Climate Change -Again.

[happy daze john in oz]

WE have has a program on SBS here about Artic regions.

A local lady who has been there for 65 years and has studied the climate and region for over 40.

She told it this way,
'Yes there is climate change, always has been and always will be but not in the manner that many are scaring people with. Yes ice is melting, but it always has and freezes again.
But serious climate change takes thousands, if not millions of years to occur, then there are mini changes which can occur over hundreds of years.'

[Keith at Tregenna]

Adding link for info only, pos of interest, not mandatory.

Coronavirus shutdowns have unintended climate benefits: cleaner air, clearer water
"I think there are some big-picture lessons here that could be very useful," one scientist said.

Seems food for thought:

"As we move to restart these economies, we need to use this moment to think about what we value," she said. "Do we want to go back to the status quo, or do we want to tackle these big structural problems and restructure our economy and reduce emissions and pollution?"

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/envi...efits-n1161921

K.

.

[Keith Tindell]

Don't know how the air can be any cleaner, cars still running, what about the cremations going full taps worldwide, the Internet is much like any other part of the media, divide it by 20 percent, and treat the rest with caution, kt

[Keith at Tregenna]

Would meet your thought at 50 percent but still better,
the message really is with plummeting oil prices, fossil
fuel consumption will likely increase as the global
economy takes steps to recover.

Will we really want to go back totally to the way it was?

As said just food for thought.

K.

[vic mcclymont]

Reading these posts it is clearly a case of shoot the messenger and ignore the message. How many of us have had to take instructions from people who we did not like one bit. Especially on board but still complied with the instructions simply because they where right. As for marrying her in ten years time Brian have you thought how old you would be LOL if still around.

Les, the problem is the messenger has no answer, same with all the greens, no comprehensible solution apart from banning the use of fossil fuels.
Vic

[happy daze john in oz]

That piece about a clean new world is a cut and paste from the Financial Crisis of 2008/9.

As to Greta, something to think about.
Went across the ocean in a carbon yacht, obviously either not hers or she gets far too much pocket money.
Allowed to speak at the UN where no scientist on the matter were.
Obviously coached to use the words and terms she did.

[Captain Kong]

When she sailed across the Atlantic with those ten men, with No Toilet,
what did they do with the effluent??
Did she and them dump it into the ocean to pollute it and poison the fish????

[Jim R Christie]

Les, the problem is the messenger has no answer, same with all the greens, no comprehensible solution apart from banning the use of fossil fuels.
Vic

If there is no legislative or regulatory need to come up with an alternative, then industry, governments and the scientific community will have little interest in finding such an alternative. That is an adage well proven in nearly every industry.
To provide a suitable shipping related analogy to support that, simply look at ballast water treatment.
For decades enormous ecological and environmental harm has been caused worldwide by merchant ships dumping ballast water in ports or esturial areas with such imported water containing "alien" organisms from either a different country, continent or hemisphere.
Several countries took it upon themselves to introduce restrictions on what ballast water could be brought into their zones, the usual procedure being to force vessels to change out ballast water at least 200 miles from the coast and in at least 200 metres of water. This is of course not without it's hazards with regard to ship structure or stability.
Some years back the IMO - after much lobbying - decided enough was enough and proposed to bring such restrictions in worldwide. The only practical method would be to have water treatment systems be they either chemical or UV based which treat all ballast water before it goes over the side, thereby eliminating these foreign organisms. This is no mean feat when you consider that in the largest vessels you're potentially taking about ballast water tonnage in 5 or 6 figures.
The technology to do this did not exist before the Ballast Water Convention was introduced - it was only once it was signed that manufacturers, flag states and owners were forced to pursue that technology and make it work. For the most part this has been successful.
The same reasoning is being applied to fossil fuel replacement.
With regard to things like motor vehicles and their projected manufacturing bans a couple of decades from now, whilst we do have electric cars and their ilk at the moment, the technology is nowhere near mature enough for universal use and for the technology to develop at it's current rate would take far longer on it's own than if a deadline is set.

[Tony Taylor]

If there is no legislative or regulatory need to come up with an alternative, then industry, governments and the scientific community will have little interest in finding such an alternative. That is an adage well proven in nearly every industry.......................................

With regard to things like motor vehicles and their projected manufacturing bans a couple of decades from now, whilst we do have electric cars and their ilk at the moment, the technology is nowhere near mature enough for universal use and for the technology to develop at it's current rate would take far longer on it's own than if a deadline is set.

Jim, it is not just ballast water, what about all the things that live in sea water intakes, we will all have seen a variety of "wildlife" inside coolers, condensers etc.

[j.sabourn]

Most countries and Australia is one and has been for many years, had their own clean air acts , anti noise act at a certain decimal level, the ballast water has been there for at least 30 years. It wants only to be policed more ftoroughly for starters , especially the decimal one for noise. I have reduced hearing among other things but certain motorists keep me awake at night. For that reason alone I would like to see electric cars. Smog should definetley be kept at a minimum for the sake of public health. But to be able to control climate like one controls your air conditioning I like others have severe doubts. Your post is correct though in its thinking . Regards jS