Prices of the electricity we use to charge

MikelBikel

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 6, 2017
907
329
Ireland
Interesting, co2 lags *Behind* temperature.
Science , Not "sceance"
Vostok-ice-core-temperature-and-CO2-Mearns-2533574145.png
 
Last edited:

Peter.Bridge

Esteemed Pedelecer
Apr 19, 2023
1,261
583
View attachment 60628
Earthobservatory.nasa.gov
No hockey stick in 1999..
It's cooler than the 1930's.
Thought they'd binned all these old, accurate graphs, haha :)

'Little Ice Age'?, 1650 to 1700ish. What happened then? No camp fires for 50yrs maybe, hehe.

Greenies better not look at medieval warm period either then, c900 to c1300. Coz there's no industry to explain it!
View attachment 60629
"prosperous time in European history. The interval was concurrent with Norse explorations of the New World, the founding of Norse settlements in Iceland and Greenland, and increased agricultural productivity and crop diversity in northern Europe"
Can't have that wine in England, can we, meanie greenies? :)
Can you link to the original source of your graph of US temperatures ?
Why have you not shown the last 25 years on your graph of US temperatures ?



Do you know why the temperatures were so high in the US in the 1930s and 1940s ?


How and when did H. H. Lamb produce his Central England temperature reconstruction ?

(See appendix a)
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Peter.Bridge

Esteemed Pedelecer
Apr 19, 2023
1,261
583
Interesting, co2 lags *Behind* temperature.
Science , Not "sceance"
View attachment 60633
Do you understand why ?

 

soundwave

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 23, 2015
16,888
6,499
pussy on strike !!!
 
  • :D
Reactions: MikelBikel

lenny

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 3, 2023
2,587
768
The incel trap

Angry and lonely young men can easily enter a web of hatred against women online. Is there a way out?
 

Ghost1951

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 2, 2024
1,584
624
For the vast majority of that time, humans didn't exist.
Absolutely right. Humans evolved during one of the coldest periods the earth has ever known and were for a lot of that time restricted to Africa and the tropics. We are a naked ape and are unsuited to life outside the tropics without technology to keep us warm. This is still true today. In order to extend our range outside tropical environments we need warm clothing and heating. Try living without it. Go outside and take a long walk in your bathing trunks even now, let alone in winter. Try spending a night outside like that, and you risk death.

We also need technological developments to enable us to continue eating during winter in latitudes outside the tropics. Large scale food storage and transport are essential in the higher latitudes, because food does not grow there in the winter time. Animals would starve in the fields unless farmers produced and stored large amounts of grass for winter in the form of hay and silage. This is not true in the tropics where we evolved in African forests and Savannah. The cradle of our species can be seen today in countries like Tanzania. The earliest remains of hominid species are found in East Africa. It is a great deal warmer there than the mean global temperature. The mean annual temperature in Tanzania is 23 - 26 degrees c.

Peter.Bridge said:
Global Warming isn't a problem for the Earth, it's a problem for humans i.e. speed of the current warming and where people live
I have said many times as you will recall, that CONTINUED and EXTENSIVE warming will have serious impacts on SOME people and some impacts on others. Quite how much is debatable.

My use of the NOAA graph of the last half billion year temperature was to put in context the rather problematic use of temperature anomaly graphs which are pretty much all we see these days. They exaggerate the current warming by making very large changes on the Y axis when the absolute value of changes is very small. One degree C is a small change which may increase storm severity, but these impacts are not yet world changing with the rise in co2 levels from 240ppm to 417ppm. For context 417ppm of co2 means that co2 is at one molecule in every 2398 of the air. For every molecule of co2 in the atmosphere there are 2400 other gas molecules. Co2 in earth's atmosphere is a trace gas even now.

Photosynthesis stops at co2 levels of 150 ppm. All plants die.

The pre -industrial levels of co2 around 240 ppm are very low by earth's long term standards. Greenhouse growers artificially elevate co2 in their greenhouses to 1000 parts per million to increase plant growth and productivity. Moderately higher levels of co2 will green the earth very much more than it now is.

Try googling "what is the optimum atmospheric co2 concentration for plant productivity?"
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: MikelBikel

soundwave

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 23, 2015
16,888
6,499
its to cold to grow cheese out side every one i tried dead :oops:
 
  • :D
Reactions: MikelBikel

lenny

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 3, 2023
2,587
768
Incels and the Gaming-Radicalization Nexus
Many incels, including Genco, frequent bespoke online forums which thematically focus on their experiences as incels, “blackpilling” each other, and promoting misogynistic views.
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,362
16,869
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
Try googling "what is the optimum atmospheric co2 concentration for plant productivity?"
CO2 is poisonous. The average concentration in the atmosphere tells only part of the story. If you breathe tailpipe gas, you'll lose consciousness in seconds and die in about 3 minutes of CO2 poisoning. Consider this: life on earth is concentrated in just a couple of kms on the surface of the earth while CO2 concentration goes 1000 miles into the earth crust. We still don't know how many species will be wiped out every year until we make our planet sustainable.
 

Chainring

Esteemed Pedelecer
Apr 24, 2013
333
162
I've been reading many of these posts and learned a lot. I think there are people on here who are sceptical of 'Net Zero'. I have been slow to catch on! We had a lady at the door offering free solar panels, heat pump etc. When I declined (she was the eighth one to visit) she offered a new (flat) roof FREE! I take it that many others are reluctant so they are pushing hard.
 

Ghost1951

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 2, 2024
1,584
624
CO2 is poisonous. The average concentration in the atmosphere tells only part of the story. If you breathe tailpipe gas, you'll lose consciousness in seconds and die in about 3 minutes of CO2 poisoning. Consider this: life on earth is concentrated in just a couple of kms on the surface of the earth while CO2 concentration goes 1000 miles into the earth crust. We still don't know how many species will be wiped out every year until we make our planet sustainable.
What?

I am pretty surprised to see those remarks. You need to learn about this subject before spouting rubbish.

CO2 is the medium by which all of life gets its carbon. We are carbon based life forms. CO2 is poisonous in the same way as water is poisonous if you take a person and submerge them in it and keep them there. Oxygen is poisonous to new born infants BUT ONLY IN VERY HIGH CONCENTRATIONS.

By very high, I mean in the context of co2 over 10% of the gas breathed.

Right now, the co2 content of the atmosphere is 0.037%. That is a VERY long way from 10%. You would need to increase the concentration 270 times to reach that level. It would be ridiculous, as is you statement. In the whole of the period since the Industrial Revolution, our species has increased the co2 concentration of the atmosphere from about 250 parts per million to 417 parts per million that means from one molecule of co2 per 4000 molecules of air, to one molecule of co2 per 2400 of air. It is a trace gas in our atmosphere.

To become poisonous, co2 would need to be 100,000 parts per million.

The exhaust from a car tailpipe should be around 14% co2. No body pipes a car exhaust into their lungs. FAR more poisonous is the C0 content of car exhaust - carbon monoxide. It interferes with the ability of the blood to carry oxygen. It is a gas controlled by emission regulations. If you light your gas cooker in the kitchen, the CO is produced but not controlled.

Everything I said is true. You were talking nonsense.

Greenhouse growers DO increase the C02 concentration of their growing environment to almost three times the current natural level. Their workers function perfectly well in that environment and the plants do much better, grow faster and produce heavier crops. This is why the growers think the expense of concentrating co2 is worthwhile.

The final paragraph of your comment is also bizarre. CO2 locked up in carbonate rocks in the earth's crust is not affected at all by what is going on in the current atmosphere. That rocky version of co2 under our feet, was fixed millions and billions of years ago by sea creatures in their shells, mostly at times when the natural concentration of co2 was about ten times what it is now. Ancient atmospheric co2 dissolved in oceans, and was taken up by microscopic sea creatures and shelled animals and sank to the bottom of the oceans when they died, eventually forming limestone and chalk. ALL life on earth depends on co2 being above 150 parts per million. At that level, photosynthesis stops and plants no longer survive at all. Where would we be then?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chainring

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,362
16,869
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
I thought you may think I don't make sense. What I meant is look at the gradient. All the charts you quoted were about average concentration of CO2 once it is diluted into the high atmosphere and into the seas and into everything else.
The gradient is more important in terms of rising temperatures where large populations live, than the average.
Saneagle also made the same mistake when talking about sea temperatures.
 
Last edited:

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,188
30,597
CO2 is poisonous. The average concentration in the atmosphere tells only part of the story. If you breathe tailpipe gas, you'll lose consciousness in seconds and die in about 3 minutes of CO2 poisoning. Consider this: life on earth is concentrated in just a couple of kms on the surface of the earth while CO2 concentration goes 1000 miles into the earth crust. We still don't know how many species will be wiped out every year until we make our planet sustainable.
What?

I am pretty surprised to see those remarks. You need to learn about this subject before spouting rubbish.

CO2 is the medium by which all of life gets its carbon. We are carbon based life forms. CO2 is poisonous in the same way as water is poisonous if you take a person and submerge them in it and keep them there. Oxygen is poisonous to new born infants BUT ONLY IN VERY HIGH CONCENTRATIONS.

By very high, I mean in the context of co2 over 10% of the gas breathed.

Right now, the co2 content of the atmosphere is 0.037%. That is a VERY long way from 10%. You would need to increase the concentration 270 times to reach that level. It would be ridiculous, as is you statement. In the whole of the period since the Industrial Revolution, our species has increased the co2 concentration of the atmosphere from about 250 parts per million to 417 parts per million that means from one molecule of co2 per 4000 molecules of air, to one molecule of co2 per 2400 of air. It is a trace gas in our atmosphere.

To become poisonous, co2 would need to be 100,000 parts per million.

The exhaust from a car tailpipe should be around 14% co2. No body pipes a car exhaust into their lungs. FAR more poisonous is the C0 content of car exhaust - carbon monoxide. It interferes with the ability of the blood to carry oxygen. It is a gas controlled by emission regulations. If you light your gas cooker in the kitchen, the CO is produced but not controlled.

Everything I said is true. You were talking nonsense.

Greenhouse growers DO increase the C02 concentration of their growing environment to almost three times the current natural level. Their workers function perfectly well in that environment and the plants do much better, grow faster and produce heavier crops. This is why the growers think the expense of concentrating co2 is worthwhile.

The final paragraph of your comment is also bizarre. CO2 locked up in carbonate rocks in the earth's crust is not affected at all by what is going on in the current atmosphere. That rocky version of co2 under our feet, was fixed millions and billions of years ago by sea creatures in their shells, mostly at times when the natural concentration of co2 was about ten times what it is now. Ancient atmospheric co2 dissolved in oceans, and was taken up by microscopic sea creatures and shelled animals and sank to the bottom of the oceans when they died, eventually forming limestone and chalk. ALL life on earth depends on co2 being above 150 parts per million. At that level, photosynthesis stops and plants no longer survive at all. Where would we be then?
The Lake Nyos disaster
.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Woosh

Peter.Bridge

Esteemed Pedelecer
Apr 19, 2023
1,261
583
I have said many times as you will recall, that CONTINUED and EXTENSIVE warming will have serious impacts on SOME people and some impacts on others. Quite how much is debatable.
On the contrary, most of the impacts are well understood, both geographically and topically



My use of the NOAA graph of the last half billion year temperature was to put in context the rather problematic use of temperature anomaly graphs which are pretty much all we see these days. They exaggerate the current warming by making very large changes on the Y axis when the absolute value of changes is very small.
You don't seem to understand why temperature anomalies are used

.


One degree C is a small change which may increase storm severity, but these impacts are not yet world changing with the rise in co2 levels from 240ppm to 417ppm.
You also don't seem to understand the difference between Transient Climate Response and Equilibrium Climate sensitivity

For context 417ppm of co2 means that co2 is at one molecule in every 2398 of the air. For every molecule of co2 in the atmosphere there are 2400 other gas molecules. Co2 in earth's atmosphere is a trace gas even now.
So what ? It is the infrared absorption characteristics that are relevant


Try googling "what is the optimum atmospheric co2 concentration for plant productivity?"
This was the answer I got

You can cherry-pick the CO2 fertilization effect from the overall effect of adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, but that is not how the world—or its climate—works.

 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc and Woosh

MikelBikel

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 6, 2017
907
329
Ireland
global+temperature+graph-3990609852.jpg
So greenies can't control volcanoes? Who would've thunk it? Maybe they can work their "Zero" magic on them? :cool:

Mount Pinatubo, Philippines 1991, rapid cooling by blocking the Sun..

Tonga seems to be erupting every year? Including biggest ever underwater one (recorded, I assume). Would that water vapour affect temperature? Yes.

The planet sees your piffling co2 and raises you.. hold on how is this measured? Mmm
At Mauna Loa observatory, down slope from.. an active volcano!
Inadvertently gives themselves away!
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,362
16,869
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
V2G is now available in Australia. Expect UK to follow suite.
Octopus reckons you can save up to £850 a year.
.
 

Peter.Bridge

Esteemed Pedelecer
Apr 19, 2023
1,261
583
View attachment 60634
So greenies can't control volcanoes? Who would've thunk it? Maybe they can work their "Zero" magic on them? :cool:

Mount Pinatubo, Philippines 1991, rapid cooling by blocking the Sun..

Tonga seems to be erupting every year? Including biggest ever underwater one (recorded, I assume). Would that water vapour affect temperature? Yes.

The planet sees your piffling co2 and raises you.. hold on how is this measured? Mmm
At Mauna Loa observatory, down slope from.. an active volcano!
Inadvertently gives themselves away!
You've still got plenty to go https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php
 

saneagle

Esteemed Pedelecer
Oct 10, 2010
6,812
3,146
Telford
When Trump weeds out all the government corruption, do you think that the climate change data will get adjusted, or will it get adjusted to show no climate change for some other reason?

Here's his plan from a year ago. No wonder they tried to kill him three times. It looks pretty good to me. Hopefully UK can learn from USA so that we can get the same:
 
Last edited: