A very small step would be if airlines on sectors up to 600nm used turboprops instead of turbofans. SFC would be improved.
MedEwork’s chart is a reminder that not so long ago, in geological terms, but during human pre-history, Chicago was under something like 10 metres of ice.
Yes but what is “Headless” & “Knee Jerk” which best describes many of the Government Responses. PV panels work incredibly well in Southern Europe but to subsidise them in the UK probably uses more carbon in the embedded energy of Manufacturing, Transport and Installation then they will ever generate before they fail early due to damp air and rain!
My previous post had a list of stupid policy responses which have added more C02 to the atmosphere than if the Government did nothing and there are plenty more like the “Boiler Scrapage” and “Car Scrapage”schemes which ignored the huge embedded energy in the existing plant.
You see this sort of thing everywhere. Middle class people with nothing better to do washing their glass Tahini jars under the hot tap and then jumping into the Volvo and driving 3 bottles, 5 miles to the “bottle bank”. In Plymouth (UK) for a short period of time the local Government used to pick up the recycling, store it in a Warehouse for a few months and then put the whole lot into Landfill with the other rubbish as this allowed them to get an EU grant for meeting recycling targets.
Proper policy responses would be a low carbon tax, gently rising over a 20 year period. As people can plan and existing plant and machinery can wear out over it’s normal lifespan it is widely accepted as doing least harm.
We need less “Virtue Signalling” anti-capitalist nonsense and more responses that look at the big picture. In the UK that probably means insulating buildings.
We need less “Virtue Signalling” anti-capitalist nonsense and more responses that look at the big picture. In the UK that probably means insulating buildings.
Fully agree with this.
As for GA, its emissions are insignificant in the bigger picture, but improved technology with less emissions such as hybrid, electric etc. would help to keep public acceptance of our hobby.
“PV panels work incredibly well in Southern Europe but to subsidise them in the UK probably uses more carbon in the embedded energy of Manufacturing, Transport and Installation then they will ever generate before they fail early due to damp air and rain!”
Not correct.
PV is more efficient in slightly cooler climate than in hot Southern Europe.
PV has, depending on electricity source during manufacturing, a carbon payback time of well under 2 years.
Transport and installation is largely irrelevant.
As previously keen sailor, I prefer PV to windmills as they are non-intrusive in many cases and still help.
UK has regionally varying annual sunshine hours, it can make a lot of sense.
That said, I agree with the general ghist of your post. Just wanted to point out the PV myths ;-)
PV is more efficient in slightly cooler climate than in hot Southern Europe.
How could that be? The sun doesn’t shine here 
so even 100% PV efficiency won’t produce electricity.
There is a limit of on PV output when the panels get too hot is likely what ch.ess gets at? I still don’t think this effect is all that big and am also wondering what is meant..
The temperature effect was just small aspect of my post, but yes, there is a loss of up to 10% when PV cells heat up.
We now the weather is mostly bad in England, Peter, no reason to rub it into your own skin ;-)
Airborne_Again wrote:
When the “a degree or two” makes substantial parts of the Earth uninhabitable or at least unable to support their current population, we’re going to see migration on a scale that dwarfs anything we’ve seen so far
We are seeing that right now, and it has nothing to do with the weather or climate. What about the white man’s invasion of America? The human race has one problem overshadowing everything else. That is overpopulation. We are becoming too many, we are using too much space, we are eating too much. The reason thousands of species have gone instinct, and even more are going to, are:
We are destroying the earth all right, and it has nothing to do with global warming. A few degrees of colder/warmer climate has not destroyed the earth, that is a fact as changes in previous periods have been much larger.
Archer-181 wrote:
In the UK that probably means insulating buildings.
This issue is already being forced. You want a grant to install some thermal solar heaters? You first must prove you’ve “picked the low hanging fruit” and have a properly insulated house first. You want to do a buy-to-let scheme? The property must meet a certain energy efficiency standard before you can.
LeSving wrote:
A few degrees of colder/warmer climate has not destroyed the earth, that is a fact as changes in previous periods have been much larger.
Has also the rate of change in previous periods been as large?
