Global warming

[GCA3N]

Is Global warming and climate change man made ?

Would be interesting to know others opinions on this. Me personally I think it's a bit of both, do I think we can make a difference, then I would say yes.

[Craig]

I believe it is both, however if everyone in Scotland changed their way of living to be carbon neutral etc then it was have little or no effect because of the way USA/China/India etc etc are behaving and the HUGE difference in population. I think we do pretty well in Scotland for looking after the environment. ;)

I read somewhere recently that someone wanted us to stop breeding cows cos they cos lots of methane and that we should all be vegetarians...! :thud::Whistle:

[Smitty]

Great topic...bit of a passion of mine :thumbs up:

I, without a doubt, think it's both. There is evidence that there is always a natural shift in planet temperatures over a period of 100,000's of years. But we can also not deny that the change in temperature has rapidly increased since civilisation "boomed".

If you don't believe that our CO2 output is the effect of global warming, then that's fine. But what cannot be argueed is we HAVE to reduce our consumption to save our natural resources (Oil, Gas, Coal to a cetain extent, Rainforests etc).

The problem is that we in the UK are a fairly advanced society, and are very aware of the effects of CO2 emmisions. China on the other hand, are in their development years, are sitting on a lifetime supply of coal and are commisioning 2 new coal power plants a week. And who are we to stop them? Meanwhile in the UK...we can't even get the go ahead to build one new coal plant with CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) attatched.

But someone has to start, and I think the UK is right to try and take the lead. Otherwise, everyone will sit there, do nothing and the consecuences will be felt by all 50/100 years down the line!


I think we do pretty well in Scotland for looking after the environment. ;)


I think "we" have made a start but do no where near enough, not even close! :frown: :argh:

[The Dogfather]

We don't know, science can't prove whether its us or natural. Its become almost a religion, people who don't believe its our fault or want to debate our impact are branded as heretics. Yet, despite the fact we can't be sure if we are responsible we are having restrictions imposed and being taxed in its name.

Personally, I think its just given the government an excuse to raise taxes.

Regardless of whether its man made or not, the UK will be affected. IMO rather than trying to save ourselves with expensive windfarms etc we should be moving people from areas that'll be lost to the sea and strengthening sea defences in other areas.

[Smitty]

Personally, I think its just given the government an excuse to raise taxes.

Do you really think the UK goverment (and goverments around the world) would be pushing the climate change so heavily just as an excuse to raise taxes? I think they have enough things to worry about without wrongly "scaring" the British public more! :hand:


IMO rather than trying to save ourselves with expensive windfarms etc we should be moving people from areas that'll be lost to the sea and strengthening sea defences in other areas.

Fair play with moving people away from these areas and investing in sea defences - very sensible approach :yes nod:

But your reference to Wind Farms is very much misguided. Wind farms are actually a fairly inexpensive way of devloping and generating renewable, carbon free energy - particulary onshore farms. Off-shore constructions prices are beginning to become more commercially viable with each farm that is built.

[Bazthemod]

Mixture of both really.... there are so many people employed now in climate change projects that theres never gonna come a time when things are improving. They will always argue its the end of the planet to keep their jobs! :rolleyes::D

Wont stop me putting my foot down, here for a good time not a long time ;)

Oh and remember the scare mongering about the sea currents shifting course that would plunge the UK into ice age??? That seems to have been hushed over haha nobody knows anything for sure!

[The Dogfather]

But your reference to Wind Farms is very much misguided. Wind farms are actually a fairly inexpensive way of devloping and generating renewable, carbon free energy - particulary onshore farms. Off-shore constructions prices are beginning to become more commercially viable with each farm that is built.

Rubbish, they are expensive to maintain, supply intermittent power and don't make commercial sense without the back hander from the government. I'm not misguided, I'm probably far more informed than most considering I used to work for the the bit of the DTI that controlled the policy and promoted the development of renewable energy sources.

If you get a high pressure over the UK in January most windfarms wouldn't be generating any energy yet the demand for electricity is likely to be at its highest...

[GCA3N]

here for a good time not a long time ;)




:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[binnie]

i think its natural......


i beleive the theory that the last ice age still hasn't ended yet, allegedly the polar ice caps are not supposed to be there? :confused:


the thing is, global warming is a fad, when was the last time you heard someone mentioning the OZONE layer? next was carbon monoxide that was the big killer! now its carbon of any description.

what next guys?

[Smitty]

Rubbish, they are expensive to maintain, supply intermittent power and don't make commercial sense without the back hander from the government. I'm not misguided, I'm probably far more informed than most considering I used to work for the the bit of the DTI that controlled the policy and promoted the development of renewable energy sources.

And I'm probably more informed than most too, consider I currently work on developing and maintaining wind farms for one of the big 6 :rolleyes: ;) :p

Expensive to maintain - no more expensive than a coal power station, and if you keep in mind the ages of both these methods of generation, the price of wind turbine up-keep will only come down as operators become smarter.

Intermittent power - yes, but they play there part in a balanced energy generation mix for the UK. Remember....once they are up there is never need to buy fuel for these.

Yes, we need the backing from the government in the form of ROC's at the moment - and will continue to do so in the future. But when you look at Round 3 of Wind Development in the UK - it makes a lot of sense - as it is the ROC's that are pushing the investments from the energy companies


If you get a high pressure over the UK in January most windfarms wouldn't be generating any energy yet the demand for electricity is likely to be at its highest...

Yup - your right there, and that's why a country could never solely run off of renewable sources. That's why we need things like coal, gas and nuclear to support the demand.

[Smitty]

i beleive the theory that the last ice age still hasn't ended yet, allegedly the polar ice caps are not supposed to be there? :confused:

Interesting theory - not heard that one and I quite like it :D :yes nod:



the thing is, global warming is a fad, when was the last time you heard someone mentioning the OZONE layer?

The hole in the ozone layer is a completely different thing. It was down to the release of harmful CFC gases in mass up until the early 80's. This was addressed as CFC's were phased out by the late 90's (I think). Since then there has been studies claiming that the hole has now retracted.

Whether this was because of natural or man-made causes - who knows but it seems a bit of a coincidence!

[The Dogfather]

And I'm probably more informed than most too, consider I currently work on developing and maintaining wind farms for one of the big 6 :rolleyes: ;) :p

Expensive to maintain - no more expensive than a coal power station, and if you keep in mind the ages of both these methods of generation, the price of wind turbine up-keep will only come down as operators become smarter.

Intermittent power - yes, but they play there part in a balanced energy generation mix for the UK. Remember....once they are up there is never need to buy fuel for these.

Yes, we need the backing from the government in the form of ROC's at the moment - and will continue to do so in the future. But when you look at Round 3 of Wind Development in the UK - it makes a lot of sense - as it is the ROC's that are pushing the investments from the energy companies

Yup - your right there, and that's why a country could never solely run off of renewable sources. That's why we need things like coal, gas and nuclear to support the demand.

Obviously, you're not independent in your perspective, whereas I am. I have no reason to be pro or anti, strange though it may seem I like windfarms, there's one practically in my back garden (Wheatley Hill Durham) and I love the fact its there.

Would there be Renewables if it wasn't for ROC's - no because they don't make commercial sense. I've been out of the loop for sometime but renewable Mega Watts were much more expensive than coal but maybe costs have come down. however I am aware that most windfarms produce far less than what they originally forecasted.

The money being wasted on subsidising windfarms could be used to fund CO2 sequestration projects to make coal clean. Coal will take forever to run out, we only stopped mining it in this country because it was cheaper to import.

Or alternatively it could fund a huge energy efficiency programme to tackle the 20%-30% of energy we waste needlessly as a nation. Doing this wouldn't cost anything in maintenance either, and the general public would feel the benefit directly.

As for a heathy mix, that's a fallacy, a coal, gas or nuclear plant can't just be switched on overnight because we aren't generating enough from wind sources. Wind power helps the government meet inadequate target so it can take the moral high ground and lecture China and India but its not an viable alternative to Coal, Gas and Nuclear.

I think we should stop pissing around giving grants to rich multinationals to fund windfarms, if its viable let them fund it. We should start investing in clean coal technology and energy efficiency.

I'd rather my taxes paid for my Gran to insulate her house and reduce her fuel bills than to keep Amec's profits topped up...

[KenL]

Would be interesting to know others opinions on this. Me personally I think it's a bit of both, do I think we can make a difference, then I would say yes.

Are any of us qualified to comment? I don't think so, but then, I don't think the "experts" can prove anything, only hypothesise!

However, my gut feeling is that humans, and their excesses, are making an impact on the planet.

David Attenborough (a hero of mine) is on TV at the moment. Apparently, the human population has tripled since he started broadcasting - scary :eek:

[Scottie]

I do not think for one minute that we are to be found guilty for the so called " global warming" and i put it in lower case because there is no solid evidence only theories which still need to be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt.

As for the historical records that are often quoted are very unreliable as they were not very accurate and they relied on things like measuring tree growth rings but no two trees grow at the same rate so that this study is not to be relied on. A study was also done on the types of shells to be found on the sea bed to try and determine if the particular creatures enjoyed warmer or cooler water to try and prove warming.

As for these wind turbines they are a complete waste of tax payers money. A study and i can not remember by who but it was found that 92% of the total area of the UK would need to be covered to produce only 2% of the total energy needed for a year. Is this a god return for your money? Not a chance.

I myself believe that the Sun is responsible for the changing climate and not global warming. Why do i say this, well let's see.
The Sun is not a constant and dose not give us the same temperature as it is constantly changing unlike setting a thermostat in the home.
It has also been proving that an increase in the radiation delivered to us by the Sun can also increase or decrease our temperature depending on the time of year.

In the 1960's-70's we were warned about the coming of a new ice what happened to that theory.

Allan.

[KenL]

As for these wind turbines they are a complete waste of tax payers money. A study and i can not remember by who but it was found that 92% of the total mass of the UK would need to be covered to produce only 2% of the total energy needed for a year. Is this a god return for your money? Not a chance.



Total mass! That is a weight, well actually it is a mass, did you mean surface area?

Someone ;) on here should be able to quote the average electricity output from a modern large turbine generator, and perhaps its footprint area.

Your statistic does not sound right, but you never know.

Given that electricity cannot be stored efficiently, we would need backup to systems that rely on wind, I say nuclear is the way forward there.

[Scottie]

thanks Ken for pointing that out about mass, as for the statistics they are not mine but belong to a group of professors who where giving the job of finding out what was needed for the UK to be self reliant in the use of renewable energy. this was their finding i just can not remember who or what group was responsible .

Allan

[KenL]

thanks Ken for pointing that out about mass, as for the statistics they are not mine but belong to a group of professors who where giving the job of finding out what was needed for the UK to be self reliant in the use of renewable energy. this was their finding i just can not remember who or what group was responsible .

Allan

Thanks Allan.

That is very interesting - and mind-boggling.

If their stats are correct then people are really trying to pull the wool over our eyes as to what use they turbines) are.

We have one at our school. The data is supposed to be available to us soon - wonder what that will show?

[Sheilz]

Could the poll be reworded because it doesn't really give three options?

Should it not be man made? natural? or both?

[GCA3N]

Are any of us qualified to comment? I don't think so, but then, I don't think the "experts" can prove anything, only hypothesise!


So we can't listen to the evidence and put together our own thoughts and opinions on a subject unless we have a degree in it.

Think you'll find there are loads of people on here that have knowledge and passion on this topic and can express an educated opinion. some of them must be right.

[GCA3N]

Could the poll be reworded because it doesn't really give three options?

Should it not be man made? natural? or both?

The very first thead says " is global warming man made"

It would appear that most folks understand, yes = man made, no = natural and both is well a bit of each;)

[KenL]

So we can't listen to the evidence and put together our own thoughts and opinions on a subject unless we have a degree in it.

Think you'll find there are loads of people on here that have knowledge and passion on this topic and can express an educated opinion. some of them must be right.

Sure, we can express an opinion - that's what forums are for :thumbs up:

No need to jump down my throat :hand:

[Sheilz]

I do not think for one minute that we are to be found guilty for the so called " global warming" and i put it in lower case because there is no solid evidence only theories which still need to be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt.

As for the historical records that are often quoted are very unreliable as they were not very accurate and they relied on things like measuring tree growth rings but no two trees grow at the same rate so that this study is not to be relied on. A study was also done on the types of shells to be found on the sea bed to try and determine if the particular creatures enjoyed warmer or cooler water to try and prove warming.

As for these wind turbines they are a complete waste of tax payers money. A study and i can not remember by who but it was found that 92% of the total area of the UK would need to be covered to produce only 2% of the total energy needed for a year. Is this a god return for your money? Not a chance.

I myself believe that the Sun is responsible for the changing climate and not global warming. Why do i say this, well let's see.
The Sun is not a constant and dose not give us the same temperature as it is constantly changing unlike setting a thermostat in the home.
It has also been proving that an increase in the radiation delivered to us by the Sun can also increase or decrease our temperature depending on the time of year.

In the 1960's-70's we were warned about the coming of a new ice what happened to that theory.

Allan.


Ditto

[GCA3N]

Sure, we can express an opinion - that's what forums are for :thumbs up:

No need to jump down my throat :hand:


I was'nt getting down your throat, you said and I quote none of us were qualified to comment, I dissagree, because we all in some way are qualified. Most of us who commented on this have either strong opinions, good knowledge or a bit of both.

[KenL]

I was'nt getting down your throat, you said and I quote none of us were qualified to comment, I dissagree, because we all in some way are qualified. Most of us who commented on this have either strong opinions, good knowledge or a bit of both.

Please read my sentence again:

"Are any of us qualified to comment? I don't think so, but then, I don't think the "experts" can prove anything, only hypothesise!"

It was a question. I then said (or meant to imply) that I don't think (my opinion and comment) that even the "experts" know what the truth is.

Still pals?

[GCA3N]

Please read my sentence again:

"Are any of us qualified to comment? I don't think so, but then, I don't think the "experts" can prove anything, only hypothesise!"

It was a question. I then said (or meant to imply) that I don't think (my opinion and comment) that even the "experts" know what the truth is.

Still pals?


ok then, it's 10 pm i get grumpy after 9 (am that is):lol:

[KenL]

ok then, it's 10 pm i get grumpy after 9 (am that is):lol:

Where is the "big hugs" smiley :D

[GCA3N]

Where is the "big hugs" smiley :D


:smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smil ewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewink grin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin: :smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smil ewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewink grin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin: :smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smil ewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewink grin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin:

[Smitty]

I think we'll leave the renewables argument for now ;) :p :thumbs up: But don't expect to see a lack of development and investment in that area any time soon :Whistle:


We should start investing in clean coal technology and energy efficiency.

Couldn't agree more - not only is coal reliable, it's affordable and as you stated - it's in abundance.

The problem with that is the "eco-mentalist's" don't even accept clean coal (or even CCS). You only have to type "Kingsnorth" or "Thames Cluster" into google to get a feel for what they think of those sort of investments. Unfortunately our government does not have the balls to out right commit to these schemes. They want to auction off a trial. Well by the time that trial is complete it'll be a bit too late :frown:

The other problem is coal plants are shutting. Something needs to replace them as electricity consumption is only going to increase over the next 20 years, regardless of how efficient we become with it.....

And as for energy efficiency....YES. One problem, people aren't interested. You only have to look at the number of contributors to this thread to realise that people don't think energy is "sexy"! It's a hard battle :argh:

[GCA3N]

Some very good points put forward Smitty.

[The Dogfather]

People are interested in energy efficiency, as it'll save them money, but we need legislation and householder grants to make it happen. For example how many now buy electrical appliances based on their energy efficiency...

That Kingsnorth power station is only 20% more efficient and will cost £1billion, however if you gave 2 million homes with old style central heating a £500 grant towards an upgrade to a combi boiler you'd get the a greater reduction in CO2 and they'd get the benefit.

Legislation needs to be changed to force builders to build houses which are (even) more energy efficient. There was a house on grand designs not that long ago that was a net producer of electricity, yes it was an expensive project but it just shows what can be done.

I think it was BP who had plans to use the power plant at Peterhead as a pumping station to pump CO2 offshore to store in spent oilfields, it can also improve oil recovery as well in existing fields, but the last I heard was the government weren't willing to fund the project. This would have been a near zero emission power station.

[Gismo]

Global warming is all very good, bring it on, gritters out today in Angus.

As long as the government don't have to foot the bill we'll all be saved

[Delboy]

I've enjoyed reading the many different views on this topic, as well as renewable and coal-fired generation :thumbs up:.

Getting back to the poll, my gut feeling is that global warming is man-made. I've no expertise in this area but, from what I've heard and read over the years, I believe, on balance, that man is largely to blame.

As for electricity generation, no single technology is ideal on its own and so a mix of nuclear, gas, coal, wind and hydro will be required - they all have different attributes. Clean coal technology is an exciting prospect and, if proven to be commercially viable, will enable the continued use of a hugely abundant natural resource. And, as someone who works in the coal and electricity generation business, I very much hope that it will be ;).

[The Dogfather]

Del, unfortunately what you have read has probably been written from polically influenced standpoint.

Mr Mercer, you might get rid of the gritters but you'll need stilts to walk round Montrose to keep you're head above water. Plus, you can say good bye to Florida it would either be blown away or flooded.

;)

[Gismo]

Del, unfortunately what you have read has probably been written from polically influenced standpoint.

Mr Mercer, you might get rid of the gritters but you'll need stilts to walk round Montrose to keep you're head above water. Plus, you can say good bye to Florida it would either be blown away or flooded.

;)I'll be dead by then :thumbs up:

[Delboy]

Del, unfortunately what you have read has probably been written from polically influenced standpoint.

You're probably right, but that doesn't mean it's not true ;).

[doogz__]

I'll be dead by then :thumbs up:

That's the attitude!

Did anyone ever see the Practical Performance Car advert they were going to put on TV? That got banned?

They were having a car show/track day, and the line was something like:

"Petrol is running out, so come along and burn your share while there's some left"

And the enviro-hippies had it banned.

[GCA3N]

That's the attitude!

Did anyone ever see the Practical Performance Car advert they were going to put on TV? That got banned?

They were having a car show/track day, and the line was something like:

"Petrol is running out, so come along and burn your share while there's some left"

And the enviro-hippies had it banned.


Good.:lol: