Antarctic meltwater could dramatically slow overturning current

[Lastamender]

Evidence?

The crap you are repeating proves it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Evidence?

Who needs evidence when you have consensus?!!

 

[Crick]

The crap you are repeating proves it.

Hardly. Try again. Evidence?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The result was planned.

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate!

 

[Kruska]

Nope. Land area of the planet is 196.9 million square kilometers.

Earth - NASA Science

Your home. Our Mission.And the one planet that NASA studies more than any other.

solarsystem.nasa.gov

NASA. See link above. Where is your number from?

Any donkey knows that around 71% of earth surface consists of water - so 29% of 510millionkm2 - according to your math is 196.9, go back to school.

.....174.285 TWh is the total energy used by the world over the course of all of 2021.

That is what I told you before, and you stated: Total current energy consumption: 2.89 TW
So do tell me, 2.89TW is how many TWh? according to my pocket calculator (2.89 divided by 365 days, divided by 24h = 0.00033TW/h - and yours?
So do tell me 0.00033TW/h is how many TW? according to my calculator 0.00033x24x365 = 2.89TW - and yours?
And the total global consumption in 2021 was 172,285TWh (172,285 x24x365) =TW? according to my calculator =1,509,216,600TW and you? =2.89TW

Where did 45 km^2 come from? Why did you shift from GW to MW and then back to GW?

Read my previous posting - world largest solar plant in China produces 2.2 GW or 2200MW - the solar plant occupies 45km2.

Where did 140 million GWh come from?

via calculation - out of the 174.285TWh only 20% derives from alternate energy - so the energy amount that needs to be replaced is around =?
1 TW = 1000GW so 140,000TWh x1000GWh = ? according to my calculator 140,000,000GW/h - and yours?
2.2GW (Chinese solar plant) = 0,00025GWh
140,000,000GWh divided by 0,00025GWh = ? = number of equivalent Chinese solar plant needed globally in total

Here is my original figuring
Total land area of the planet is 196.9 million km^2
Total current energy consumption: 2.89 TW (from my source)
1.6 MW/km^2 output from solar panels (from my source. You never gave a value for this.

I did - 45km2 produce 2200MW = 48MW/km2 - and not your total underestimate of 1.6MW/km2. And your above figures are ALL totally wrong.

Land requirement 1,806,000 km^2

Your figures are ALL totally wrong

About 1 acre in each 110 devoted to Solar PV would satisfy the planet's total current electrical demand.

If I ask Google how much land area would be required to power the planet with solar PV, it comes back with "Even so, if we replicated this particular farm in order to produce enough electricity to power the world, we would then require: 92.7 billion solar panels. 54.1 million acres, or 84,531 square miles." 84,531 square miles is 218,934.28 square kilometers. So even I have come in more than 8 times too high. Your figures are absolutely ridiculous.

Then how does your 1 acre x110 countries/participants (110 acres) equal to 218.934km2 ?
110 acres are 0.44km2 (less then half 1km2) - just how ignorant are you?

This sort of calculation has come up before. The solar PV area required to power the entire US would be about the size of Lake Michigan. If as energy-intensive a country as the US can operate with that small a fraction of its area covered in panels, the Earth as a whole could be powered with a far smaller fraction.

Just read up onto your own nonsense - you are stating that the total US power demand is higher then that of the whole planet

Perfect example of the solar lobby playing people for stupid.

Solar deployed on rooftops could match annual U.S. electricity generation

Researchers conducted a global assessment of rooftop solar PV potential using high-resolution imagery, big data, and machine learning.

pv-magazine-usa.com

The state of Florida is roughly 65,000 square miles (168,000km2) The researchers said this area could result the production of 27 petawatt-hours, or 27 million GWh, if completely covered by conventional photovoltaic.
According to this statement - that would equal to 160GWh/km2 - the Chinese solar plant 2.2GW = 0,00025GWh divided by 45km2 = 0,000,005GWh/km2

So 160GWh/km2 (according to this "report" compared to 0.000.005GWh/km2 from China's solar plant.
Or 160GWh/km2 = 1,400,000GW/km2 compared to 0.049GW/km2 produced in China's solar plant.

The report further said that rooftops in the United States could host enough capacity to produce an annual 4.2 PWh per year, effectively matching the nation’s current total energy output of about 4 PWh per year.
So the article states US total energy output would be 4 PWh = 4,000,000GWh or 4000TWh
How does this figure match the total global energy consumption of 175,000,000GWh or 175,000TWh = USA output would be just 2.3% of global consumption.

Energy Production and Consumption

Explore data on how energy production and use varies across the world.

ourworldindata.org

Globally 176,431 TWh in 2021 - coal and gas represent around 90,000TWh, hydro 11,000TWh, nuclear 7,000TWh and solar energy represents 2,700 TWh
1KWh solar private investment for a household costs around US$2300
4000TWh = 4,000,000GWh = 4 billion MWh = 4 trillion KWh x US$2300 = US$ 9200 trillion investment to get all households in the USA under solar energy.
US$ 9200 trillion divided by 330 million people = US$ 2.8 million per US citizen.

You CO2 freaks are pure lunatics and juggling around with numbers you can't even comprehend

 

[EMH]

You CO2 freaks are pure lunatics and juggling around with numbers you can't even comprehend

And they cannot explain

How Co2 melted North America and froze Greenland at the same time
How with all the "ocean warming" there is no breakout in Cane Activity
How with all the "ice melt" there is not one single landmark on Earth sinking
Why every piece of land within 600 miles of an Earth pole is in continent specific ICE AGE, while all land more than 600 miles from a pole is not

 

[Crick]

Nope. Land area of the planet is 196.9 million square kilometers.

Earth - NASA Science

Your home. Our Mission.And the one planet that NASA studies more than any other.

solarsystem.nasa.gov

NASA. See link above. Where is your number from?

Do you understand the difference between a KW and a KWh? You're looking for the land area required. You do not need the time component. 174.285 TWh is the total energy used by the world over the course of all of 2021. To get the instantaneous power requirement, you have to divide it by (365x24), the number of hours in a year. That comes to 0.0199 TW, 19.9 GW

Where did 45 km^2 come from? Why did you shift from GW to MW and then back to GW?

Where did 140 million GWh come from?


Here is my original figuring
Total land area of the planet is 196.9 million km^2
Total current energy consumption: 2.89 TW (from my source)
1.6 MW/km^2 output from solar panels (from my source. You never gave a value for this.
Land requirement 1,806,000 km^2

About 1 acre in each 110 devoted to Solar PV would satisfy the planet's total current electrical demand.

If I ask Google how much land area would be required to power the planet with solar PV, it comes back with "Even so, if we replicated this particular farm in order to produce enough electricity to power the world, we would then require: 92.7 billion solar panels. 54.1 million acres, or 84,531 square miles." 84,531 square miles is 218,934.28 square kilometers. So even I have come in more than 8 times too high. Your figures are absolutely ridiculous.

This sort of calculation has come up before. The solar PV area required to power the entire US would be about the size of Lake Michigan. If as energy-intensive a country as the US can operate with that small a fraction of its area covered in panels, the Earth as a whole could be powered with a far smaller fraction.

Area required given by Google / Land area according to NASA
219,934.28 km^2 / 196,900,000 km^2 = 0.00117 or 0.12% of the Earth's land surface

TW * Hours = TWh
TWh / Hours = TW
You got these reversed. Try again.

 

[mamooth]

And they cannot explain

How Co2 melted North America and froze Greenland at the same time

We've done so, several times. It's the albedo, stupid. Nobody but you has ever said that CO2 was the only thing affecting climate. That's one of your favorite BigLies, clearly inspired by Satan Himself.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Lots, but it's all irrelevant to the topic subject.

It's very relevant because the preachers do very little to nothing of what they preach.

So for example, you access the internet to preach on forums, you should stop using electronics and plastic products to do that, get them recycled in, then stop creating demand by buying technology.

Stop driving on asphalt, stop wearing it out and creating demand. Stop buying welded products, welding creates green house gases. I hope you've gone vegan.

Not doing much are you?

 

[Crick]

It's very relevant because the preachers do very little to nothing of what they preach.

And what does that have to do with meltwater slowing the AMOC?

So for example, you access the internet to preach on forums, you should stop using electronics and plastic products to do that, get them recycled in, then stop creating demand by buying technology.

And what does that have to do with meltwater slowing the AMOC?

Stop driving on asphalt, stop wearing it out and creating demand. Stop buying welded products, welding creates green house gases. I hope you've gone vegan.

And what does that have to do with meltwater slowing the AMOC?

Not doing much are you?

More than you I'd wager.

 

[Captain Caveman]

And what does that have to do with meltwater slowing the AMOC?

And what does that have to do with meltwater slowing the AMOC?

And what does that have to do with meltwater slowing the AMOC?

More than you I'd wager.

Alarmists and those, like yourself on the climate band wagon, claim oil and greenhouse gases are causing man made climate change. So why are you using these products and creating demand? Why don't you get your thumb out of backside and stop causing climate change?

 

[Crick]

Alarmists and those, like yourself on the climate band wagon, claim oil and greenhouse gases are causing man made climate change. So why are you using these products and creating demand? Why don't you get your thumb out of backside and stop causing climate change?

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "oil and greenhouse gases". Petroleum is a fossil fuel. All fossil fuels produce CO2 when burned.

Do you accept the greenhouse effect?

Do you accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Do you accept that human use of fossil fuels have increased atmospheric levels of CO2?

Do you accept that that increase (abvoe 280 ppm) is the primary cause for the observed warming?

I assume you want to make yourself feel better by thinking of me as hypocritical. I'm not going to bother responding to your accusations because you will simply assume I'm making it up.

 

[Captain Caveman]

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "oil and greenhouse gases". Petroleum is a fossil fuel. All fossil fuels produce CO2 when burned.

Do you accept the greenhouse effect?

Do you accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

Do you accept that human use of fossil fuels have increased atmospheric levels of CO2?

Do you accept that that increase (abvoe 280 ppm) is the primary cause for the observed warming?

I assume you want to make yourself feel better by thinking of me as hypocritical. I'm not going to bother responding to your accusations because you will simply assume I'm making it up.

I accept that the Milankovitch cycles, sun, earthquakes, sink holes, co2, nitrous oxide, Albedo effect, solar panel deflection, oxygen levels, volcanic activity, methane from ruminants, ash clouds etc.. all can contribute to the climate moving around the earth that causes sea level and temperature to increase and decrease as and when these alter to whatever degrees. To what these degrees are, humans will never fathom that out, despite their efforts, funding, and rhetoric.

Historical data always shows that life on the planet increases co2, along with other factors, even before mankind was here.

I disagree with the alarmists claiming it's just personkind (not mankind because I'm trying to include the trannies) and co2. The climate is not that simple. Why? My geology days say so. If you or others disagree, that's called democracy and it also means I don't get funded due to my evidence.

You will believe upto your intellect level and vice versa. I don't agree with the alarmists that ditching nuclear and pushing EV's will save the planet from co2 changes. But democracy goes with the masses, no matter how informed and misinformed they are or not.

The human race is flawed.

 

[Crick]

I accept that the Milankovitch cycles, sun, earthquakes, sink holes, co2, nitrous oxide, Albedo effect, solar panel deflection, oxygen levels, volcanic activity, methane from ruminants, ash clouds etc.. all can contribute to the climate moving around the earth that causes sea level and temperature to increase and decrease as and when these alter to whatever degrees. To what these degrees are, humans will never fathom that out, despite their efforts, funding, and rhetoric.

Humans have put a great deal of work into making better and better estimates of precisely that value.

Historical data always shows that life on the planet increases co2, along with other factors, even before mankind was here.

I do not believe it shows such a relationship. Life sequesters compounds and then releases them when we die. The record shows that increasing temperatures cause CO2 to come out of solution in the world's oceans which then provide a positive feedback through the greeenhouse effect. As temperatures drop, it goes back into solution.

I disagree with the alarmists claiming it's just personkind (not mankind because I'm trying to include the trannies) and co2.

Your chasing a strawman. Mainstream science has NEVER said "it's just personkind and CO2". Deniers constantly claim that what they say, but you KNOW they do not.

The climate is not that simple. Why? My geology days say so. If you or others disagree, that's called democracy and it also means I don't get funded due to my evidence.

As I think you've heard many times before, the line goes "anthropogenic CO2 is the primary cause of the observed warming.

You will believe upto your intellect level and vice versa. I don't agree with the alarmists that ditching nuclear and pushing EV's will save the planet from co2 changes. But democracy goes with the masses, no matter how informed and misinformed they are or not.

The human race is flawed.

I support nuclear power and I'm not crazy about EVs, but there will be better technology coming along. There are batteries coming down the pike with greater capacity and much faster charge time. It's still possible that hydrogen fuel cell and/or hydrogen combustion will take off. Either one, though, is going to require infrastructure and right now the only infrastructure change in progress is the establishment of charging stations. One hopes that doesn't turn out to be a waste.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Humans have put a great deal of work into making better and better estimates of precisely that value.

I do not believe it shows such a relationship. Life sequesters compounds and then releases them when we die. The record shows that increasing temperatures cause CO2 to come out of solution in the world's oceans which then provide a positive feedback through the greeenhouse effect. As temperatures drop, it goes back into solution.

Your chasing a strawman. Mainstream science has NEVER said "it's just personkind and CO2". Deniers constantly claim that what they say, but you KNOW they do not.

As I think you've heard many times before, the line goes "anthropogenic CO2 is the primary cause of the observed warming.

I support nuclear power and I'm not crazy about EVs, but there will be better technology coming along. There are batteries coming down the pike with greater capacity and much faster charge time. It's still possible that hydrogen fuel cell and/or hydrogen combustion will take off. Either one, though, is going to require infrastructure and right now the only infrastructure change in progress is the establishment of charging stations. One hopes that doesn't turn out to be a waste.

The evolution of early animals caused global warming more than 500 million years ago

Also, the world's first mass extinction was from global cooling and falling sea levels.

 

[Crick]

The evolution of early animals caused global warming more than 500 million years ago

Also, the world's first mass extinction was from global cooling and falling sea levels.

As your article describes, that process occurred once.

 

[EMH]

The evolution of early animals caused global warming more than 500 million years ago

Also, the world's first mass extinction was from global cooling and falling sea levels.

Good thing asteroid hits never killed anything....


Sea level is Earth's thermometer. If it goes up, Earth is warming. If it goes down Earth is cooling. On the other side of course is how much ice the planet has.

And that's the Co2 fraud's biggest problem, because ice on Earth is 100% about WHERE LAND IS, and LAND MOVES

90% on Antarctica
7% on Greenland

Every piece of land on Earth within 600 miles of a Pole is in Continent Specific Ice Age today.

Every piece of land outside 600 miles from a Pole is NOT.

THAT is why Greenland froze while North America thawed, because Greenland moved inside 600 miles as NA moved outside...

 

[Captain Caveman]

As your article describes, that process occurred once.

Animals (including humans) effect the climate, starting from 500 million years ago. Mass extinctions means there's a lower animal population to cause any changes on the climate.

The climate is what it is, there's no law to say if it can go fast or slow, too hot or too cold etc.. the various ocean and air streams will forever and a day move about.

One thing is evident, alarmists do not and will not and don't want to practice what they preach. Even if the climate cranks think they're being heroic by installing solar panels, they've just created demand to dig up raw materials and have panels manufactured. Just simply switch off your electric, get it discounted. If the climate hypocritical idiots do that, then they'll be in a position to preach to others. Until then, they need to shove meltwater and all the climate rhetoric right up their own backsides, show us how it's done.

 

[Crick]

Animals (including humans) effect the climate, starting from 500 million years ago. Mass extinctions means there's a lower animal population to cause any changes on the climate.

Mass extinctions are not ongoing processes. They are events. Are you trying to claim that the rise of CO2 is due to increased animal life?

The climate is what it is, there's no law to say if it can go fast or slow, too hot or too cold etc..

I'm sorry, but there is. Nothing outside of quantum uncertainty takes place without a cause.

the various ocean and air streams will forever and a day move about.

Only when they are driven to do so. Nothing outside of quantum uncertainty takes place without a cause.

One thing is evident, alarmists do not and will not and don't want to practice what they preach.

Bullshit. Generalized prejudicial bullshit.

Even if the climate cranks think they're being heroic by installing solar panels, they've just created demand to dig up raw materials and have panels manufactured.

Building solar panels and using them reduces the amount of CO2 being put in the air.

Just simply switch off your electric, get it discounted. If the climate hypocritical idiots do that, then they'll be in a position to preach to others. Until then, they need to shove meltwater and all the climate rhetoric right up their own backsides, show us how it's done.

I'll just have to apologize for their 'failure" to take the advice of a neandethalic fool on the internet

 

[Captain Caveman]

Mass extinctions are not ongoing processes. They are events. Are you trying to claim that the rise of CO2 is due to increased animal life?

I'm sorry, but there is. Nothing outside of quantum uncertainty takes place without a cause.

Only when they are driven to do so. Nothing outside of quantum uncertainty takes place without a cause.

Bullshit. Generalized prejudicial bullshit.

Building solar panels and using them reduces the amount of CO2 being put in the air.

I'll just have to apologize for their 'failure" to take the advice of a neandethalic fool on the internet

Can you stop dissecting my posts with this multiquote shite. I forever and a day ask you guys to stop this shit on this forum. I don't entertain re-reading my post in snippet form.

I just cannot be arsed to rey to it.