This mistake is BIG over C02 and resevoirs

[tinydancer]

I mean come on. This is a huge "whoopsies".

The original calculation is out by 273 million metric tons? And this really makes a difference because of this:

"Hydroelectricity supplies an estimated 20 per cent of the world's electricity and accounts for more than 85 per cent of electricity from renewable sources"

Here's part of the article and I've included a link.

Hydroelectric reservoirs emit about one-sixth of the greenhouse gases previously attributed to them, says an international team of scientists.

They emit 48 million metric tonnes of carbon annually, a downgrade from earlier estimates of 321 million metric tonnes, according to a study of 85 reservoirs published in this week's online version of Nature Geoscience.

"Our analysis indicates that hydroelectric reservoirs are not major contributors to the greenhouse gas problem," Jonathan Cole, a limnologist at New York State's Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, said in a release.

"But there are some caveats," he warned. "To date, only 17 per cent of potential hydroelectric reservoir sites have been exploited, and impacts vary based on reservoir age, size, and location."


Hydro reservoirs produce less CO2 than believed - Technology & Science - CBC News

 

[ScienceRocks]

Being that energy must flow from warm to cold I don't understand, what the deal is. The physics says that the cooler Atmosphere can't transmit energy to the warmer surface.

The first and second law of thermodynamics doesn't allow it.

 

[tinydancer]

What's really strange is that apparently Obama is going to cut funding for hydropower.


Obama Wants To Cut Hydropower Funding
By Russell Ray
April 19, 2011 | 33 Comments



Hydropower advocates must be puzzled by President Obama’s plan to build a nation powered by clean energy.

As the Obama administration promotes an ambitious new goal to produce 80 percent of the nation’s energy from clean resources by 2035, Obama’s budget proposal for fiscal 2012 would slash funding for hydropower research and development by 21 percent.

Talk about irony.

Hydropower is the world’s largest and most reliable form of renewable power, and it deserves a strong presence in any comprehensive plan to generate more clean energy in the U.S. Cutting funding for hydropower research and development amid deepening concerns about climate change is a crime against common sense.

Great article at link.

Obama Wants To Cut Hydropower Funding | RussellRay

 

[IanC]

Is clean energy viable? I read somewhere that the crops needed to fill a 25 gal SUV with ethanol could feed a person for a year. do you think this is right within an order of magnitude?

 

[RollingThunder]

I mean come on. This is a huge "whoopsies".

The original calculation is out by 273 million metric tons? And this really makes a difference because of this:

"Hydroelectricity supplies an estimated 20 per cent of the world's electricity and accounts for more than 85 per cent of electricity from renewable sources"

Here's part of the article and I've included a link.

Hydroelectric reservoirs emit about one-sixth of the greenhouse gases previously attributed to them, says an international team of scientists.

They emit 48 million metric tonnes of carbon annually, a downgrade from earlier estimates of 321 million metric tonnes, according to a study of 85 reservoirs published in this week's online version of Nature Geoscience.

"Our analysis indicates that hydroelectric reservoirs are not major contributors to the greenhouse gas problem," Jonathan Cole, a limnologist at New York State's Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, said in a release.

"But there are some caveats," he warned. "To date, only 17 per cent of potential hydroelectric reservoir sites have been exploited, and impacts vary based on reservoir age, size, and location."


Hydro reservoirs produce less CO2 than believed - Technology & Science - CBC News

??????

So what?

Annual human CO2 emissions, mostly from burning fossil fuels and cement production, are about 30,000,000,000 tons per year. That's 30 billion tons/year. And you think 273 million tons is "huge"? LOL. That's less than one one hundredth of our total CO2 emissions.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I mean come on. This is a huge "whoopsies".

The original calculation is out by 273 million metric tons? And this really makes a difference because of this:

"Hydroelectricity supplies an estimated 20 per cent of the world's electricity and accounts for more than 85 per cent of electricity from renewable sources"

Here's part of the article and I've included a link.

Hydroelectric reservoirs emit about one-sixth of the greenhouse gases previously attributed to them, says an international team of scientists.

They emit 48 million metric tonnes of carbon annually, a downgrade from earlier estimates of 321 million metric tonnes, according to a study of 85 reservoirs published in this week's online version of Nature Geoscience.

"Our analysis indicates that hydroelectric reservoirs are not major contributors to the greenhouse gas problem," Jonathan Cole, a limnologist at New York State's Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, said in a release.

"But there are some caveats," he warned. "To date, only 17 per cent of potential hydroelectric reservoir sites have been exploited, and impacts vary based on reservoir age, size, and location."


Hydro reservoirs produce less CO2 than believed - Technology & Science - CBC News

??????

So what?

Annual human CO2 emissions, mostly from burning fossil fuels and cement production, are about 30,000,000,000 tons per year. That's 30 billion tons/year. And you think 273 million tons is "huge"? LOL. That's less than one one hundredth of our total CO2 emissions.

How does that compare to Earths atmosphere?

 

[tinydancer]

I mean come on. This is a huge "whoopsies".

The original calculation is out by 273 million metric tons? And this really makes a difference because of this:

"Hydroelectricity supplies an estimated 20 per cent of the world's electricity and accounts for more than 85 per cent of electricity from renewable sources"

Here's part of the article and I've included a link.

Hydroelectric reservoirs emit about one-sixth of the greenhouse gases previously attributed to them, says an international team of scientists.

They emit 48 million metric tonnes of carbon annually, a downgrade from earlier estimates of 321 million metric tonnes, according to a study of 85 reservoirs published in this week's online version of Nature Geoscience.

"Our analysis indicates that hydroelectric reservoirs are not major contributors to the greenhouse gas problem," Jonathan Cole, a limnologist at New York State's Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, said in a release.

"But there are some caveats," he warned. "To date, only 17 per cent of potential hydroelectric reservoir sites have been exploited, and impacts vary based on reservoir age, size, and location."


Hydro reservoirs produce less CO2 than believed - Technology & Science - CBC News

??????

So what?

Annual human CO2 emissions, mostly from burning fossil fuels and cement production, are about 30,000,000,000 tons per year. That's 30 billion tons/year. And you think 273 million tons is "huge"? LOL. That's less than one one hundredth of our total CO2 emissions.

Sadly and with all due respect, you have completely missed the point of the OP.

Let me put this in ECW terms.

They fucked up. They fucked up. The scientists fucked up on the original estimate.

That's the point. I'm supposed to believe that they can accurately predict what's going to happen in 50 years by these freaking star gazers using a global warming crystal ball?

Hell's bells no one can even forecast a 3 day weather pattern. And I'm supposed to believe the world is going to end from people who have a financial interest in carbon trading?

I don't think so.

 

[Old Rocks]

Now you silly little snit, who pointed out the error? Scientists.

So, the manner in which the original estimate was made is going to have to be reviewed. Maybe it was based on a couple of reservoirs, maybe the people that made the second estimate made an error, that is also a possibility. Both were published in peer reviewed journals, so there will be some review on the part of the scientists that made the original estimate.

However, as has already been pointed out, even the larger amount is miniscule, and not a problem on the global scale.

As to why more dams are not being built, one might look to what kind of geology it takes to have a safe hydroelectric installation. Also, what kind of land are you flooding for the reservoir? How about the effect on the fisheries?

Hydroelectric is an excellant renewable resource. But it too has costs and problems that have to be addressed when a dam is built.

 

[westwall]

Now you silly little snit, who pointed out the error? Scientists.

So, the manner in which the original estimate was made is going to have to be reviewed. Maybe it was based on a couple of reservoirs, maybe the people that made the second estimate made an error, that is also a possibility. Both were published in peer reviewed journals, so there will be some review on the part of the scientists that made the original estimate.

However, as has already been pointed out, even the larger amount is miniscule, and not a problem on the global scale.

As to why more dams are not being built, one might look to what kind of geology it takes to have a safe hydroelectric installation. Also, what kind of land are you flooding for the reservoir? How about the effect on the fisheries?

Hydroelectric is an excellant renewable resource. But it too has costs and problems that have to be addressed when a dam is built.

What it points out MENSA boy, is that the leading lights of your religious movement can't fucking add or subtract.

 

[Big Fitz]

I mean come on. This is a huge "whoopsies".

The original calculation is out by 273 million metric tons? And this really makes a difference because of this:

"Hydroelectricity supplies an estimated 20 per cent of the world's electricity and accounts for more than 85 per cent of electricity from renewable sources"

Here's part of the article and I've included a link.

Hydroelectric reservoirs emit about one-sixth of the greenhouse gases previously attributed to them, says an international team of scientists.

They emit 48 million metric tonnes of carbon annually, a downgrade from earlier estimates of 321 million metric tonnes, according to a study of 85 reservoirs published in this week's online version of Nature Geoscience.

"Our analysis indicates that hydroelectric reservoirs are not major contributors to the greenhouse gas problem," Jonathan Cole, a limnologist at New York State's Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, said in a release.

"But there are some caveats," he warned. "To date, only 17 per cent of potential hydroelectric reservoir sites have been exploited, and impacts vary based on reservoir age, size, and location."


Hydro reservoirs produce less CO2 than believed - Technology & Science - CBC News

Run the numbers of atmospheric composition to truly see what a joke and infinitesimally small this error is too. 0.04% of the atmosphere is CO2, and of that 0.06% is created by man.

I keep seeing this scene from Good Morning Vietnam over and over when people argue over the minutia of how much CO2 is produced by man. Lt. Hauk just replaced Adrienne Cronauer on the air, and complains to the General that he felt that a certain section of the polka loving men was under-represented by the playing of 'modern' music. The General retorts by saying it don't matter if you play polkas or don't play polkas.

But of course, the only thing about the weather that needs be said from that movie is this.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXdmTtk1Mm4&feature=related]‪Weather Report with Walter Cronkite‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[tinydancer]

Now you silly little snit, who pointed out the error? Scientists.

So, the manner in which the original estimate was made is going to have to be reviewed. Maybe it was based on a couple of reservoirs, maybe the people that made the second estimate made an error, that is also a possibility. Both were published in peer reviewed journals, so there will be some review on the part of the scientists that made the original estimate.

However, as has already been pointed out, even the larger amount is miniscule, and not a problem on the global scale.

As to why more dams are not being built, one might look to what kind of geology it takes to have a safe hydroelectric installation. Also, what kind of land are you flooding for the reservoir? How about the effect on the fisheries?

Hydroelectric is an excellant renewable resource. But it too has costs and problems that have to be addressed when a dam is built.

What it points out MENSA boy, is that the leading lights of your religious movement can't fucking add or subtract.

Bingo. I love how believers try to explain away an "error" of 5/6 of an estimate. Whoopsies!!!

What the hell. We might as well just set up a Wheel of Global Warming Fortune and keep spinning the wheel for future predictions.

Sheesh. In my Baba's age these people would have been called Fortune tellers, not scientists.

 

[tinydancer]

I mean come on. This is a huge "whoopsies".

The original calculation is out by 273 million metric tons? And this really makes a difference because of this:

"Hydroelectricity supplies an estimated 20 per cent of the world's electricity and accounts for more than 85 per cent of electricity from renewable sources"

Here's part of the article and I've included a link.

Hydroelectric reservoirs emit about one-sixth of the greenhouse gases previously attributed to them, says an international team of scientists.

They emit 48 million metric tonnes of carbon annually, a downgrade from earlier estimates of 321 million metric tonnes, according to a study of 85 reservoirs published in this week's online version of Nature Geoscience.

"Our analysis indicates that hydroelectric reservoirs are not major contributors to the greenhouse gas problem," Jonathan Cole, a limnologist at New York State's Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, said in a release.

"But there are some caveats," he warned. "To date, only 17 per cent of potential hydroelectric reservoir sites have been exploited, and impacts vary based on reservoir age, size, and location."


Hydro reservoirs produce less CO2 than believed - Technology & Science - CBC News

Run the numbers of atmospheric composition to truly see what a joke and infinitesimally small this error is too. 0.04% of the atmosphere is CO2, and of that 0.06% is created by man.

I keep seeing this scene from Good Morning Vietnam over and over when people argue over the minutia of how much CO2 is produced by man. Lt. Hauk just replaced Adrienne Cronauer on the air, and complains to the General that he felt that a certain section of the polka loving men was under-represented by the playing of 'modern' music. The General retorts by saying it don't matter if you play polkas or don't play polkas.

But of course, the only thing about the weather that needs be said from that movie is this.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXdmTtk1Mm4&feature=related]‪Weather Report with Walter Cronkite‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

Now I can't upload the you tube (ancient computer and really bad connections in the middle of nowhere) but are you talking about the part where Adrian goes on a roll about the weather? I can't quote him exactly but it's something like "It's shitty and it's hot with continued shitty and hot"

His "weather routine" was second only to Carlin's Hippy Dippy Weatherman.

But re: Polkas I do have to address this.

Polkas do matter if you grew up like I did in the land of Walter Ostanek sp? and the Shmenge Brothers. ( btw a little known fact was Al Yankovic's dad was a hero long before Al was a star. Frankie was a huge king of polka) And when the whole family on a Sunday afternoon would turn on Polka Party Time and dance in the living room.

Have mercy! No wonder I turned to Alice Cooper when I grew up!!! No more "roll out the barrel" give me "No more Mr. Niceguy".....

 

[Big Fitz]

I mean come on. This is a huge "whoopsies".

The original calculation is out by 273 million metric tons? And this really makes a difference because of this:

"Hydroelectricity supplies an estimated 20 per cent of the world's electricity and accounts for more than 85 per cent of electricity from renewable sources"

Here's part of the article and I've included a link.

Hydroelectric reservoirs emit about one-sixth of the greenhouse gases previously attributed to them, says an international team of scientists.

They emit 48 million metric tonnes of carbon annually, a downgrade from earlier estimates of 321 million metric tonnes, according to a study of 85 reservoirs published in this week's online version of Nature Geoscience.

"Our analysis indicates that hydroelectric reservoirs are not major contributors to the greenhouse gas problem," Jonathan Cole, a limnologist at New York State's Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, said in a release.

"But there are some caveats," he warned. "To date, only 17 per cent of potential hydroelectric reservoir sites have been exploited, and impacts vary based on reservoir age, size, and location."


Hydro reservoirs produce less CO2 than believed - Technology & Science - CBC News

Run the numbers of atmospheric composition to truly see what a joke and infinitesimally small this error is too. 0.04% of the atmosphere is CO2, and of that 0.06% is created by man.

I keep seeing this scene from Good Morning Vietnam over and over when people argue over the minutia of how much CO2 is produced by man. Lt. Hauk just replaced Adrienne Cronauer on the air, and complains to the General that he felt that a certain section of the polka loving men was under-represented by the playing of 'modern' music. The General retorts by saying it don't matter if you play polkas or don't play polkas.

But of course, the only thing about the weather that needs be said from that movie is this.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXdmTtk1Mm4&feature=related]‪Weather Report with Walter Cronkite‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

Now I can't upload the you tube (ancient computer and really bad connections in the middle of nowhere) but are you talking about the part where Adrian goes on a roll about the weather? I can't quote him exactly but it's something like "It's shitty and it's hot with continued shitty and hot"

His "weather routine" was second only to Carlin's Hippy Dippy Weatherman.

But re: Polkas I do have to address this.

Polkas do matter if you grew up like I did in the land of Walter Ostanek sp? and the Shmenge Brothers. ( btw a little known fact was Al Yankovic's dad was a hero long before Al was a star. Frankie was a huge king of polka) And when the whole family on a Sunday afternoon would turn on Polka Party Time and dance in the living room.

Have mercy! No wonder I turned to Alice Cooper when I grew up!!! No more "roll out the barrel" give me "No more Mr. Niceguy".....

I grew up and lived most of my life within 50 miles of Pulaski, Wisconsin. The Polka Capital of the world. For some fluke there is a higher concentration of bands there than anywhere else in the US. There used to be multiple stations devoted strictly to Polka and the Catholic churches all did regular (at least once or twice a month) polka masses, not that I'm catholic. Hooray bob a rebob and a yah dere hey1

 

[skookerasbil]