Things are Starting to Heat Up - Part IX 10

[dik]

thread1618-496010:
thread1618-496614:
thread1618-497017:
thread1618-497239:
thread1618-497988:
thread1618-498967:
thread1618-501135:
thread1618-504850:


-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[dik]

It's like arguing with an engineer, I suspect...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[TugboatEng]

Engineer 1: This building has a structural deficiency.

Engineer 2: We must replace the building entirely.

Engineer 1: That is unreasonable, we can mitigate the deficiency.

Engineer 2: I guess we'll just have to wait and see

 

[dik]

By denying there could be a very serious problem, that's exactly what you are doing... we'll just wait and find out. Another option might be to try and remedy the problem with the building... did you think of that option?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[Tomfh]

The team found no clear increase in the number of storms in the Atlantic over that 168-year time frame

What’s most disturbing is so many people (policy makers included) are completely sure they can see a clear major increase with their own eyes. They can SEE IT. It is NOT IN DISPUTE.

How did this mass hysteria occur where people are claiming to see first hand an effect that is so subtle that the majority of studies can’t even find it?

 

[hokie66]

dik, you may not have recognized yourself in Tug's analogy. You are Engineer 2.

 

[TugboatEng]

I am missing some details, though. Somewhere, management is trying to figure out how to get the government to subsidize the total replacement of the structure so they're going to side with Engineer 2.

Otherwise, the post was alluding to the problem of the all or nothing approach.

 

[dik]

Sorry hokie, wrong again...as I noted, my solution would be "Another option might be to try and remedy the problem with the building... "

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[TugboatEng]

So your problem is that you're not really happy with how the building is being used so you want to use the mitigation process to simultaneously force a change of occupancy. "Remedy the problem with the building" doesn't mean fix the structural issues, It means to transform the building into one you like.

 

[dik]

Remedying means making it fit of the purpose it was originally constructed for. I don't know where you come up with your definitions, or ideas sometimes.

A new really good article on climate change. It explains a lot:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHGt9l6U5fM

I missed Bridge's comment... in response, the problem is too difficult for me, and I don't have a solution. If I knew of a fix, I don't have the resources to implement it. You don't need a solution to recognise a possible problem. By putting out information, it allows that are more capable of possibly coming up with a solution. No matter how you look at it, it appears things are heating up, and it doesn't appear the anyone is seriously thinking that this could be a major problem.


-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[TugboatEng]

I didn't say remedy, I said mitigate.

Aegrescit Medendo

 

[hokie66]

dik,

You persist in saying there is a problem coming, but you have no idea what to do about it, and will just have to wait and see. The title of this Forum is "Climate Change Engineering Solutions", yet you have started 9 threads so far, and have offered not one specific solution. Do you wonder why we are sceptical of your contributions?

 

[dik]

I don't have a solution that does not entail some serious 'cutbacks' and changes. There could be some serious changes to transportation, manufacturing, societies, geopolitics, etc.

By posting the most recent information I find, I'm providing others with the information and hoping that others may have a solution, or that others may decide there is not a serious potential problem. If you do not think the information is correct, that's your prerogitive; provide material to the contrary. With the current activity, we'll just have to wait and see what the outcome will be.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[dik]

Wind turbines:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/19/us/floating-offshore-wind-energy-turbines-climate/index.html

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Do you wonder why we are skeptical of your contributions?

Honestly, I'm not skeptical of dik's contribution. I think he is refreshingly honest about the issue. True, this forum is engineering solutions. But, a solution is rarely completely engineering in nature. Especially one which involves the entire world working together. Coming up with solutions that involve multiple nations is more political than engineering. Also, coming up with solutions that are affordable and cost efficient are economic as much as they are engineering.

In reality any "complete solution" for global warming is going to be multi-disciplinary and is so incredibly complex (politically and economically) that it's almost guaranteed to fail. That being said, there are smaller "partial solutions" that will help us. That's what I'm focused on. But, I tend to think that Dik's correct.... These are not complete solutions and eventually, less palatable solutions may very well be required. We just don't have the immediacy and clear necessity that demand those less palatable solutions. Maybe we will if things get worse. I believe that's a partial (but imperfect) summary of dik's position.

Where we are right now (IMO) is that we can afford and invoke these minor "solutions" without tremendous economic consequences. We're talking pushing the economy towards hybrid and electric cars (which the market is doing anyways), moving away from coal power as quickly as we can, encouraging nuclear power, hydro and other sources of power that don't emit CO2. Those are what I personally think we SHOULD be doing to set ourselves up what we fear may be coming.

But, Dik (and many, many other people in this world) don't believe this will be enough. That voice / contribution isn't trivial. He's much more honest and realistic about the chances of getting more dramatic changes implemented now than others with his beliefs are. I'm very happy to hear his contributions. It's better than living in a echo chamber where people only agree with me and never challenge me intellectually. Certainly we can be skeptical of him (just as he can be skeptical of you and me).

 

[rb1957]

"I don't have a solution that does not entail some serious 'cutbacks' and changes." aye, and therein lies the rub, and part of my feeling that the CO2 thing has been oversold. The early strident calls for change, some 20 years ago, were backed up by threats of imminent doom and possibly "we're past the "legendry" tipping point" ... and there "legendry" works in both senses of the word !

And sure over that 20 years we've made some progress, clearly not enough for the "believers". And this on the back of much government subsidies (paid for by taxpayers and mortgaging our future). Some people are getting very rich, many are getting poorer, and not much is changing. T'was ever thus.



"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.

 

[Tomfh]

I don't have a solution that does not entail some serious 'cutbacks' and changes

That’s what it will take. We will have to largely revert to pre industrial quality of life. No more being carried around in 2 tonne metal cages to avoid the hassle of walking. No more large cushy air conditioned spaces.

As it is people want net zero with no significant reduction in quality of life, which is utter fantasy. It’s all the utter rubbish about “stopping big carbon polluters”, as though we’re not the ones fuelling it.

 

[dik]

Maybe a start to a cleaner environment:

"The idea is that countries like China that burn a lot of coal to run their factories could be persuaded to cut emissions so their companies aren't boxed out of the EU market. Meanwhile, countries like the U.S., which already have fairly strict environmental regulations, might also begin taxing the emissions linked to imports in order to protect their own domestic industries."

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/17/1171...ies-around-the-world-to-cut-climate-pollution

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[TugboatEng]

That's the right way to do this. Tariff imports from low cost countries until they meet out equivalent environmental and humanitarian standards.

Sadly, our current administration in the USA has no interest.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bi...block-solar-panel-tariffs-waivers-2023-05-16/

 

[Tomfh]

The reason China makes everything is because they don’t bother with the environmental and labour constraints that the West follows. That’s why we pay them to make all our stuff.

Telling them to meet environmental and labour standards is a total nonsense when the reason we engaged them in the first place is because they don’t.

 

[GregLocock]

Most of the West's decarbonising to date is a mirage, we've just exported the dirty work elsewhere.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?