensate so long as temperatures stay below freezing, but winter rains can mess up weeks of hard work, or prematurely end the season.
I was interviewed by a writer doing a story about this last week. One dimension is that the step-pause-step pattern of 20th century warming affected how the historical ski industry developed.
|
|
rectorsquid
climber
Lake Tahoe
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 02:07pm PT
|
...nor do I think that man is the main reason we have cyclical warming/cooling cycles on the earth.
It is very possible that current trends are caused by things other than man and C02 in the atmosphere. Then again, It is a scientific fact that C02 and other gases do cause a change to the way the atmosphere transmits light and heat. The way C02 and other gases behave is not just speculation or theory any more than the reason for the blue sky is a theory.
Simple logic would then tell us that if C02 is actually a "greenhouse gas" and that we are increasing the C02 in the atmosphere, then the earth will get hotter.
Scientists disagree with each other about how much and what effect it has. I don't think that any rational person who understands the physics of gasses and light/head transmission would debate that increased C02 in the atmosphere is a good thing.
The problem with the whole debate is that ordinary folks don't understand the physics of it and also that ordinary folks will reject everything that a scientist says as soon as it is beyond their own understanding. Recent prison sentences for geologists shows how ignorant and stupid ordinary people can be.
So who here is for imprisoning scientists and who here thinks that maybe, just maybe, the 329 billion tons of carbon dioxide have been poured into the atmosphere from burning fossil fuels since 1750, is a bad thing [1]?
Dave
[1] http://onlyzerocarbon.org/carbon_dioxide.html is probably a bias site but 1/10 of that numbers still seems like a lot. Forest fires can contribute that much although carbon is sequestered by teh trees until they burn making that contribution possibly negligible because of the balance (http://www.geotimes.org/nov07/article.html?id=WebExtra111207.html)
|
|
The Chief
climber
Climber from the Land Mongols under the Whites
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 02:15pm PT
|
It is very possible that current trends are caused by things other than man and C02 in the atmosphere. Then again, It is a scientific fact that C02 and other gases do cause a change to the way the atmosphere transmits light and heat. The way C02 and other gases behave is not just speculation or theory any more than the reason for the blue sky is a theory. Ah, maybe these factors have some influence ya think...
Their being in a Positive or Negative Phase may just have a little to do with it all.... maybe.
ADO
PDO
NAO
AO
Quite interesting how Chiloe never brings these weather pattern "forcing" factors to bear. Hmmmmm.
For example, the AO maintained a Negative Phase for most of last Winter. We here got nada and Alaska got hammered. Record snows and low temp.
The year prior, the AO maintianed a Pos Phase during the Winter and we down here got hammered with record snowfalls.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/daily_ao_index/month_ao_index.shtml
One can compare the phases to snowfall in the West and you would be pleasantly surprised.
Try and debunk that Larry.
Again, hmmmmmmm.
Oh yeah, the AO (Arctic Oscillation) has absolutely NADA to do with warming.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 02:37pm PT
|
Quite interesting how Chiloe never brings these weather pattern "forcing"factors to bear.
Rick Poedtke ("The Chief") posts yet another false claim.
Just f'rinstance, two paragraphs from one paper:
THE NAO AND WEST GREENLAND CLIMATE
The North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) refers to a large-scale alternation of atmospheric mass between the Icelandic Low and the Azores High pressure centers, most pronounced in wintertime (Hurrell, 1995; Dickson et al., 1996). Together with the better-known El Nińo/Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the NAO explains much of the interannual variability in worldwide weather and climate (Hurrell and van Loon, 1997). Calculations based on differences between historical air-pressure measurements from Lisbon, Portugal (or alternatively, the Azores or Gibraltar) and Stykkishólmur, Iceland yield an NAO index extending back into the 19th century (Hurrell, 1995). Analyses of ice cores, tree rings and other proxies have found long-term evidence of decadal-scale climatic cycles around the North Atlantic, although their relationship to the modern NAO remains problematic (Schmutz et al., 2000).
Positive or high-NAO conditions classically involve a low-pressure anomaly centered on Greenland, with a zonal high-pressure anomaly across the Atlantic to its south, and strong westerly winds in between. Surface winds tend to be northerly over Greenland and eastern Canada, bringing down cold Arctic air. Conversely, negative or low-NAO conditions involve higher pressure over Greenland and lower pressure to the south. Surface winds tend to be southerly and air temperatures warmer over Greenland and eastern Canada. Figure 2 graphs the Lisbon–Iceland winter NAO index over 1900–2001. NOA index values in Figure 2 reflect the difference of normalized (relative to 1864–1983) sea level pressures between Lisbon, Portugal and Stykkishólmur/Reykjavík, Iceland, averaged for the months of December through March. These data cover winters from 1899/1900 through 2000/2001. Also shown are the three-year running means. The most extreme and persistent negative phase occurred during the 1950s and 1960s. After 1970, NAO behavior shifted into a cyclical, persistent and extreme positive phase. Anomalous negative conditions interrupted this positive phase in the winters of 1995–1996 and 2000–2001.
source: Hamilton, Brown & Rasmussen (2003)
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 02:50pm PT
|
Burchey: ...nor do I think that man is the main reason we have cyclical warming/cooling cycles on the earth.
No one anywhere is saying man is responsible for "cyclical warming/cooling cycles on the earth". What is being said, is man is now significantly involved in how those cycles play out.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 02:58pm PT
|
What is being said is man is now significantly involved in how those cycles play out.
Yes
Mankind now has developed the technology to alter the weather to some degree.
Unfortunately mankind is to stupid too do it right.
Also thru the industrialization of the world we've altered the weather.
Industrialization of the world, "the iron age" is due to more of mankind's stoopidity.
Mankind is not very intelligent when they theorize and speculate on what is good and what is bad because of the bottom line ....
Mankind is stupid when acting independent of it's true nature ........
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 02:59pm PT
|
And, back on the snow topic, here's a graphic tracking the number of ski areas, either tiny (non-chairlift) or at least somewhat larger (chairlift), in NH through the 20th century.
source: Hamilton, Rohall, Brown, Hayward & Keim (2003)
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 03:23pm PT
|
I see Crotched Mountain has an active website and so must still be in business (I lived in Francestown for a couple of years).
|
|
The Chief
climber
Climber from the Land Mongols under the Whites
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 03:41pm PT
|
Ah Larry Hamilton..
The AO... Arctic Osc
Not the NAO affects the WESTERN SKI AREAS.
Yur paper concerns the menial little podunk NH hills.
My Point. But of course you are good at deflecting.
Bravo
For the record, here is the NAO history which of course has NOTHING TO DO WITH WARMING and one can see that the same affect occurs as does the AO on the Eastcoast during the POS and NEG Phases:
Also LARRY, your bottom graph indicates that NH Temps have increased almost 3C since 1980. That equates to almost 6F. Hmmm. Interesting
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 04:08pm PT
|
False:
My Point.
Here, I'll quote you again, to show exactly what your "point" was that I responded to:
False:
ADO
PDO
NAO
AO
Quite interesting how Chiloe never brings these weather pattern "forcing" factors to bear. Hmmmmm.
False:
Yur paper concerns the menial little podunk NH hills.
Didn't even look at it, did you? Try again, what's that NAO passage from?
|
|
Norte_Carolińa_Climber
Gym climber
BigWall Baller From the Holler
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 04:23pm PT
|
Go easy on him, how could he know that New Hampshire ain't in Greenland? I don't imagine they teach a lot of geography in firehose-jockey school.
|
|
The Chief
climber
Climber from the Land Mongols under the Whites
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 04:53pm PT
|
Larry CHILOE:
Can you please cite the local USHCN Surface Stations utilized to gather your temp data for this graph.
Thanks!
Oh... I am not paying no $25 to read your entire paper.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 04:59pm PT
|
healyje:
I see Crotched Mountain has an active website and so must still be in business
Yep, Crotched Mountain is still there. But King Ridge, where I used to ski with my daughter, is gone. And Mt Whittier along the way to N Cornflake, or Highlands along the way to Cannon.
There's a cool, bittersweet website -- NELSAP, New England Lost Ski Areas Project, "preserving the history of 599 lost ski areas." NELSAP (and personal experience) was our inspiration for writing that NH paper.
http://www.nelsap.org/
|
|
The Chief
climber
Climber from the Land Mongols under the Whites
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 05:06pm PT
|
Per your website LARRY:
looks into the over-investment local competition, weather variation, changing skier habits, insurance costs and just plain bad luck that caused these areas to succumb and melt back into the landscape.
Not one word regarding Global Warming as the primary cause for these "lost SA's".
How about them USHCN Surface Stations you all used for the paper/graph.
I love logic. I love reason. I can't stand hysteria. Unfortunately, this whole issue is tainted with a sh*tload of hysteria, mostly by those who would mock or shout-down anyone who dares to question the theories of MMGW. It's the same way a lot of my friends were hysterical over candidate Obama, but couldn't really provide solid arguments as to why he was so great. A lot of these same folks had graduate degrees. A lot of them had graduate degrees in science. Lovely people, but not immune to letting politics shape the way they view/spew the facts surrounding an issue.
I hate that we pollute, and most of us could improve on the amount of waste we create. That being said, I don't think that every law coming down the pike to "control the warming" makes sense, nor do I think that man is the main reason we have cyclical warming/cooling cycles on the earth.
Nice Post Burch!
|
|
Dr. F.
Ice climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2012 - 05:52pm PT
|
How Germany Is Getting to 100 Percent Renewable Energy
by Thomas Hedges
Published on Thursday, November 15, 2012 by TruthDig.com
There is no debate on climate change in Germany. The temperature for the past 10 months has been three degrees above average and we’re again on course for the warmest year on record. There’s no dispute among Germans as to whether this change is man-made, or that we contribute to it and need to stop accelerating the process.
Since 2000, Germany has converted 25 percent of its power grid to renewable energy sources such as solar, wind and biomass. The architects of the clean energy movement Energiewende, which translates to “energy transformation,” estimate that from 80 percent to 100 percent of Germany’s electricity will come from renewable sources by 2050.
Germans are baffled that the United States has not taken the same path. Not only is the U.S. the wealthiest nation in the world, but it’s also credited with jump-starting Germany’s green movement 40 years ago.
“This is a very American idea,” Arne Jungjohann, a director at the Heinrich Boll Stiftung Foundation (HBSF), said at a press conference Tuesday morning in Washington, D.C. “We got this from Jimmy Carter.”
Germany adopted and continued Carter’s push for energy conservation while the U.S. abandoned further efforts. The death of an American Energiewende solidified when President Ronald Reagan ripped down the solar panels atop the White House that Carter had installed.
Since then, Germany has created strong incentives for the public to invest in renewable energy. It pays people to generate electricity from solar panels on their houses. The effort to turn more consumers into producers is accelerated through feed-in tariffs, which are 20-year contracts that ensure a fixed price the government will pay. Germany lowers the price every year, so there’s good reason to sign one as soon as possible, before compensation falls further.
The money the government uses to pay producers comes from a monthly surcharge on utility bills that everyone pays, similar to a rebate. Ratepayers pay an additional cost for the renewable energy fund and then get that money back from the government, at a profit, if they are producing their own energy.
In the end, ratepayers control the program, not the government. This adds consistency, Davidson says. If the government itself paid, it would be easy for a new finance minister to cut the program upon taking office. Funding is not at the whim of politicians as it is in the U.S.
“Everyone has skin in the game,” says writer Osha Gray Davidson. “The movement is decentralized and democratized, and that’s why it works. Anybody in Germany can be a utility.”
The press conference the foundation organized with InsideClimate News comes two weeks after one of the biggest storms in U.S. history and sits in the shadow of the Keystone XL Pipeline, which would unlock the world’s second-largest oil reserve in Canada. The event also comes one day after a report that says that the U.S. is on track to become the leading oil and gas producer by 2020, which suggests that the U.S. has the capability to match Germany’s green movement, but is instead using its resources to deepen its dependency on fossil fuels.
Many community organizers have given up on government and are moving to spark a green movement in the U.S. through energy cooperatives.
Anya Schoolman is a D.C. organizer who has started many co-ops in the district although she began with no experience. She says that converting to renewable energy one person at a time would not work in the U.S. because of legal complexities and tax laws that discourage people from investing in clean energy.
Grid managers in the U.S., she explains, often require households to turn off wind turbines at night, a practice called “curtailment.”
“It’s a favor to the utility companies,” she says, which don’t hold as much power in Germany as they do in the United States.
Individuals and cooperatives own 65 percent of Germany’s renewable energy capacity. In the U.S. they own 2 percent. The rest is privately controlled.
The largest difference, panelists said, between Germany and the U.S. is how reactive the government is to its citizens. Democracy in Germany has meant keeping and strengthening regulatory agencies while forming policies that put public ownership ahead of private ownership.
“In the end,” says Davidson, who spent a month in Germany studying the Energiewende, “it isn’t about making money. It’s about quality of life.”
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!