Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #530784 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-11-06 14:17 -0600 |
| Last post | 2015-11-07 14:50 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 89 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 14:17 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Puppet_Sock <puppet_sock@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-06 13:26 -0800
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-06 22:28 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-06 22:31 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 17:55 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-06 23:07 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 18:09 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 18:16 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 00:57 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 19:44 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution "Ringer" <byoung@peoplestel.net> - 2015-11-06 20:02 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 21:37 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-11-06 20:59 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 22:03 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-11-06 23:20 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 00:56 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-11-07 10:46 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 18:17 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Unum <noneof@yourbusiness.com> - 2015-11-08 19:06 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-07 16:09 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Trawley Trash <trash@invalid.invalid> - 2015-11-07 05:42 -0800
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-06 17:56 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 09:33 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-07 10:22 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 00:58 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 22:27 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-06 23:40 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 00:20 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 01:00 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 07:10 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 08:23 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 10:31 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 10:00 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 11:16 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 10:21 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 11:29 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 10:35 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 11:48 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:39 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:11 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 20:17 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:42 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 21:17 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:37 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:12 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 20:19 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:43 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 21:18 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:37 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:12 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 20:20 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 14:44 -0600
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 21:18 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 09:43 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 07:08 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Edgardo Alcantara <edgardoalcantara@carosseryrepair.org> - 2015-11-07 14:16 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:42 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Edgardo Alcantara <edgardoalcantara@carosseryrepair.org> - 2015-11-08 00:50 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 08:45 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 17:56 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-11 23:58 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 08:02 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 16:09 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 19:47 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 19:38 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 19:58 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 19:52 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 20:07 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 21:28 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 21:32 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 22:20 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 23:02 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 21:59 +0100
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Ludwig Böhm <ludwb@widespectrum.com> - 2015-11-12 21:26 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-11-12 16:05 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 21:40 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-11-12 18:01 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-12 23:29 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-11-12 20:20 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-13 01:49 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-11-12 22:35 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-13 04:39 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 13:10 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-08 17:30 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-11-07 09:37 -0800
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-07 12:43 -0500
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-07 18:43 +0000
Re: Technology's role in a climate solution RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-08 16:52 -0800
US climate trolling militants infecting sci.physics 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2015-11-07 14:50 +0000
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 20:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <is22hc-h4h.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530988 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/7/15 12:39 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Pull your head out of your ass, shit head. > > > Now, now, jimp, Now, now, spamming shit head. We all know you are incapable of dicsussing anything and all you can do is repeatedly cut and paste the same thing over and over again. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 14:42 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <HNednRgIQe-9_6PLnZ2dnUU7-Y3OydjZ@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530998 |
On 11/7/15 2:17 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Now, now, spamming shit head. > > We all know you are incapable of dicsussing anything and all you can > do is repeatedly cut and paste the same thing over and over again. Now, now, jimp, you're slipping again, your language inappropriate, and your absolute contempt and total disgust are addressed in these Anger Management classes. You, jimp, need these services: > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 21:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <tb62hc-ngh.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #531006 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/7/15 2:17 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Now, now, spamming shit head. >> >> We all know you are incapable of dicsussing anything and all you can >> do is repeatedly cut and paste the same thing over and over again. > > > > Now, now, jimp, Now, now spaming shit head, you are still a spamming shit head incapable of anything other than repasting the same cut and paste over and over again, ass hole. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 18:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <21t1hc-f7g.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530909 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/7/15 9:31 AM, Wally W. wrote: >> So*discuss* already. > > What aspect of this article would you like to discuss with me? That was already stated, cut and paste, spamming piece of shit. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 14:12 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <HNedneAIQe-oxqPLnZ2dnUU7-Y3OydjZ@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530950 |
On 11/7/15 12:37 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > That was already stated, cut and paste, spamming piece of shit. Now, now, jimp, you're slipping again, your language inappropriate, and your absolute contempt and total disgust are addressed in these Anger Management classes. You, jimp, need these services: > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 20:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <0v22hc-h4h.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530989 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/7/15 12:37 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> That was already stated, cut and paste, spamming piece of shit. > > > Now, now, jimp, Now, now, spamming cut and paste shit head, we all know you can not discuss anything. No need to keep proving it by ignoring the questions and repasting the same thing over and over again. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 14:43 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <HNednRsIQe___6PLnZ2dnUU7-Y3OydjZ@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530999 |
On 11/7/15 2:19 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Now, now, spamming cut and paste shit head, we all know you can not > discuss anything. Now, now, jimp, you're slipping again, your language inappropriate, and your absolute contempt and total disgust are addressed in these Anger Management classes. You, jimp, need these services: > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 21:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ed62hc-ngh.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #531007 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/7/15 2:19 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Now, now, spamming cut and paste shit head, we all know you can not >> discuss anything. > > > Now, now, jimp, Now, now, spamming cut and paste shit head, we all know you can not discuss anything. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 18:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dvs1hc-f7g.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530868 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/7/15 1:10 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> The spamming shit head's "discussion" is to rehash arm waving buzzwords >> like "sustainably" that he obtained from cut and pastes. >> > > > Now, now, jimp, your jealousy is obvious, your language inappropriate, Now, now, you spamming piece of shit, take your doom and gloom nonsense and shove it up your ass. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 14:12 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <HNedneMIQe_WxqPLnZ2dnUU7-Y3OydjZ@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #530949 |
On 11/7/15 12:37 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Now, now, you spamming piece of shit, take your doom and gloom nonsense > and shove it up your ass. Now, now, jimp, you're slipping again, your language inappropriate, and your absolute contempt and total disgust are addressed in these Anger Management classes. You, jimp, need these services: > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 20:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4132hc-h4h.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530990 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/7/15 12:37 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Now, now, you spamming piece of shit, take your doom and gloom nonsense >> and shove it up your ass. > > > Now, now, jimp, Now, now, spamming, worthles piece of shit, we all know you can not discuss anything, so why bother to repaste the same cut and paste yet again, ass hole? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 14:44 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <HNednRoIQe8D_6PLnZ2dnUU7-Y3OydjZ@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #531000 |
On 11/7/15 2:20 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > Now, now, spamming, worthles piece of shit, we all know you can not > discuss anything, so why bother to repaste the same cut and paste > yet again, ass hole? Now, now, jimp, you're slipping again, your language inappropriate, and your absolute contempt and total disgust are addressed in these Anger Management classes. You, jimp, need these services: > http://yellowpages.com/rancho-cucamonga-ca/anger-management-classes Technology's role in a climate solution > http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > A different approach. So far, the countries that have experienced the > most success in moving away from fossil fuels are Germany and Cuba. > Germany guarantees fixed tariffs to producers of renewable energy. > Cuba has focused on efficiency and also organic farming, which > conserves energy through its lower water requirements, reduced use of > farm equipment, and rejection of fertilizers and pesticides. The > German model might be replicated in developed countries, but not in > developing ones. A large percentage of Germany's renewable-generator > owners are individuals, cooperatives, or communities, and such > entities in developing nations lack the capital to invest in > renewable energy. The Cuban experience is even more difficult to > replicate, as organic farming is not as remunerative as commercial > cropping. > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. And > investments are needed in biotic and other low-energy innovations. > But in the end, global energy consumption must be reduced by > something on the order of 60 percent. This will require a number of > profound non-technological changes. Energy equity must be established > among the world's nations—people in wealthy countries should not, as > they do today, use hundreds of times as much energy as people in the > poorest countries. Ownership rights over nature must be discarded in > favor of the right to use nature without destroying it. The global > economy must prioritize "risk minimization for all" over "gain > maximization for a few." A steady-state economy—a sustainable economy > that maintains nature’s balance—must be established. > > The implications of these changes are radical. The United States and > Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; > Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities > must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and > rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and > governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must > be implemented for everyone. -- sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of physics, news from the physics community, and physics-related social issues.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 21:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <se62hc-ngh.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #531008 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/7/15 2:20 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> Now, now, spamming, worthles piece of shit, we all know you can not >> discuss anything, so why bother to repaste the same cut and paste >> yet again, ass hole? > > > > Now, now, jimp, Now, now, spamming, worthles piece of shit, we all know you can not discuss anything, so why bother to repaste the same cut and paste yet again, ass hole? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 09:43 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n1kdfu$rqd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #530833 |
Dne 07/11/2015 v 05:27 Sam Wormley napsal(a): > On 11/6/15 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: >> Technology's role in a climate solution >>> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy—despite the technical problems. > Most people are focused on energy matters, not considering the fact that fossil fuels, especially oil and gas, are more valuable as input to chemistry industry than as a energy source. It is wasting of raws to burn them. Many things will become more expensive, when these raws are not available any more. -- Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 07:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pjk0hc-r2c.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530833 |
Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/6/15 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: >> Technology's role in a climate solution >>> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 > > > For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift > from fossil fuels to solar energy?despite the technical problems. Utter nonsense. There are hundreds of years of natural gas around, which might be enough time to get fusion working. Solar energy isn't going to power ships, airplanes, trucks, construction equipment or large farm machinery. And you completely overlook current nuclear technology. You are a babbling Chicken Little. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edgardo Alcantara <edgardoalcantara@carosseryrepair.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 14:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n1l132$5hr$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #530862 |
W dniu Sat, 07 Nov 2015 07:08:09 +0000 użytkownik jimp napisał: > Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 11/6/15 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: >>> Technology's role in a climate solution >>>> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 >> For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift >> from fossil fuels to solar energy?despite the technical problems. > > Utter nonsense. There are hundreds of years of natural gas around, which > might be enough time to get fusion working. Unequivocally wrong. Natural gases and oil are, right after the water, the most abundant resource on planet Earth. > Solar energy isn't going to > power ships, airplanes, trucks, > construction equipment or large farm machinery. And you completely > overlook current nuclear technology. You are a babbling Chicken Little. You are batshit crazy. Only in rotten poor capitalist countries around the world would believe such that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 18:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <q8t1hc-f7g.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #530865 |
In sci.physics Edgardo Alcantara <edgardoalcantara@carosseryrepair.org> wrote: > W dniu Sat, 07 Nov 2015 07:08:09 +0000 użytkownik jimp napisał: > >> Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 11/6/15 2:17 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: >>>> Technology's role in a climate solution >>>>> http://thebulletin.org/technologys-role-climate-solution8815 >>> For civilization to continue sustainably, human beings must shift >>> from fossil fuels to solar energy?despite the technical problems. >> >> Utter nonsense. There are hundreds of years of natural gas around, which >> might be enough time to get fusion working. > > Unequivocally wrong. Natural gases and oil are, right after the water, the > most abundant resource on planet Earth. If they are "the most abundant resource on planet Earth", how can what I ACTUALLY said be unequivocally wrong? > >> Solar energy isn't going to > power ships, airplanes, trucks, >> construction equipment or large farm machinery. And you completely >> overlook current nuclear technology. You are a babbling Chicken Little. > > You are batshit crazy. Only in rotten poor capitalist countries around the > world would believe such that. How do you power an airliner with solar power? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edgardo Alcantara <edgardoalcantara@carosseryrepair.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-08 00:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n1m68q$kp2$4@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #530952 |
W dniu Sat, 07 Nov 2015 07:33:26 +0600 (PDT) użytkownik jimp napisał: >>> Solar energy isn't going to > power ships, airplanes, trucks, >>> construction equipment or large farm machinery. And you completely >>> overlook current nuclear technology. You are a babbling Chicken >>> Little. >> >> You are batshit crazy. Only in rotten poor capitalist countries around >> the world would believe such that. > > How do you power an airliner with solar power? Very easy. You just need to present the right attitude.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-08 08:45 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n1muee$3af$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #531067 |
Dne 08/11/2015 v 01:50 Edgardo Alcantara napsal(a): > W dniu Sat, 07 Nov 2015 07:33:26 +0600 (PDT) użytkownik jimp napisał: > >>>> Solar energy isn't going to > power ships, airplanes, trucks, >>>> construction equipment or large farm machinery. And you completely >>>> overlook current nuclear technology. You are a babbling Chicken >>>> Little. >>> >>> You are batshit crazy. Only in rotten poor capitalist countries around >>> the world would believe such that. >> >> How do you power an airliner with solar power? > > Very easy. You just need to present the right attitude. > It is not so easy. Airliners have fuel efficiency about 2-3 L/seat/100km. ( Many people are not aware of the flying is more energy efficient than 1 person car driving ) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft#Example_Values For 200 people and 900 km/h it is 3600-5400 L/hour. If I estimate fuel specific energy 10 MJ / L it is 36-54 GJ / h = 10-15 MJ/s = 10-15 MW. If I suppose panels providing 200 W /sq m, it is 50000-75000 sq meters, what makes area 1000 x 50-75 metres. We do not use airplanes with such a vertical crosssection area. (smile) And even if we do, it would not take off it there is cloudy. Another technological challange is power supply, if batteries are used. Aside of the price, batteries are known to be very inferior to fuels in energy/mass parameter, what is show stopper for flying. Another technological challange is electric engine technology, as current implementations using just propeller engines that are efficient for slow airplanes only. As resume, for airliners I see as real only cases the planes ARE powered by fuel, but synthetically prepared with solar energy use. In such cases the carbon cycle is closed. -- Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-08 17:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n1nuo9$kpe$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #531149 |
Dne 08/11/2015 v 08:45 Poutnik napsal(a): > For 200 people and 900 km/h it is 3600-5400 L/hour. > If I estimate fuel specific energy 10 MJ / L > it is 36-54 GJ / h = 10-15 MJ/s = 10-15 MW. > > If I suppose panels providing 200 W /sq m, > it is 50000-75000 sq meters, > what makes area 1000 x 50-75 metres. > > We do not use airplanes with such a vertical cross-section area. (smile) > And even if we do, it would not take off it there is cloudy. I have realized the fuel has about 37 MJ / kg, so area would be 3.7 times larger. -- Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web