An engineering solution to climate change?

[cyrano]

Meanwhile, I read up on the plastic cleanup project. The project has a website at:

https://www.theoceancleanup.com/technology/

And Wikipedia has an entry about it, under the name "Pacific garbage patch":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_garbage_patch

In short, the first segment of the first garbage collector being built, has been tested begin of 2018.

And on September 8, 2018 from San Francisco, System 001 was launched . It intends to prove the concept of The Ocean Cleanup's technology in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch - situated halfway between Hawaii and California.

Note that the name "Great Pacific Garbage Patch" is misleading. It's more of a soup than a patch. "Patch" leads people to think it's more or less solid.

AFAIK there is only one island that consists of waste material, and that's not plastic. It consists of conch shells:

http://www.rumshopryan.com/2012/01/03/happy-island/

When I saw pictures of this island, years ago, it wasn't a tourist attraction, but just a pile of waste, inhabited in season by poor conch collectors. I'm not even certain it's the same one...

 

[living sounds]

John, I guess this makes climate change very personal for you:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/15/climate-change-to-cause-dramatic-beer-shortages-extreme-weather-price

 

[JohnRoberts]

John, I guess this makes climate change very personal for you:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/15/climate-change-to-cause-dramatic-beer-shortages-extreme-weather-price

I won't be drinking beer 80 years from now...  If anything the trend for beer drinking is down (since pot was legalized in several locations). I do not anticipate any shortages in my probable lifespan.

I shared an article several months ago about CO2 shortages during the big football matches leading to short term draft beer scarcity in pubs (UK or EU?).

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

This seems pretty hard to believe, I read a long article about it last night and it is a little more complicated than that.

Perhaps shining a spotlight on this will get more activity but the situation underwater resists conventional remedies (capping off the well head(s), due to landslides and dangerous underwater conditions).

Lets hope the recent publicity gets something done, besides spinning for political advantage.

Reportedly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_oil_spill Taylor energy has spent hundreds of millions trying to stop the leakage and is out of options (and probably money).

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

I caught the tail end of an interesting show last night about man made earthquakes....... Pretty interesting and there was a lot of pretty convincing stuff on it........

Seems I've been writing about this for years too...

The earthquakes are made by tectonic plate movement. Arguably fraqing can trigger temblors on known fault lines.

the earthquakes in Oklahoma being caused by deep waste water injection was one of the segments.......here's a related article I guess.....

The surge of earthquakes in Central Oklahoma has features of reservoir-induced seismicity

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-29883-9

Exactly for this reason, fraqing is not embraced in parts of Europe where very old buildings are not robust enough to tolerate new earthquakes, even if minor.  In CA fault areas, new building standards are engineered to tolerate moderate shakes. In OK not so robust.

It is debatable wether fraqing "caused" the earthquake to occur,  or relived stress along an existing fault with minor shakes reducing the probability of a larger earthquake later.  The plates are still moving and fault pressure always building.

Of course this will not stop those injured from suing oil drillers. You can't sue mother nature, but oil companies generally have deep pockets.

JR

 

[living sounds]

Of course this will not stop those injured from suing oil drillers. You can't sue mother nature, but oil companies generally have deep pockets.

JR

And they use those deep pockets to pay lobbyists and lawyers and buy lawmakers to make sure lawsuits gets nowhere.

 

[living sounds]

BTW, regarding climate change, here's an interesting article vis-a-vis the current wildfires:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-californias-wildfires-are-so-destructive-in-5-charts/

 

[JohnRoberts]

So what's going on with the taxes in France??? So all the people get taxed on fuel and this makes them want to comply by what???buying a newer car??? Does all the money from the extra taxes go to some pool where it's put to some kind of use??? I'm just trying to figure out where this extra money for fuel is going????

I need to research but figured I'd ask in case anyone knew already.......

Trying to ween them off fossil fuel to save the planet... Apparently the higher priced gas is more annoying than climate change. :

I'm sure the government puts all tax revenue to good use for the benefit of its citizens. :lol: 

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

BTW, regarding climate change, here's an interesting article vis-a-vis the current wildfires:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-californias-wildfires-are-so-destructive-in-5-charts/

Coincidentally I read a newspaper article today about the benefits of prophylactic logging to remove undersized trees and brush between mature trees. The healthy larger trees can resist catching fire without all the kindling wood under them.  The article also mentioned controlled burns, again to remove fuel. https://www.wsj.com/articles/facing-deadlier-fires-california-tries-something-new-more-logging-1542390642

After decades of mismanagement it will not be trivial get the forests healthy again, but there may be no choice. PG&E may not have enough insurance to pay for the incidental damage from the last fire. One whole town got wiped off the map.

Once taxpayers are fully footing the bill, someone needs to apply common sense. Always the optimist I find this a positive development. 

JR

[edit] I saw another mention about CA legislature considering how to relieve PG&E of the liability from inadvertently starting fires. They will have them buy bonds to make reparations to customers and have ratepayers pay back the bonds over time with higher rates. But for now they are not talking about covering 2018 losses in that legislation so Paradise is still lost for now. Clearly socializing the loss but utilities are already government blessed quasi-monopolies.  [/edit]

 

[JohnRoberts]

We have controlled burns near me all the time....sometimes several times a year..... The power company owns tons of land and sends out notices when they are doing it. I need to look for some pics and a video I have of one burn that got close to out of "control" but it was handled pretty quick...........

FL may have a new problem... lots of forests (15+ million acres). Pine trees encouraged by a govt subsidy. Many were damaged by recent hurricanes.. Storm damaged pine trees can be only worth $2-$3 a ton for pulp, if they harvest them soon enough... left on the ground too long they become worthless, but perhaps fuel for future fires. It will take a while to restore some balance to that industry.

JR

 

[boji]

PG&E may not have enough insurance to pay for the incidental damage

Aside: I got an official looking legal-sized letter in the mail yesterday where, in a nutshell, my local electrical utility was asking homeowners to pay extra in insurance (conveniently added to their bill) for the meters and such on the house in case they fail. I think this included the lines coming to the house from the pole as well.  I have a hard time with this since for example, Comcast doesn't charge a person to replace a broken router or faulty demarc coax. It would be like a store owner asking you to pay more for their goods since they are concerned their cash register is failing.
The device or lines they run are put there so they can monitor their profits and supply their paid-for service.  At the least, you build-in the electrical costs to account for depreciating equipment.  If they are asking homeowners to pay insurance, then it sounds like it's illegal to do this.
I'd like to see the profit margins these utility companies make...My intuition says they are doing quite well, and can replace my meter on their own damn dime as part of the cost of doing business and still turn a handsome profit. They may even be able to take a hit of paying for a burnt down town, as it's not like people are going to stop paying for power if and when they rebuild.

Edit:  If they are trying to say I own the meter, when why the locking tabs and the warnings that say I can't futz with it? 
Make me think of a time when I was younger a utility in AZ killed the power to a group house I was living in at the peak of summer. Ahem..someone got mad and took a coat hanger to it, circumventing the lockout, and restored half of three phase back to the house for a few months until deadbeat roommates paid up. 

 

[JohnRoberts]

Aside: I got an official looking legal-sized letter in the mail yesterday where, in a nutshell, my local electrical utility was asking homeowners to pay extra in insurance (conveniently added to their bill) for the meters and such on the house in case they fail. I think this included the lines coming to the house from the pole as well.  I have a hard time with this since for example, Comcast doesn't charge a person to replace a broken router or faulty demarc coax. It would be like a store owner asking you to pay more for their goods since they are concerned their cash register is failing.
The device or lines they run are put there so they can monitor their profits and supply their paid-for service.  At the least, you build-in the electrical costs to account for depreciating equipment.  If they are asking homeowners to pay insurance, then it sounds like it's illegal to do this.
I'd like to see the profit margins these utility companies make...

As a regulated business I suspect that is public information. You didn't mention which utility you use, apparently there are several in MD and customers can select the one they want. This gives you some leverage if unhappy with the service. (I do not have a choice. Just one over-expensive clean coal power plant not even burning coal, because NG is cheaper. )

My intuition says they are doing quite well, and can replace my meter on their own damn dime as part of the cost of doing business and still turn a handsome profit. They may even be able to take a hit of paying for a burnt down town, as it's not like people are going to stop paying for power if and when they rebuild.

Edit:  If they are trying to say I own the meter, when why the locking tabs and the warnings that say I can't futz with it? 
Make me think of a time when I was younger a utility in AZ killed the power to a group house I was living in at the peak of summer. Ahem..someone got mad and took a coat hanger to it, circumventing the lockout, and restored half of three phase back to the house for a few months until deadbeat roommates paid up.

I believe the meter is their property, but I am not an expert.

JR

 

[ruffrecords]

The water companies have a similar  ploy here in the UK. They are legally responsible for the supply up to your boundary line. Beyond that it is yours. If you get a leak between your stop cock and their supply it is down to you to fix. They offer insurance against this.

Cheers

Ian

 

[JohnRoberts]

The water companies have a similar  ploy here in the UK. They are legally responsible for the supply up to your boundary line. Beyond that it is yours. If you get a leak between your stop cock and their supply it is down to you to fix. They offer insurance against this.

Cheers

Ian

In my water district they are responsible up to their water meter, which is near the water main (and edge of my property). When my water feed line between the meter and my house sprung a leak several years back, it was my problem (the joys of home ownership). While I had a plumber there I added a cut-off valve where the water enters my house for my convenience, but everything my side of the meter is 100% mine to worry about.

I suspect it is similar for the mains power meter. 

The utility with some gray area was the old phone company where they originally took responsibility for the wires inside your house, as well as ownership of the phone sets (too high tech for consumers). That changed decades ago with phones turning into plug in consumer products and the wiring responsibility shifted back toward the telephone poles.

JR

 

[ruffrecords]

The utility with some gray area was the old phone company where they originally took responsibility for the wires inside your house, as well as ownership of the phone sets (too high tech for consumers). That changed decades ago with phones turning into plug in consumer products and the wiring responsibility shifted back toward the telephone poles.

JR

Much the same here British Telecom (who owns the wires) takes responsibility only up to and including the socket they provide in the house. Any extensions are your responsibility. Equipment used to be provided solely by them (rented to you) but like you that changed decades ago shortly after they were privatised. The big story these days is the (lack of) provision of decent internet speeds to rural areas.

Cheers

Ian

 

[cyrano]

The driest place on earth is a desert in Chili. A few weeks ago, it got as much rain as in the previous 500 years...

Result: most of the life in this desert is dead. Some species might be gone forever.

 

[JohnRoberts]

The driest place on earth is a desert in Chili. A few weeks ago, it got as much rain as in the previous 500 years...

Result: most of the life in this desert is dead. Some species might be gone forever.

For any interested in learning more about the Atacama dessert, its in Chile.... It's geography places it directly west of the Andes mountain range so rain clouds generally release their rainfall on the other side of the tall mountain peaks. This makes it the driest place on earth.

The Atacama has been inhabited by people for thousands of years, with cities down by the Pacific coast.

Above average dessert rainfall occurs during el nino ocean weather patterns (that repeat on a multiple year cycle) where a warmer Pacific ocean surface temperatures  generate more rain clouds. Normally the pacific there is too cold to generate significant rain activity.

JR

 

[boji]

My co-worker told his son one evening to 'go catch some fireflies'. He then realized he hadn't seen any in his yard for quite some time...

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/27/magazine/insect-apocalypse.html

 

[ruffrecords]

The UK Met Office recently released a prediction that temperatures will rise by 5 degrees in 50 years according to their latest model. I guess some of you will be around to see if that one comes true.

Cheers

Ian

 

[desol]

I've already purchased a few sets of arm floaties.