Ice Melt

[JasperFrank]

Tj, the mass of the ice is the same as the mass of the water. The state of a material does not change its displacement. You got the lesson wrong. The water level didn't change. Do it again today. You will see there is no change in the levels. Your teacher should have been fired. Ice is bigger than water, the oxygen makes an expansion when it goes to a solid, but it isn't heavier, its the same "weight." So do the experiment, Fill a glass half way with water, put in one ice cube so that it is freely floating, measure with a line where the water is. It will be the same level after the cube is melted.

 

[JasperFrank]

Egon, I'm a nerd, with a degree in computer science, that understands how those statistical models are made, both from understanding the data collection, to the computer program models that try to tell people stuff. And as a nerd, I can say these models are F*^Ked.

 

[tjkubota93]

Tj, the mass of the ice is the same as the mass of the water. The state of a material does not change its displacement. You got the lesson wrong. The water level didn't change. Do it again today. You will see there is no change in the levels. Your teacher should have been fired. Ice is bigger than water, the oxygen makes an expansion when it goes to a solid, but it isn't heavier, its the same "weight." So do the experiment, Fill a glass half way with water, put in one ice cube so that it is freely floating, measure with a line where the water is. It will be the same level after the cube is melted.

The volume of ice is greater than water right? That's why pipes burst?
So ice takes up more space than water. The mass stays the same.
If the polar ice caps are 90% under water and frozen, they will take up less space, the volume will decrease if they melt. That would make the ocean level go down.

I didnt say the glass of ice water weighed less, I said the level in the glass went down.

 

[JasperFrank]

Yes. Water expands when it goes to a solid state. The molecules arrange so that ice is less dense than water. The atoms "Tent." its unusual in that way. And thank the Physics of the Universe that Ice Floats. If Ice wasn't less dense, we wouldn't be here. Other combinations of elements don't act this way. And good for us, cause Hydrogen and Oxygen, if separated are explosive. They will expel all that energy used to separate them, to come back together. Its the perfect battery if we can master it.

 

[gsganzer]

If a warmer climate is such a bad thing, then why do all the yankees keep moving south?

Just joking around:dance1:

 

[tjkubota93]

If a warmer climate is such a bad thing, then why do all the yankees keep moving south?

Just joking around:dance1:

Carpet baggers......

LoL

 

[Egon]

Egon, I'm a nerd, with a degree in computer science, that understands how those statistical models are made, both from understanding the data collection, to the computer program models that try to tell people stuff. And as a nerd, I can say these models are F*^Ked.

I am not a Nerd. I do not have any degrees. I got to sit on the high stool and wear the conical hat when at school.

So please, tell me how you know they are faked. Perhaps describe the Data Collection and computer models involved.

 

[Egon]

The useless windmill:
[video]https://medium.com/@info_78345/the-windmills-of-netherlands-271e425a7374[/video]

A working windmill:
[video]https://www.google.ca/search?q=texas+water+pump+windmill&client=safari&hl=en-ca&prmd=isvn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj90MORkajkAhWumeAKHZM1CVoQ_AUoAXoECA8QA Q&biw=1024&bih=671#imgrc=_LNZq69exYfOwM[/video]

Ancient windmill:
[video]https://images.app.goo.gl/kvSZBxKtT9pqzzM39[/video]

Wind powered sawmill:
[video]https://images.app.goo.gl/USZeS5frZKMh5r8X6[/video]

Windmills have seen Yeomen Duty over the course of many years. They have been a very viable aspect of their community economies. Makes me wonder why the modern more efficient version is considered a failure by many?

 

[EddieWalker]

See, this is where your confirmation bias is kicking in. There is no clear pattern of "the leaders of global warming" (whatever that means) repeatedly lying about anything. What you have latched onto is a series of well funded attempts to intentionally discredit various scientists and organizations. You want to see that people have been lying to you about the very real evidence of climate change, so you seek out these manufactured stories, and believe them without researching them yourself.

The only reason that things at NASA have appeared to become at all politicized is because certain politicians chose to disagree with their real, scientific findings (GOP members whose campaigns were directly funded by fossil fuel industry). So now whenever NASA tries to publish their research, it is intentionally attacked by those who seek to profit from de-legitimizing it. They are still scientists trying to do real work.

Do you seriously think that a spinning wind turbine is not generating actual, usable electricity? Maybe go study some basic physics? Wind power generates 16% of the electricity in Texas, for pete's sake (~6% nationally). It's real and very effective. P.S. wind farms are not the only energy provider getting federal subsidies... just google it.

Nobody is saying that windmills do not generate electricity. They do not generate enough electricity to be profitable, and since they lose money when operating, they are junk.

What I find interesting and why I enjoy threads like this is my curiosity as to why people intentionally mislead and distort the simple facts to support a position that they want others to believe to be true.

There is more then enough evidence that NASA has become a corrupt government bureaucracy. Probably the last one to do so, but when their funding is dependent on their politics, it's no longer a reputable organization.

NASA's Rubber Ruler

 

[EddieWalker]

There is a kernel of truth in what you've written here, Eddie. I can imagine that some windmills, because of gov't incentives, resistance from neighbours, etc., get built in places where the wind doesn't blow hard enough for them to be viable economically. When wind farms are sited for the logical reason of where the winds blows the strongest, they are definitely cost effective compared to other sources now. According to the following, they weren't not that long ago.

Here's a table copied from the following Wikipedia entry:
Cost of electricity by source - Wikipedia

View attachment 618968

The source of the data is a US government agency, the Energy Information Administration (so please read my other post first). The "LCOE" is the "all in" cost of generating electricity including the costs to build, fuel, maintain, etc.

Natural gas electricity generation has dropped in cost in recent years, as the price of the raw material has dropped. The interesting sections (blue highlight) is how the cost of generating electricity through wind power and solar (PV) has dropped to about the same as natural gas. I know that gov't subsidies are an evil concept to many of the folks on TBN, but that is responsible for a lot of this price decrease. Subsidies help to generate a market, which spurs innovation and drives down the cost through scale of production.

Of course, until we have a better way to store electricity, solar and wind power are never going to be the entire solution.

Chris

How many power plants have been shut down due to windmill farms replacing them? Any? Or do they keep on running 24/7 because the wind isn't reliable?

What happens to every windmill farm after they are built? They fall apart. Maintaining them is extremely expensive. Wind means dust, and dust means abrasion. The blades themselves wear away from the dust at an extreme rate that requires replacement, or on site rebuilds, or what happens most of the time, they are abandoned.

Innovation only happens when there is free market. Windmills are paid for by federal funds regardless of how well they perform, or how much money they lose. This is why I am against windmills. If they actually did what they are supposed to do, I would be all for them.

 

[Chris616]

If 90% of the ice caps are underwater and ice takes up more room than liquid water, if the ice caps melt than the water level should go down right?

We did an experiment in grade school. The level of water in a glass of ice water went down when all the ice melted.

There is no land at the north pole, so the ice cap there floats on the sea. Its melting will not significantly affect global sea levels. It is the ice caps that sit on land (Greenland and Antarctica) that will raise sea levels when they melt and the water flows downhill into the sea.

Chris

 

[Chris616]

When you see some click bait of Sea Levels rising, just do a little research on if that area is experiencing land subsidence. I've found almost ever article that talks about sea level rise, neglects to tell you that scientists also know that the elevation in that area is dropping. Sea level seems to rise when the land drops, but sea level NEVER seems to be dropping when the land is being elevated. Its a very strange war of words. I've visited many ancient harbor sites around the world. Some are under water, some are 12 feet above what the sea level was 2000 years ago, and some are exactly at the right level to be working harbors today, 2000 years after they were created without any alterations. We haven't had an independent measuring stick until very recently using satellites and super computers to normalize a base line Ocean Level. Are oceans rising... probably,.... at a few centimeters a century.

Much of what you've written is correct. Contrary to what most people think, measuring the average sea level is a complicated thing, because of tides, weather systems, etc. and the fact that land masses are moving up and down at the same time. The best science says that for the last 100 years, the seas have been rising at 10-20 cm per century.

Chris

 

[Snobdds]

The Obamas will be long dead before human caused global warming raises sea levels enough to affect their new purchase.

Chris

Same answer. In the 21st century (the one that we're in), sea level rise is projected to be anywhere between 10-40 inches. Considering the time horizon for even the longest mortgage, lenders aren't taking much risk.

Chris

Sea level rise - Wikipedia

Al Gore disagrees with you...the father of climate change panic.

 

[Chris616]

Al Gore disagrees with you...the father of climate change panic.

Could you provide a reference that we can read that supports what you've written, please.

Chris

 

[Chris616]

What I find interesting and why I enjoy threads like this is my curiosity as to why people intentionally mislead and distort the simple facts to support a position that they want others to believe to be true.

There is more then enough evidence that NASA has become a corrupt government bureaucracy. Probably the last one to do so, but when their funding is dependent on their politics, it's no longer a reputable organization.

NASA's Rubber Ruler

But Eddie..."mislead(ing) and distort(ing) the simple facts to support a position" is exactly what you're doing. Information supporting almost any argument can be found on the Internet. That's why we all have to be critical in evaluating the sources of the data that we use to form our opinions. Can anyone believe that there are still folks around who believe the following?
The Flat Earth Society

I read through the whole "Rubber Ruler" link about NASA's measuring of global temperature. The author claims that NASA's research can't be relied upon because with "absolutely no transparency" they have changed historical data. But the link to NASA's website shown in his article has a link providing just that - a complete analysis of the history of the data and how/why it changes. For example, if a new weather station is built at a higher elevation on a mountain, the old historical data gets adjusted slightly so that an "apples to apples" comparison can be made between data from the old and new sites.
Data.GISS: GISTEMP HISTORY

Chris

 

[Snobdds]

The Obamas will be long dead before human caused global warming raises sea levels enough to affect their new purchase.

Chris

Same answer. In the 21st century (the one that we're in), sea level rise is projected to be anywhere between 10-40 inches. Considering the time horizon for even the longest mortgage, lenders aren't taking much risk.

Chris

Sea level rise - Wikipedia

Could you provide a reference that we can read that supports what you've written, please.

Chris

Absolutely...

Al Gore's movie 'An Inconvenient Truth' says sea levels could rise up to 2 feet. Is this true? | Scienceline

Arctic ice cap grows same year Al Gore predicted it would disappear, networks ignore | National Snow and Ice Data Center

Gore's no Arctic ice in 5–7 yrs. prediction a bust

I could go on...

 

[Sono]

Im marked safe ( probly dead by then as well ) but the truth is... its not the burning of fossil fuels and the such.
It is a natural occurance that has been going on for billions of years.... Ice Age, Heat Age, just a continuous cycle the same with the switching of the poles polarity which is now in effect.
This is just the governments way to milk more money out of everything and enact new laws, regulations and so on. Just a quick search will pull lots of this up. Nature repeats itself.

 

[Chris616]

How many power plants have been shut down due to windmill farms replacing them? Any? Or do they keep on running 24/7 because the wind isn't reliable?

Here's a graph showing how the US generates its electricity. The significant change is the drop in coal powered generation. That doesn't necessarily mean that a plant was shut down, though.
Electricity in the U.S. - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)


As I wrote earlier, until we have a better way to store electricity renewables aren't going to be the entire solution. One of the reasons that natural gas is being used more is because gas fired turbines can be turned on at a moment's notice (unlike nuclear and coal), making them a good partner for renewables for the days when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine.

What happens to every windmill farm after they are built? They fall apart. Maintaining them is extremely expensive. Wind means dust, and dust means abrasion. The blades themselves wear away from the dust at an extreme rate that requires replacement, or on site rebuilds, or what happens most of the time, they are abandoned.

All equipment needs maintenance to continue operating. The table that I included in my previous post included those maintenance costs when calculating the cost to produce electricity. Unlike a lot of people most folks on TBN have a pretty good idea about what is required to maintain equipment. Most of us would estimate that the maintenance required for a system where an electric generator is spun by a big propeller is going to be less than that required when the electrical generator is spun by a natural gas fired turbine or a steam powered turbine where the steam is produced in a coal fired or nuclear heated boiler.

Innovation only happens when there is free market. Windmills are paid for by federal funds regardless of how well they perform, or how much money they lose. This is why I am against windmills. If they actually did what they are supposed to do, I would be all for them.

There are lots of drivers for innovation. The cost of solar panels has dropped 99% over the last 40 years. Government subsidies around the world played a big role in that happening. One of the biggest drivers of innovation is war. It's amazing how the world's airforces changed from biplanes to jets during 1939-45.
Explaining the plummeting cost of solar power | MIT News

Edits in red by me.
Chris

 

[deezler]

The volume of ice is greater than water right? That's why pipes burst?
So ice takes up more space than water. The mass stays the same.
If the polar ice caps are 90% under water and frozen, they will take up less space, the volume will decrease if they melt. That would make the ocean level go down.

I didnt say the glass of ice water weighed less, I said the level in the glass went down.

No. The ice on greenland and antartica is on solid rock, ABOVE sea level. It will melt and flow down into the ocean. Same with various glaciers, etc.

 

[deezler]

Nobody is saying that windmills do not generate electricity. They do not generate enough electricity to be profitable, and since they lose money when operating, they are junk.

What I find interesting and why I enjoy threads like this is my curiosity as to why people intentionally mislead and distort the simple facts to support a position that they want others to believe to be true.

There is more then enough evidence that NASA has become a corrupt government bureaucracy. Probably the last one to do so, but when their funding is dependent on their politics, it's no longer a reputable organization.

NASA's Rubber Ruler

And you cite yet another obvious right wing troll site. You are not reading real news, dude! You can research your sources to see how honest they are. You continue to seek out questionable opinions because they have the viewpoint you want to confirm. Expand your news sources and maybe you will see things a bit differently.

All your link showed was that NASA was adjusting their models and data, which they do regularly as new data and improved models come online. Perhaps, you know, to improve their accuracy? you'd rather believe otherwise, we get that.

American Thinker - Media Bias/Fact Check

Plenty of coal power plants have gone offline in the last decade, btw. Reasonable people would readily admit that the vast majority of their energy production was replaced by gas, not renewables, though.