Global Warming is over.

[nando]

read the article, read your post, then looked at the date again.

Doh.

[gwb72tii]

http://notrickszone.com/2012/10/08/arctic-melting-due-to-global-warming-but-antarctic-ice-growth-due-to-ocean-currents-nsidc-says/

[gwb72tii]

also for you doomsayers
you say there is a direct linkage between CO2 and GW
why has warming stopped then as CO2 has risen?

http://notrickszone.com/2012/10/16/luningvahrenholt-comment-on-hadcruts-16-years-of-no-warming-tough-times-ahead-for-climate-science/

and to quote phil jones
"We don’t fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don’t fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We don’t know what natural variability is doing.”

what???????? WTF do you mean you don"t fully understand? that is not what you've said before.

[BraveUlysses]

You're such a fucking terrible hack poster that you won't even admit you're ten fucking years off on your rebuttal's source material.

[gwb72tii]

for once you could be right mr brave
me bad
read the follow on links
and eat me

[rwh11385]

for once you could be right mr brave
me bad
read the follow on links
and eat me

You mean the link that again cherry picks the sea ice in Antarctica yet ignores the much larger overall loss of total ice mass on Antarctica?

Ironically called "no tricks zone".

http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/#landIce

Data from NASA's Grace satellites show that the land ice sheets in both Antarctica and Greenland are losing mass. The continent of Antarctica (left chart) has been losing more than 100 cubic kilometers (24 cubic miles) of ice per year since 2002.

[rwh11385]

In other news, bipartisan effort to improve energy efficiency:

http://portman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=8b5ac7ee-8f5a-4f48-b661-d34e23dcdeec

September 24, 2012

The Senate passed important provisions from the bipartisan Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act (S.1000) introduced by U.S. Senators Rob Portman (R-OH) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) to help the country save money by using less energy. The measures were included as part of the Enabling Energy Saving Innovations Act (H.R. 4850).

[...]

INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY

Coordination of Research and Development of Energy Efficient Technologies for Industry
Reducing Barriers to the Deployment of Industrial Energy Efficiency
Advanced Energy Technology Manufacturing Capabilities in the United States
Industrial Technologies Steering Committee

FEDERAL AGENCY ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Availability of Funds for Design Updates
Best Practices for Advanced Metering
Federal Energy Management and Date Collection Standard

http://www.shaheen.senate.gov/priorities/issues/energy/S1000%20One%20Page%20Summary%20and%20Study%20External.pdf

The Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness (ESIC) Act is a national strategy to increase the use of energy
efficiency technologies in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors of our economy, while also fostering
job creation.

This bipartisan bill uses a variety of low-cost tools to reduce barriers for private sector energy users and drive
adoption of off-the-shelf efficiency technologies that will save businesses and consumers money, make America
more energy independent, and reduce emissions. Efficiency technologies are commercially available today, can be
widely deployed in every state in the nation, and pay for themselves through energy savings relatively quickly.

The Shaheen-Portman bill will help speed the transition to a more energy efficient economy, increasing both our
economic competitiveness and our energy security for the coming decades, while stimulating the economy and
encouraging private sector job creation.

http://www.shaheen.senate.gov/news/press/release/?id=aa647338-36e9-4c96-8dcf-705cee855078

A new study has calculated that bipartisan energy-efficiency legislation from U.S. Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Rob Portman (R-OH) could save consumers $60 billion by 2030, help businesses add 159,000 jobs to the economy and cut carbon-dioxide emissions by the equivalent of taking 21 million cars off the road.

[Thizzelle]

could there be a link of population to global warming? our bodies give off heat.And everything is trying to reach a equilibrium temperature.
dun dun dun......

[Thizzelle]

ok. convincing argument.

I can log into my co-worker's solar panels and read his power generation stats for a 9x2 array. seems to be working just fine. each panel has it's own IP adress and shows individual power output tracked in real time. It's an overcast day in WA and he's currently producing 1000w (at an average rate of 6.5kwh). he's on track to produce 400kwh in october, in a northern lattitude state that sees long stretches of nothing but clouds/rain.

now stick your hand over 1 panel and let me know what the reading is. Should drop significantly.
Solar panels are setup in series so if one has problems the rest are effected.

did experiment in my energy systems class where we tracked data of a solar panel. I asked the teacher "what happens if there is shsde on it" he told me to stick my finger over the corner of the panel and the power output dropped to like 20% of what we were getting before that. bird shit will do the same thing.

unless you set each panel up seperate with its own inverter, etc. which costs more $$ and not worth it.

[rwh11385]

could there be a link of population to global warming? our bodies give off heat.And everything is trying to reach a equilibrium temperature.
dun dun dun......

I wonder what AGW stands for... but even so...

http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae420.cfm

World population: 6,973,738,433

7 Billion * 100 W = 0.7 TW

Comparably, we use 16 TW of energy globally - whether for heating, electricity, transportation, or industrial.

[rwh11385]

Interesting read, although slightly dated (2005) http://patapsco.nist.gov/mep/documen...energy-nam.pdf

Industry uses more than one-third of the energy consumed in the United States—and even more when product transportation is factored in. The escalating costs for natural gas and oil clearly have a major impact for manufacturers in America that, left unaddressed, could hurt their competitiveness in world markets.

Obviously Natural Gas has come down in price and will help make US manufacturing more cost competitive, as I've posted before I believe, but the overall importance is clear.

American industries and manufacturing and transportation rely on energy and higher costs = a risk to our economy. A business might not have the same viewpoints as a person in regards to payback period (nor is the plant as likely to move on the same timeline as a family), so there can be focus on delivering cost efficient renewable resources that can make American manufacturing more resilient to competition.

But it also doesn't necessarily require investment, but just an open-minded approach to efficiency and environment - unlike some of the RWNJs in the thread:

According to U.S. Department of Energy figures included in this report, industry can achieve practical energy reductions of about 20 percent. These savings are worth almost $19 billion at 2004 energy prices. About 30 percent of the savings can be achieved without capital investment, using only procedural and behavioral changes.

best analysis (Table 1) still concludes that only 43 percent of all manufacturing energy inputs are applied to process work. But industry pays for all energy consumed, whether it is used or wasted. The recovery of lost industrial energy—to the greatest practical extent—is an opportunity for U.S. manufacturers to improve financial performance in a globally competitive marketplace.

And how is the government involved?

In the United States, the national government plays an important role in promoting energy efficiency in the private sector. For example, the U.S. Department of Energy, (***) with substantial help from federally chartered national laboratories, has been active and effective in advancing R&D for energy efficient technologies. Recently, ***’s Industrial Technologies Program (and earlier programs) published “BestPractices,” technical reference materials to help plant managers develop their own strategies for improving energy efficiency.

For the past 20 years, industrial R&D has favored refinements of existing products and production facilities. This reflects industry’s preference for lower, short-term risks and a more immediate return on investment.
7 But this focus is at the expense of developing “next generation” technologies that will ensure long-term industrial competitiveness. Certain energy efficient technologies face developmental hurdles because of industry’s investment priorities. To facilitate overall U.S. industrial R&D, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Industrial Technologies Program partners with industry to mutually identify, sponsor and develop new technologies.

In total, these energy-saving opportunities represent 5.2 quadrillion Btu—21 percent of primary energy consumed by the manufacturing sector. These savings equate to almost $19 billion for manufacturers, based on 2004 energy prices and consumption volumes

Alternatively, I guess the old people who were mentioned in the paper could sit back and say "this is the way things have always been done" and not take action. Being energy-smart just isn't for hippies.

[Fusion]

do any of you pro the world is melting guys have solar panels?

Of course not. 99% here drive a "planet killing" E30 or rwh a 540i, yet thinks he's "taking action" for the planet by posting graphs and rants.
Smelly hypocrite.

[rwh11385]

Of course not. 99% here drive a "planet killing" E30 or rwh a 540i, yet thinks he's "taking action" for the planet by posting graphs and rants.
Smelly hypocrite.

Ignoring discussion about subject matter and how he pointed out why denialism is the effort hijacking politics, and then sticking to name calling.

My car is parked during most of the week as I'm away from home. It doesn't burn much gas doing so. But when I return to a traditional commute, I'll spring for a PHEV, probably a Volt. Maybe go crazy with an ELR.

When I buy a newer house in a few years, solar panel(s) will be my first mod.

Just refi'ed the starter home and going to be doing renovations, prepping it for sale in ~3 years so makes no sense to buy them although for certain will do in the future house.

Doesn't really matter though, 100% of my power is sourced from wind turbines and I pay all of a 1% premium for it. But hey, run your ignorant mouth more.

[herbivor]

My car is parked during most of the week as I'm away from home. It doesn't burn much gas doing so. But when I return to a traditional commute, I'll spring for a PHEV, probably a Volt.

I'm scheduled to test drive the Tesla S in 2 weeks. May be selling my E30 soon after if the drive exceeds my expectations, which are pretty high for this car.

[Kershaw]

maintaining old cars are a lot better for the planet than building new ones, as long as they are kept in good working order.