Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

2020 officially saw a record number of $1 billion weather and climate disasters.

Options
18911131484

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,913 ✭✭✭Danno


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    If pylon damage was the issue then again wind/solar is far more vulnerable as it requires a vastly larger network of such infrastructure to connect to the grid
    Danno wrote: »
    Alternatively you could tell us how Texas would have fared during it's recent winter storm had the state been a 100% renewable energy state. You even have the benefit of hindsight now to "show them up".

    I brought up this very point earlier, but the answer was one of conspiracy:
    Thargor wrote: »
    :rolleyes:

    Alternatively you could just stop making up lies that even Fox News wouldn't touch.

    Advocates of green energy don't like their pet projects scrutinised in any way.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    If pylon damage was the issue then again wind/solar is far more vulnerable as it requires a vastly larger network of such infrastructure to connect to the grid

    A it wasn't just a pylon issue in fact the power plants just shut down because corners had been cut for decades.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,632 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    A it wasn't just a pylon issue in fact the power plants just shut down because corners had been cut for decades.

    Consult my earlier post with the link to this matter again - the likes of gas plants were the only ones supplying significant power during the peak of the cold spell


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Consult my earlier post with the link to this matter again - the likes of gas plants were the only ones supplying significant power during the peak of the cold spell

    Consult my links
    "ERCOT has acknowledged that the blackouts have largely stemmed from failures to winterize natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy systems”


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,865 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Danno wrote: »
    I brought up this very point earlier, but the answer was one of conspiracy:



    Advocates of green energy don't like their pet projects scrutinised in any way.
    Sorry what? How often do you need it explained to you? It had nothing to do with green energy, you claimed 'eco loons' had caused deaths in order to reduce emissions, this is rambling nonsense and nothing whatsoever to do with the events in Texas. Keep lying about it all you want but it won't make it true.

    Im going to submit a complaint in Feedback about the moderation on this 'Science' forum.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,865 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Consult my links
    "ERCOT has acknowledged that the blackouts have largely stemmed from failures to winterize natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy systems”
    Whats the point? Another liar will just jump in and take a turn next, they're not interested in any kind of truth or logic, this place is like reading the Trump reddit before it got shut down.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Thargor wrote: »

    Im going submitting a complaint in Feedback about the moderation on this 'Science' forum.

    It’ll be swept under the rug at the highest level.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,632 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Thargor wrote: »
    Sorry what? How often do you need it explained to you? It had nothing to do with green energy, you claimed 'eco loons' had caused deaths in order to reduce emissions, this is rambling nonsense and nothing whatsoever to do with the events in Texas. Keep lying about it all you want but it won't make it true.

    Im going submitting a complaint in Feedback about the moderation on this 'Science' forum.

    Clearly the big lie is exposed in my link showing the failure of "Green energy" to produce any significant power during the cold spell. The fact that pylons in parts of the country connecting other power plants got damaged by freezing rain does not make such facts any less factual.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,865 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Clearly the big lie is exposed in my link showing the failure of "Green energy" to produce any significant power during the cold spell. The fact that pylons in parts of the country connecting other power plants got damaged by freezing rain does not make such facts any less factual.
    ERCOT have given you the reason all power generation failed during the event, what do you think you've exposed exactly? Renewable power generation dips in Winter? Congratulations. Pity ERCOT also said that wind generation was ahead of their forecasts for the period and absolutely nothing to do with the disaster.

    Why are you quoting my posts calling his claim that the EPA killed people in order to save on emissions a lie? Do you have a rebuttal to that besides irrelevant Politics.ie links? Do you agree with this claim?


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,632 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Thargor wrote: »
    ERCOT have given you the reason all power generation failed during the event, what do you think you've exposed exactly? Renewable power generation dips in Winter? Congratulations. Pity ERCOT also said that wind generation was ahead of their forecasts for the period and absolutely nothing to do with the disaster.

    Why are you quoting my posts calling his claim that the EPA killed people in order to save on emissions a lie? Do you have a rebuttal to that besides irrelevant Politics.ie links? Do you agree with this claim?

    The link I posted clearly showed very little power generation coming from wind/solar - any power genertion there was was coming from conventional sources. The reason there was some disruption on the coventional grid was due to pylon damage from freezing rain. Solar/wind also performed poorly during the cold spells in the UK and Europe. You seem to have a problem with folk who point out these facts - throwing your toys out of the pram over it impresses nobody btw:rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,865 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    The link I posted clearly showed very little power generation coming from wind/solar - any power genertion there was was coming from conventional sources. The reason there was some disruption on the coventional grid was due to pylon damage from freezing rain. Solar/wind also performed poorly during the cold spells in the UK and Europe. You seem to have a problem with folk who point out these facts - throwing your toys out of the pram over it impresses nobody btw:rolleyes:
    So? What is your point? Why are you quoting my posts calling out the repeated lies about the causes of this incident and replying to them as if I claimed renewable energy saved the day or something? Stop making stupid strawman arguments about things I never said.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,855 ✭✭✭Nabber


    Plenty of effort in here to associate scepticism of AGW influence as a cause to perceived increase in extreme weather events to political affiliation (Trump, Fox News doing the rounds)

    Assuming that CNN and Biden are opposites of Fox and Trump, would it be possible to support CNN/Biden and also be skeptical of the FF carbon influence to the climate?


    For those interested, studies on AGW impact on extreme weather. Mapped out for the Nerds too
    https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-how-climate-change-affects-extreme-weather-around-the-world

    A lot is hedged, but that would be expected with any study of it's nature. A lot of extrapolation of data from various sources with pre 1980s being some what of a guessing game.
    In the MSM for the most part $ (dollar) damage is typically the display severity. Of the papers I read in the link above I didn't find any of that, which is good.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    Here's a summary of February's Arctic sea ice extent. Despite what some tried to imply during the Texas outbreak, the Arctic wasn't "almost ice-free", being only the 7th lowest in the satellite record. Stilll wondering if Akrasia had any joy finding out what the reason for the 1895 storm was that was different to the reason for this one.

    Also note that 925-hPa temperature over Siberia was up to 8 degrees below average, as were northern Alaska and the Beaufort Sea.

    Figure2b.png
    Arctic sea ice extent averaged for the month of February 2021 was 14.39 million square kilometers (5.56 million square miles), placing it seventh lowest in the satellite record for the month. This was 910,000 million square kilometers (351,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 February average and 420,000 square kilometers (162,000 square miles) above the record low mark for February set in 2018. For the month of February, ice extent was near average in most regions of the Arctic except most notably in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and to a lesser extent in the Bering Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk. The ice edge was also further north than average on the northern and western side of Svalbard.

    Throughout the month, sea ice grew by an average of 9,900 square kilometers (3,800 square miles) per day, roughly half the average rate over the period 1981 to 2010 of 20,300 square kilometers (7,800 square miles per day).

    Air temperatures at the 925 hPa level (about 2,500 feet above the surface) were from 1 to 6 degrees Celsius (2 to 11 degrees Fahrenheit) above average across much of the central Arctic Ocean, East Siberian Sea, Atlantic Sector, and Canadian Arctic Archipelago. By contrast, northern Alaska, Siberia, and the Beaufort Seas saw temperatures up to 8 degrees Celsius (14 degrees Fahrenheit) below average (Figure 2b).

    The first part of the month was characterized by extremely high sea level pressure over the central Arctic Ocean, driving an exceptionally strong clockwise Beaufort Gyre sea ice circulation. This is consistent with the strongly negative phase of the Arctic Oscillation observed over this time period, which is sometimes associated with a wavy jet stream pattern and cold air outbreaks in lower latitudes, such as was experienced in Texas during the middle of the month. While this pattern broke down later in the month, the average sea level pressure pattern for February still featured a strong Beaufort High, with peak surface pressures exceeding 1,030 (Figure 2c). This atmospheric circulation pattern, driving a pronounced clockwise Beaufort Gyre circulation, led to the transport of thick multiyear ice along the Canadian Arctic Archipelago towards the Alaskan coastline.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,495 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Nabber wrote: »
    . . .

    For those interested, studies on AGW impact on extreme weather. Mapped out for the Nerds too
    https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-how-climate-change-affects-extreme-weather-around-the-world

    Following the link leads you to this.

    HhMRkUr.png

    Which leads you to Heatwave in northern Europe, summer 2018
    In Ireland, the Netherlands and Denmark there are clear trends towards more heat waves in the observations. In Ireland and Denmark climate models give a very similar increase in probabilities to the observations — roughly a factor two more likely in Dublin and a factor four in Denmark. In the Netherlands the observed increase in hot extremes is much larger than the modelled increase. This is a well-known problem (Min et al, 2013, Sippel et al, 2016) but the cause has not yet been elucidated.

    source

    That leads to Friederike Otto another product of the Potsdam climate scientist nursery now based in Oxford.

    Friederike E.L. Otto (PhD in philosophy, 2011)

    » Philosophical aspects of climate modeling
    » Co-advisor: H. Tetens, Free University, Berlin, Germany:
    » Scholarship of Friedrich-Ebert Foundation
    » For publications see website.
    » Now deputy director of eci @ University of Oxford, UK.


    source


    You can read her book "Angry weather – In search of the culprits for heatwaves, floods and storms"with reviews by the usual cheerleaders.

    “Angry Weather introduces us to the forensic scientists of climate change; if you like to watch CSI, you’ll be equally enthralled with the skill and speed these folks exhibit. But the stakes are infinitely higher!”
    Bill McKibben, author of Falter: Has the Human Game Begun to Play Itself Out?

    <snip>

    “This fascinating book takes us on a voyage across the cutting edge of climate science that irrevocably alters our perspective of the world in which we live and the future it holds. I wish I could make this book required reading for the world.”
    Katharine Hayhoe, UN Champion of the Earth



    The usual garbage in garbage out climate modelling interspersed with cherry picked data points to generate media headlines.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Nabber wrote: »
    Plenty of effort in here to associate scepticism of AGW influence as a cause to perceived increase in extreme weather events to political affiliation (Trump, Fox News doing the rounds)

    Many of the "skeptics" seem post up links lifted from political forums and generally seem take a line identical to aforementioned affiliation categories. You only have to read through the posts associated to the Texas freeze to see that.

    Its difficult to separate the two things when someone here spins out the propaganda saying the EPA preferred to let people die then allow power plants to operate.

    Nabber wrote: »
    would it be possible to support CNN/Biden and also be skeptical of the FF carbon influence to the climate?

    Not if you believe whatever the opposition say for example things like the EPA preferred to let people die then allow power plants to operate at extra capacity. Or that wind turbines were the total cause of the power cuts despite ERCOT acknowledging that the blackouts have largely stemmed from failures to winterise natural gas, coal, and nuclear energy systems.

    I googled that phrase "FF carbon influence to the climate" and I got this:
    https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide
    I would a good share of Biden supports believe that, generally.
    Nabber wrote: »
    A lot of extrapolation of data from various sources with pre 1980s being some what of a guessing game.

    I have difficulty with that statement when on so many occasions the skeptics turn around and look back hundreds of years to establish there point an example of such is right here on this page,
    Stilll wondering if Akrasia had any joy finding out what the reason for the 1895 storm was that was different to the reason for this one.

    In any event I read the linked page from Nabber it was interesting its a sort of pole of poles exercise. It gives the flat earthiests something to cling onto but shows that the vast majority of research so far has concluded that AGW is a significant reason for climate change as I've always maintained.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir



    In any event I read the linked page it was interesting its a sort of pole of poles exercise. It gives the flat earthiests something to cling onto but shows that the vast majority of research so far has concluded that AGW is a significant reason for climate change as I've always maintained.

    Which linked page would that be?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Following the link leads you to this.

    HhMRkUr.png

    Which leads you to Heatwave in northern Europe, summer 2018



    That leads to Friederike Otto another product of the Potsdam climate scientist nursery now based in Oxford.





    You can read her book "Angry weather – In search of the culprits for heatwaves, floods and storms"with reviews by the usual cheerleaders.






    The usual garbage in garbage out climate modelling interspersed with cherry picked data points to generate media headlines.

    Lol, Jesus H and Joseph Stalin !


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,495 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Lol, . , ,!

    The science of attribution, testing one hypothesis against another hypothesis using computer simulations based on assumptions that time and again fail reality and have a predictive value of zero.


    climpanic.png

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,235 ✭✭✭Oneiric 3


    Worth keeping in mind...

    CpaG01F.png

    New Moon



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    Attachment not found.It's interesting the lack of global interest in the rodent problem in southeastern Australia due to the bumper harvest this year. Rainfall has been abundant and is set to continue so over the next few months. This time last year there was plenty of talk about the fires and the fact that the drought was something we should be getting used to, but this year there seems to be very little commentary on it because the opposite has been happening.

    547527.jpg

    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/ahead/outlooks/archive/20210318-outlook.shtml
    End of March and April likely to be wetter than average for parts of northern and eastern Australia
    Issued: 18 March 2021

    April to June is likely to be wetter than average (chance of exceeding median is more than 60%) across the Kimberley in WA, the northern half of the NT, northern and eastern Queensland, and eastern parts of NSW and Victoria. Remaining areas show no significant shift towards a wetter or drier three months (chances of exceeding median is close to 50%).

    The 3-month wet signal is dominated by the April outlook, with April likely to be wetter than average across a similar area, including northern WA, the northern and central NT, most of Queensland except the far south-west, and patchy areas of NSW, Victoria, Tasmania, and south-east SA. May, on the other hand, is likely to be a drier month for parts of northern and south-west Australia with the remainder of the country having roughly equal chances of a wetter or drier than average month.

    The fortnight of 22 March to 4 April is likely to be wetter than average (chance of exceeding median is greater than 60%) over the eastern half of Australia extending into the far north of WA. Parts of the far north, and down the east coast are very likely to be wetter than average (greater than 80% chance). For the remainder of WA, south-west NT and eastern SA there are roughly equal chances of a wetter or drier than usual fortnight.
    Climate outlook overview
    11 March 2021

    April to June rainfall is likely to be above average for large parts of northern and eastern Australia.

    Maximum temperatures for April to June are likely to be warmer than average for most of northern Australia, the west coast of WA, the east coast of Queensland, and Tasmania.

    Minimum temperatures for April to June are likely to be warmer than average for most of Australia, except for parts of SA, WA and north-western NSW.

    The current La Niña is forecast to end during autumn. La Niña typically increases the likelihood of above average rainfall across eastern Australia during early autumn, and this influence is expected to continue as the event decays.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,570 ✭✭✭Tyrone212


    To be fair I think Wildfires killing up to 3 billion animals is going to make the news more than a bumper year for rats riding down under.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    Tyrone212 wrote: »
    To be fair I think Wildfires killing up to 3 billion animals is going to make the news more than a bumper year for rats riding down under.

    I would hazard a guess that there are more than 3 billion extra rats and mice this year...


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,570 ✭✭✭Tyrone212


    I would hazard a guess that there are more than 3 billion extra rats and mice this year...

    Filthy hurs


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,632 ✭✭✭Birdnuts


    Attachment not found.. This time last year there was plenty of talk about the fires and the fact that the drought was something we should be getting used to, but this year there seems to be very little commentary on it because the opposite has been happening.

    Same with the number of snow and cold records approached or exceeded over much of the Northern Hemisphere this winter - it just doesn't fit in with the climate alarmists narrative so is just ignored


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,495 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Same with the number of snow and cold records approached or exceeded over much of the Northern Hemisphere this winter - it just doesn't fit in with the climate alarmists narrative so is just ignored

    Not at all, Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) has been quoted in mainstream German media (Der Spiegel, Bild, Deutche Welle etc that warming causes cold. Stefan Rahmstorf and Anders Levermann are German medias go to people when they need a quote to shove under sensationalist weather headlines. Often attibuted to Max Planck science progresses one funeral at a time, eventually this craze will pass. and Rahmsdorf is not without his critics in Germany.

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,234 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Birdnuts wrote: »
    Same with the number of snow and cold records approached or exceeded over much of the Northern Hemisphere this winter - it just doesn't fit in with the climate alarmists narrative so is just ignored

    It actually fits in perfectly fine with the science behind climate change

    The boundaries between Arctic and tropical air are breaking down
    It’s destabilizing climate and weather is getting disrupted as a result

    Additional energy in the biosphere causes more extreme weather events

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/10/fires-and-floods-australia-already-seesaws-between-climate-extremes-and-theres-more-to-come

    Australia has more to worry about today than mice, a hundred year flooding event is underway in Sidney with mass evacuations required to minimize loss of life

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.smh.com.au/national/nsw-weather-live-updates-floods-across-sydney-and-nsw-as-more-rain-lashes-the-state-warragamba-dam-spills-20210320-p57ck5.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    Akrasia wrote: »
    It actually fits in perfectly fine with the science behind climate change

    The boundaries between Arctic and tropical air are breaking down
    It’s destabilizing climate and weather is getting disrupted as a result

    Additional energy in the biosphere causes more extreme weather events

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/10/fires-and-floods-australia-already-seesaws-between-climate-extremes-and-theres-more-to-come

    Australia has more to worry about today than mice, a hundred year flooding event is underway in Sidney with mass evacuations required to minimize loss of life

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.smh.com.au/national/nsw-weather-live-updates-floods-across-sydney-and-nsw-as-more-rain-lashes-the-state-warragamba-dam-spills-20210320-p57ck5.html

    Ah, you're back. It's been a while. Now have you any news on that mystery factor that you claimed probably caused the 1895 Houston ice storm but which couldn't have caused this year's? Also, did you find any actual observational data to show how this year's event was caused by Arctic amplification, because that's what you said?

    Sure while you're at it, any data to show that the Sidney [sic] flood is also due to agw, as implied?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,865 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Stilll wondering if Akrasia had any joy finding out what the reason for the 1895 storm was that was different to the reason for this one.

    Also note that 925-hPa temperature over Siberia was up to 8 degrees below average, as were northern Alaska and the Beaufort Sea.

    Figure2b.png[IMG][/img]
    I'm still waiting on Akrasia to come up with his proof that the recent cold outbreak in the US was "caused by an almost ice-free Arctic (as stated categorically by a TV meteorologist on the ground there during it)" in that thread. Or indeed also that "something" that he said was probably responsible for the similar 1895 outbreak but not this time. Maybe he's just busy.
    Ah, you're back. It's been a while. Now have you any news on that mystery factor that you claimed probably caused the 1895 Houston ice storm but which couldn't have caused this year's? Also, did you find any actual observational data to show how this year's event was caused by Arctic amplification, because that's what you said?

    Sure while you're at it, any data to show that the Sidney [sic] flood is also due to agw, as implied?
    Jesus... :rolleyes:

    Relax, he caught you fabricating the data in a graph like Donald Trump altering a hurricanes track with a sharpie marker and you were humiliated, we get it, but you brought it on yourself when you made up lies to support your climate change denial, what did you think was going to happen?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Thargor wrote: »
    Jesus... :rolleyes:

    Relax, he caught you fabricating the data in a graph like Donald Trump altering a hurricanes track with a sharpie marker and you were humiliated, we get it, but you brought it on yourself when you made up lies to support your climate change denial, what did you think was going to happen?

    Lol, burn! Long time coming mind.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭Banana Republic 1


    Ah, you're back. It's been a while. Now have you any news on that mystery factor that you claimed probably caused the 1895 Houston ice storm but which couldn't have caused this year's? Also, did you find any actual observational data to show how this year's event was caused by Arctic amplification, because that's what you said?

    Sure while you're at it, any data to show that the Sidney [sic] flood is also due to agw, as implied?

    Sydney is spelt with a y not an i.


Advertisement