Climate Change Report

Sounds like something to aspire to. Especially if Harbaugh is still coaching the Wolverines.
True!

Still, you know the climate crisis data is off. Ice is often used to make determinations of past temps. They look at this line rings on a tree. The problem is that ice doesn’t work that way. Some years you gain ice. Some years ice melts away. When ice melts there is no record left. It’s gone. The ice age added layers of ice that accumulated. About two kilometers of ice in some areas.
 
i would like to hear the reasoning behind wood fuel being worse than fossil fuels.

conventional wisdom says the carbon in wood is fairly " active" as we are just recycling it. the carbon in fossil fuels has been locked away for millions of years and we can't "recycle" it.
That one raised my eyebrows a bit too frankly. I’ve always thought wood burned fairly clean 🤷‍♂️
 
i would like to hear the reasoning behind wood fuel being worse than fossil fuels.

conventional wisdom says the carbon in wood is fairly " active" as we are just recycling it. the carbon in fossil fuels has been locked away for millions of years and we can't "recycle" it.
This might be the likely reason.

Does burning wood instead of fossil fuels increase GHG emissions?

Gunn co-authored a 2010 study that concluded the amount of carbon released per unit of energy is actually greater for forest biomass than it is for fossil fuels. That’s because wood isn’t a very energy-dense material, which means you have to burn a lot more tons of it to match the energy output of gas or coal.
 
So he was talking about the amount dumped into the atmosphere at one time like a big wild or Forrest fire ?
I think it’s just referring to energy density for wood vs fossil fuel. Per unit mass fossil fuel is dirtier but you use less of it than wood to release the same joules of energy
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb
I think it’s just referring to energy density for wood vs fossil fuel. Per unit mass fossil fuel is dirtier but you use less of it than wood to release the same joules of energy
That's how I read it. Potential energy is one way I have heard that referred to. Which is a pretty "duh" statement.
We didn't switch to internal combustion with fossil fuels for no reason over steam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
I think it’s just referring to energy density for wood vs fossil fuel. Per unit mass fossil fuel is dirtier but you use less of it than wood to release the same joules of energy

I always like to think outside the box, typically waaaaay beyond my intellectual understanding. Would not climate warming contradict the law of the conservation of energy?
 
That's how I read it. Potential energy is one way I have heard that referred to. Which is a pretty "duh" statement.
We didn't switch to internal combustion with fossil fuels for no reason over steam.
I think SOME of us have made that same argument in this very thread 😃
 
I am waiting for the locals response to this guy.

I had never heard of him so no idea how legit he is considered and how much of a blow this may actually be. I figure we will see responses eventually ridiculing this guy as a sell out or fake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
Democrats have nothing to run on, they must create fear and then promise to solve it. This is how they get votes by creating division. Republicans are stupid for not coming up with real environmental solutions to deal with real issues. I don't think anyone would disagree with protecting nature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GordonC
I am waiting for the locals response to this guy.

I had never heard of him so no idea how legit he is considered and how much of a blow this may actually be. I figure we will see responses eventually ridiculing this guy as a sell out or fake.
Oh the cancel culture is already lining up the attack on him I’m sure.
 
Democrats have nothing to run on, they must create fear and then promise to solve it. This is how they get votes by creating division. Republicans are stupid for not coming up with real environmental solutions to deal with real issues. I don't think anyone would disagree with protecting nature.
This is my side.
You can sell the crap put of this stuff to preppers, farmers, anyone with any type of self independence on their mind. Cut your bills, live off the land.

But like you said the left politicized and demoralized the issue before it could take hold. Which tends to have the opposite effect.
 
This is my side.
You can sell the crap put of this stuff to preppers, farmers, anyone with any type of self independence on their mind. Cut your bills, live off the land.

But like you said the left politicized and demoralized the issue before it could take hold. Which tends to have the opposite effect.
Demoralized? Autocorrect helping you out on demonize? But yeah I agree with both of you. Nobody is against nature and the environment. But the fix can’t be worse than the problem.
 
Demoralized? Autocorrect helping you out on demonize? But yeah I agree with both of you. Nobody is against nature and the environment. But the fix can’t be worse than the problem.
Should have just been "moralized"

You couldnt sell steak to a starving man with the attitude and approach these guys have taken.

It disappoints me that there is such a difference between the scientists/politicians and the engineers/operators on this. The engineers side of it is cool as heck and would be a lot better salesmen for this stuff. It's incredibly fun sitting down for 4 hours with these guys to go over ideas on a project and watch them get worked up and excited and then come back with real world applications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40

VN Store



Back
Top