Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents

nitro said:
A step in the right direction, but not the ultimate destination:

Natural gas tops coal as top source of electricity in US

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/14/natu...ource-of-electric-power-generation-in-us.html
More...

A further step would be the long-term implementation of a mico-grid power structure in the U.S. -- which would use small gas plants for additional power and "green" sources (solar, wind, water turbine, etc.) for primary power. The "smart-grid" concept pushed by power technologists was not originally designed so power companies could bill your residential meter in 15 minute increments and screw you each billing cycle; originally "smart-grid" was focused on improving core power infrastructure and distribution. However power companies found there was more money in deploying smart meters than fixing their infrastructure.

At this point power companies are fighting tooth & nail against core smart-power grid proposals since they have a deep financial vested interest in protecting their existing large power plants and ancient distribution infrastructure. Any liberalization of the power market opens the door to new competitors deploying a smarter, more local grid with green roots which in time will likely be very price competitive. Of course large electric utilities are piling on political donations to stop any competitive power market proposal in the U.S. -- however the reality is that the long term future will be a more dynamic electric market and the big utilities are already dying dinosaurs - the vestiges of which will litter the landscape five decades from now.
 
gwb-trading said:
A further step would be the long-term implementation of a mico-grid power structure in the U.S. -- which would use small gas plants for additional power and "green" sources (solar, wind, water turbine, etc.) for primary power. The "smart-grid" concept pushed by power technologists was not originally designed so power companies could bill your residential meter in 15 minute increments and screw you each billing cycle; originally "smart-grid" was focused on improving core power infrastructure and distribution. However power companies found there was more money in deploying smart meters than fixing their infrastructure.

At this point power companies are fighting tooth & nail against core smart-power grid proposals since they have a deep financial vested interest in protecting their existing large power plants and ancient distribution infrastructure. Any liberalization of the power market opens the door to new competitors deploying a smarter, more local grid with green roots which in time will likely be very price competitive. Of course large electric utilities are piling on political donations to stop any competitive power market proposal in the U.S. -- however the reality is that the long term future will be a more dynamic electric market and the big utilities are already dying dinosaurs - the vestiges of which will litter the landscape five decades from now.
More...
Interesting. Thanks.
 
Thanks for the post nitro. About what I thought. Nuances lost indeed. More like brain cells the righties never had to begin with. From the article...

Zharkova never even used the phrase “mini ice age.” Meanwhile, several other recent studies of a possible solar minimum have concluded that whatever climate effects the phenomenon may have will be dwarfed by the warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

Besides, that “Little Ice Age” that occurred during the Maunder minimum, it wasn’t so much a global ice age as a cold spell in Europe, and it may have been caused more by clouds of ash from volcanic eruptions than by fluctuations in solar activity.

(It’s also worth mentioning that Zharkova’s findings have not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal, so her conclusions haven’t been vetted and refined.)

But those nuances were totally lost as stories about Zharkova’s research made the rounds on social media and in the press. Instead, we got 300-year-old engravings of Londoners cavorting on the frozen River Thames accompanied by predictions of food shortages and brutal cold — plus snarky tweets about not worrying about global warming anymore.
 
those nuances lacked the disclaimer that they were complete speculation or misleading slants.
the entire historical temperature record is sparse and arguing the maunder minimum was a cold spell in europe is completely disingenuous. Temps were also seen to be lower in North America...

Questioning the Maunder Minimium as representative of world temps... basically questions the proxy record for all of climate science. That is a nuance lost on you agw liars.
 
jem said:
those nuances lacked the disclaimer that they were complete speculation or misleading slants.
the entire historical temperature record is sparse and arguing the maunder minimum was a cold spell in europe is completely disingenuous. Temps were also seen to be lower in North America...

Questioning the Maunder Minimium as representative of world temps... basically questions the proxy record for all of climate science. That is a nuance lost on you agw liars.
More...


"about half the experts think man is contributing to warming...
but only a few nutter scientists state man made co2 is causing warming.
that is because no science showing it."

jem....you are showing your true self. A liar. Amazing to think that you consider yourself a Christian.

I'm actually feeling sorry for you.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
 
your citation was to the IPCC kooks... that is proof the kooks are in on the lie. that is not the data showing that 97% of scientists agree on something. grow up stop lying.

you have seen the real surveys we have presented.



http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/19/t...e-that-global-warming-stopped-or-slowed-down/
for instance...

The Obama administration and environmental groups have long claimed 97 percent of scientists agree that human activity is causing the Earth to warm, but there’s a new consensus they may be less willing to acknowledge.

Using the same methodology as the vaunted “97 percent” paper by researcher John Cook, two climate scientists have made a bold discovery: virtually all climate scientists agree that global warming has “stopped” or “slowed down” in recent years.

“We didn’t find a single paper on the topic that argued the rate of global warming has not slowed (or even stopped) in recent years,” wrote scientists Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberger with the libertarian Cato Institute.

“This is in direct opposition to the IPCC’s contention that global warming is accelerating, and supports arguments that the amount of warming that will occur over the remainder of the 21st century as a result of human fossil fuel usage will be at the low end of the IPCC projections, or even lower,” the two scientists added. “Low-end warming yields low-end impacts.”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/19/t...warming-stopped-or-slowed-down/#ixzz3gAdEtMu9
 
Hottest June Puts 2015 On Track For Hottest Year On Record By Far

NASA reported Wednesday that this was the hottest June on record (tied with 1998). And it’s now all but certain 2015 will be the hottest year on record, probably by a wide margin — as what increasingly appears to be one of the strongest El Niños in 50 years boosts the underlying global warming trend.

Climate expert Dr. John Abraham amended this NASA chart to show how the first six months of 2015 compares to the annual temperatures of previous years:

YTD2015vsAnnualTemps.jpg
 
so the el nino is driving temperatures land-ocean temps up?
Is that a surprise?
Ocean temps have been rising since the last ice age.
Was that man made co2 going back in time?

where is the science showing man made co2 is doing the warming?
it does not exist... because co2 trails change in ocean temps.
 
jem said:
your citation was to the IPCC kooks... that is proof the kooks are in on the lie. that is not the data showing that 97% of scientists agree on something. grow up stop lying.

you have seen the real surveys we have presented.



http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/19/t...e-that-global-warming-stopped-or-slowed-down/
for instance...

The Obama administration and environmental groups have long claimed 97 percent of scientists agree that human activity is causing the Earth to warm, but there’s a new consensus they may be less willing to acknowledge.

Using the same methodology as the vaunted “97 percent” paper by researcher John Cook, two climate scientists have made a bold discovery: virtually all climate scientists agree that global warming has “stopped” or “slowed down” in recent years.

“We didn’t find a single paper on the topic that argued the rate of global warming has not slowed (or even stopped) in recent years,” wrote scientists Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberger with the libertarian Cato Institute.

“This is in direct opposition to the IPCC’s contention that global warming is accelerating, and supports arguments that the amount of warming that will occur over the remainder of the 21st century as a result of human fossil fuel usage will be at the low end of the IPCC projections, or even lower,” the two scientists added. “Low-end warming yields low-end impacts.”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/19/t...warming-stopped-or-slowed-down/#ixzz3gAdEtMu9
More...


"but only a few nutter scientists state man made co2 is causing warming.
that is because no science showing it." jem

lol ....too funny. You can't make this shit ^ up.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top