Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   Even by the most conservative estimates, rising sea levels will wipe Miami off the map by the end of the century, and there is nothing that can be done about it except live in denial. Well, good   (npr.org ) divider line
    More: Scary, sea-level rise, Miami, Saigon, denials, Watergate, Swiss cheese, pump station, South Florida metropolitan area  
•       •       •

8379 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jun 2013 at 1:05 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



299 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-24 01:33:01 PM  

FloydA: Galloping Galoshes: FloydA: A concrete wall separates this pond from the ocean. The wall is low enough that waves crash above it at high tide; that and rainfall keep the pond replenished. The water is constantly warmed to about 90 degrees F, and is the most relaxing natural hot pond I have ever visited.

Precisely how natural is a pond that owes its existence to a concrete wall?


Um... Not very.  Apparently I'm missing your point.    Could you explain to me why that is relevant?


Better?
 
2013-06-24 01:34:55 PM  

Dimensio: NuttierThanEver: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 720x480]

We'll just have to establish new cities further inland for our ports and coastal luxury resorts like Marina Del Lexe or Otisburg

Otisburg?


It's just a little bitty place...
 
2013-06-24 01:35:04 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: chimp_ninja: Smeggy Smurf: How is this possible? The unbiased data shows global warming stopped 16 years ago. If anything the overall temperature is going down.

16.  Huh.  what an unusual number to choose.

[www.skepticalscience.net image 500x340]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020430140457717153183842 1 366.html

Yup.  16 years of no warming.  It must suck to see that you've been lied to for so long.


Any timeline chosen is by nature arbitrary.  If you go back to the mid 1800's, there's been a long trend of warming.  Go back farther, and you'll notice a long trend of cooling, preceded by a warm trend, preceded by...
 
2013-06-24 01:35:30 PM  

TheDumbBlonde: Andromeda: Shostie: AdolfOliverPanties: Why is Miami considered the biggest vulnerability?  What will this do to Hawaii, or the Bahama?  Is Miami one of those dumbass cities that is built below sea level, like New Orleans?

First off, New Orleans didn't "build below sea level," so much as the city is actively sinking. Because cities weigh a lot. And from what I understand they've been tapping into natural gas reserves below the city which hasn't been helping much.

Second, Miami is AT sea level. If a hurricane goes through, there's virtually nothing to cushion the blow.

IRC the last time a category 5 hurricane hit Miami in the 1930s it took like two decades to recover.  So we have that to look forward to someday sooner instead of later I'm sure...

I live in Amsterdam these days which is of course famously below sea level (they built my institute just outside of the big door they can automatically shut in the event of flooding in the barrier, so hooray I am left to die).  I'm sure a lot of the flooding protections they have in this country are going to seem commonplace in the lot of the USA as well sooner instead of later, it's just the Dutch have a few hundred year head start on a lot of these things.

Er, Hurricane Andrew was a Cat 5.


Andrew didn't hit Miami head on.

It made landfall 30 miles south in Homestead. But it took a very long time for Homestead to recover. Can't imagine what that would do to Miami if it got hit directly.
 
2013-06-24 01:35:55 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: FloydA: Galloping Galoshes: FloydA: A concrete wall separates this pond from the ocean. The wall is low enough that waves crash above it at high tide; that and rainfall keep the pond replenished. The water is constantly warmed to about 90 degrees F, and is the most relaxing natural hot pond I have ever visited.

Precisely how natural is a pond that owes its existence to a concrete wall?


Um... Not very.  Apparently I'm missing your point.    Could you explain to me why that is relevant?

Better?


The heating is natural (geothermal vent), so it is a natural hot spring protected by an artificial wall.

How is that relevant to the fact that it will be sad when the site is flooded?  I'm not following your logic, sorry.  I probably need more coffee.
 
2013-06-24 01:36:20 PM  

misanthropologist: vpb: cman:
Climate change is a problem. If you don't believe me, then believe Carl Sagan, who was a political socialist, and he advocated the use of nuclear power as a way to help ease climate change. Yes, Mr Super-duper-left Carl Sagan said that nuclear power was clean and safe.

So did James Lovelock and others.

Best worst option. And I don't think either of them would have really defended "clean and safe" so much as "cleaner and safer given the current problem of excessive GHG emissions and their short and long-term effects."


None of them seem to address the economics of nuclear power, which is a problem even if you pretend there will never be another Chernobyl or Fukushima.  Nuke plants are very expensive to build and stupefyingly expensive to decommission, and they don't really last that long.  And, more than a half century into the nuclear power industry, we still can't get anyone to agree on how to handle waste disposal.  Having brought that last item up, though, I'm sure a few farkers can come up with quick, easy, uncontroversial solutions that no one thought of before.
 
2013-06-24 01:36:40 PM  

indarwinsshadow: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 550x299]


I thought you were only here to tell us how much you don't care about this topic?  You know, how you don't care at all about scientific evidence that is presented to refute your political whargarrbl?

indarwinsshadow: Ok. Let's put this into terms you can grasp. I really really really don't care. I don't care what your opinion is. I don't give a crap about the myriad of articles that get published for or against this. I. Don't. Care. Clear now? Do we really need to continue to go on with this, or can you finally accept that I don't care because fark publishes this stuff week after week, the same believers come on and lay on the graphs and insults, the non believers laugh and say "how do you function being that you're so stupid". It's just a bunch of children arguing back and forth.
farking snooooorrrrreeeeeeee......


It's a little weird that you show up in every single thread on the topic just to reiterate how much you don't care.
 
2013-06-24 01:37:38 PM  

FloydA: Galloping Galoshes: FloydA: Galloping Galoshes: FloydA: A concrete wall separates this pond from the ocean. The wall is low enough that waves crash above it at high tide; that and rainfall keep the pond replenished. The water is constantly warmed to about 90 degrees F, and is the most relaxing natural hot pond I have ever visited.

Precisely how natural is a pond that owes its existence to a concrete wall?


Um... Not very.  Apparently I'm missing your point.    Could you explain to me why that is relevant?

Better?

The heating is natural (geothermal vent), so it is a natural hot spring protected by an artificial wall.

How is that relevant to the fact that it will be sad when the site is flooded?  I'm not following your logic, sorry.  I probably need more coffee...


I think he is pointing out, that while the hot spring is natural, the pond is not natural, it is manmade
 
2013-06-24 01:37:57 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: Smeggy Smurf: chimp_ninja: Smeggy Smurf: How is this possible? The unbiased data shows global warming stopped 16 years ago. If anything the overall temperature is going down.

16.  Huh.  what an unusual number to choose.

[www.skepticalscience.net image 500x340]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020430140457717153183842 1 366.html

Yup.  16 years of no warming.  It must suck to see that you've been lied to for so long.

Any timeline chosen is by nature arbitrary.  If you go back to the mid 1800's, there's been a long trend of warming.  Go back farther, and you'll notice a long trend of cooling, preceded by a warm trend, preceded by...


SO we can argue about "Yes it is", "no it isn't", or we can do something about it.  Invest in solar panels - profit in 6 years, 25 year life, and just might help the problem, if global warming is real.  If it's not, then all it does is provide profit in 6 years with 25 year life.  Fill every appropriate roof with them.  Think of the energy savings and job creation, environmental benefits aside.
 
2013-06-24 01:38:23 PM  
Yeah, but if we deny global warming, after a century of increasingly-strong storms and floods, cities like that won't cost as much to move.
 
2013-06-24 01:39:27 PM  

cman: The problem is that politics is extremely intertwined with science.


You want to talk about climate change? Fine. Get it out of the political arena.


Climate change is a problem. If you don't believe me, then believe Carl Sagan, who was a political socialist, and he advocated the use of nuclear power as a way to help ease climate change. Yes, Mr Super-duper-left Carl Sagan said that nuclear power was clean and safe.


It was deliberately dragged INTO the political arena so that the fossil fuel industry could control the debate.
 
2013-06-24 01:40:08 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: Any timeline chosen is by nature arbitrary. If you go back to the mid 1800's, there's been a long trend of warming. Go back farther, and you'll notice a long trend of cooling, preceded by a warm trend, preceded by...


Not long ago, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published an overlay of a dozen or two reconstructions of the (geologically) recent temperature.  Instrument records are the red line on the right.  Notice anything?

www.pnas.org
 
2013-06-24 01:40:17 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: zulius: Cyno01: vpb: Denying global warming is like denying that water is wet.

Really.  The liquid phase of water is an observable physical property of water just as the fact that carbon dioxide is opaque to infrared light and transparent to visible light is are observable physical properties.

You know what else is an observable property? The solid phase of water being LESS dense than the liquid. If all the ice melted the sea level would probably go down a little bit. This whole rising sea level chicken little attitude doesnt make any sense to anyone with half a brain. Go get a glass, put some ice in it, fill it to the top with water , and wait for the ice to melt. Did the glass overflow?

Damn scientists just looking for grant money...

That's because you're only worried about the ice that's already expanded...there's more of this "frozen water" above the "rim" of this glass to worry about as well...hence, this issue...

You mean there's a SOUTH pole?


Shocking, isn't it?
 
2013-06-24 01:40:25 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: BitwiseShift: I, for one, will miss mainland Cuba.

There'll be plenty of Cuba left.  It just won't be 90 miles from Key West anymore.


I believe he was referring to Little Havana, or maybe just Miami in general.

In the US Miami, NYC, New Orleans, and the VA Tidewater area are the most at risk to flooding due to climate change.  What's interesting is that according to this report, China has the most to potentially lose from rising sea levels, yet they're responsible for almost a quarter of all global greenhouse gas emissions, and while the US is starting to trend down, China is spiking with a huge upsurge.
 
2013-06-24 01:40:31 PM  

DubtodaIll: So just build a 15ft seawall around the entire Florida coastline. Problem solved.


And then fill it with water
 
2013-06-24 01:40:41 PM  

kanesays: I was actually hoping it was going to be sooner than that. My hopes were that the #1 climate change denier, Rush Limbaugh, would be an eyewitness to his beach-front compound in Florida sinking into the ocean.
//Schadenfreude at it's finest, my friend.


Because of the tar sands industry here in Alberta, it is the hotbed for Canadian global climate-change denial.  So many otherwise intelligent people buy into the denial due to blind economic self-interest.

Well, in 2005 we had historic rainfalls and flooding.  Now in 2013 we had even worse historic rainfalls and flooding.  Downtown Calgary was washed away, which for an Albertan over the age of 40 is farking inconceivable.

I can't wait for the spin our right-wing media tries to put on the flooding, once southern Alberta dries out.
 
2013-06-24 01:40:45 PM  
No subby, theology be in the Atlantic not denial.
 
2013-06-24 01:40:46 PM  

Galloping Galoshes: Any timeline chosen is by nature arbitrary. If you go back to the mid 1800's, there's been a long trend of warming. Go back farther, and you'll notice a long trend of cooling, preceded by a warm trend, preceded by...


If only our analyses of global temperature trends could be more sophisticated than a simple up or down switch. Curse you nature, for only providing binary choices!
 
2013-06-24 01:41:05 PM  
weiserfireman:

I think he is pointing out, that while the hot spring is natural, the pond is not natural, it is manmade

Ah, gotcha.  He was attaching the adjective "natural" to the noun "pond," while I was attaching it to the other adjective "hot."

/I can't brain today.
 
2013-06-24 01:42:29 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: Galloping Galoshes: BitwiseShift: I, for one, will miss mainland Cuba.

There'll be plenty of Cuba left.  It just won't be 90 miles from Key West anymore.

I believe he was referring to Little Havana, or maybe just Miami in general.

In the US Miami, NYC, New Orleans, and the VA Tidewater area are the most at risk to flooding due to climate change.  What's interesting is that according to this report, China has the most to potentially lose from rising sea levels, yet they're responsible for almost a quarter of all global greenhouse gas emissions, and while the US is starting to trend down, China is spiking with a huge upsurge.


That's because China views things like basic environmental standards as inconveniences that get in the way of business.

For a bunch of Communists, they really do sound like Conservatives in that regard.
 
2013-06-24 01:42:44 PM  

gameshowhost: It's got to be more than that. The deniers will have to start paying* for their egregious stupidity, one way or another, or else there's no incentive for them to cease being egregiously stupid, both now and in the future.

*paying = paying a whole bunch more than the average share. whole. bunch. more.


I hate to bring this up because it looks like you're comfortable in your tiny little logic box....but you don't need to work about deniers....you need to worry about China and India.   The US represents only 4% of the population of those 2 countries...and having to travel to both of them, I can readily attest that the best air quality in China or India is much worse than the very worst fire/smog day in LA.   From an economic standpoint, why should the US seriously disadvantage ourselves by unilaterally taking on the cost of "not quite ready yet" green energy when China, Russia, and India aren't doing jack shiat to curb any of their emissions?  Stand back and take a look at the leaps in technology in 50 years...computers, internet, space travel, wireless communications.  Do you honestly think that we can't come up with a solution to the problem over the next 100 years as technology continues to advance along Moores Law?

Finally, the oceans are going to rise 3 feet in 50 years?  Really, is that coming from the same models that have been predicting temps would be going up for the last decade?  You can believe in climate change but still believe that their models are farked up and their predictions are bullshiat.  In my business, if I created forecasting models that were consistently wrong for the last 15 years, I'd be fired.  But in the climate world, you just get more grant money to do it right.   Once they start, getting their models tuned in to start predicting temperature changes that actually come to pass, I will start giving their forecasts on ocean levels some credence....until then, garbage in, garbage out.
 
2013-06-24 01:44:19 PM  

djh0101010: Galloping Galoshes: Smeggy Smurf: chimp_ninja: Smeggy Smurf: How is this possible? The unbiased data shows global warming stopped 16 years ago. If anything the overall temperature is going down.

16.  Huh.  what an unusual number to choose.

[www.skepticalscience.net image 500x340]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020430140457717153183842 1 366.html

Yup.  16 years of no warming.  It must suck to see that you've been lied to for so long.

Any timeline chosen is by nature arbitrary.  If you go back to the mid 1800's, there's been a long trend of warming.  Go back farther, and you'll notice a long trend of cooling, preceded by a warm trend, preceded by...

SO we can argue about "Yes it is", "no it isn't", or we can do something about it.  Invest in solar panels - profit in 6 years, 25 year life, and just might help the problem, if global warming is real.  If it's not, then all it does is provide profit in 6 years with 25 year life.  Fill every appropriate roof with them.  Think of the energy savings and job creation, environmental benefits aside.



Not trying to buzzkill you here, but solar cells are not consequence free.  You do understand that we have to use hazardous chemicals to make photoelectric cells, right?  Arsenic, Chlorine, etc?  Every ton of arsenic you mine = X grams of arsenic released into the air or water.
 
2013-06-24 01:45:03 PM  

djh0101010: SO we can argue about "Yes it is", "no it isn't", or we can do something about it. Invest in solar panels - profit in 6 years, 25 year life, and just might help the problem, if global warming is real. If it's not, then all it does is provide profit in 6 years with 25 year life. Fill every appropriate roof with them. Think of the energy savings and job creation, environmental benefits aside.


You sort of have to do both, however.  Otherwise, a year later the person who is doing the right thing (generating electricity by PV) but doesn't understand why continues to make long-term decisions (buying a gas guzzler, not recycling aluminum, eating tons of meat, etc.) without regard for externalities.
 
2013-06-24 01:45:04 PM  
1. "Taking my talents to the Twilight Zone" sounds even cooler than what LJ said.

2. The mob has a plan.
 
2013-06-24 01:46:25 PM  
This could be a good thing.  It will lower the amount of social security that the government pays out each year.
 
2013-06-24 01:48:57 PM  
good
 
2013-06-24 01:49:29 PM  

misanthropologist: Can the President please fark off with the "God's creation" cliche? Who is he targeting with that kind of language? And in what way does he think it bears any relevance to the problem of anthropogenic climate change, or even to the current state of science?


NEW FLASH - THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS BELIEVE IN GOD.

/more at 11...
 
2013-06-24 01:49:35 PM  

evaned: Dimensio: NuttierThanEver: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 720x480]

We'll just have to establish new cities further inland for our ports and coastal luxury resorts like Marina Del Lexe or Otisburg

Otisburg?

It's just a little bitty place...

OTISBURG?!!

 
2013-06-24 01:50:47 PM  
Pretty depressing stuff. Science is bad though...and politically incorrect. Let continue on protecting the interests of one industry at the cost to how amny others, as well as risking billions/trillions worth of property on the coast lines. My cousin says its colder today where he lives...this equals proof to my republican counsin that global warming is a liberal thing.

Right winged dumb ass science wins....again
 
2013-06-24 01:51:07 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: I'm sure there's a downside as well.


it is quite possible that you are incorrect, but I can understand wanting to believe there must be some intrinsic good
 
2013-06-24 01:51:31 PM  
Well, well well..... looks like all of that Florida bashing you farkers do is going to come back to haunt your crotchfruit and their crotchfruit. If Miami goes under then YOU folks up North better learn to speak whatever 3rd word gibberish those people speak and get real used to the fact that THEY will control your town or city, not you my friend.

Ah yes payback.... Karma she is a sweetheart, too damn bad I will be dead and gone and unable to enjoy the show.
 
2013-06-24 01:52:07 PM  
Hmmm, I wonder if this kind of thing has happened before. It certainly would be poetic if it was man-made global warming that causes the Great Flood from numerous mythologies. I do love how nature tends to fix its own problems.
 
2013-06-24 01:52:16 PM  
A 3' rise in sea level will dramatically reshape the US coastline, especially along the Southeast coast on both the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Tampa will have problems, as will New Orleans, Houston, Miami, Charleston, Savannah, all the cities around the Chesapeake Bay, Mobile and the NC coastline. While many of those cities have seawalls or can expand existing ones, many smaller towns will not have the resources to undertake building walls or relocating to higher ground. There are probably a dozen counties in NC that would become marshes if the sea level rises 3'; fortunately for us our legislature passed a bill denying any sea level rise was taking place.
 
2013-06-24 01:52:17 PM  

Cyno01: vpb: Denying global warming is like denying that water is wet.

Really.  The liquid phase of water is an observable physical property of water just as the fact that carbon dioxide is opaque to infrared light and transparent to visible light is are observable physical properties.

You know what else is an observable property? The solid phase of water being LESS dense than the liquid. If all the ice melted the sea level would probably go down a little bit. This whole rising sea level chicken little attitude doesnt make any sense to anyone with half a brain. Go get a glass, put some ice in it, fill it to the top with water , and wait for the ice to melt. Did the glass overflow?

Damn scientists just looking for grant money...


A little physics is a dangerous thing.

/The neighbors from my teenage years would probably argue that a little chemistry was a much more dangerous thing.
 
2013-06-24 01:52:30 PM  
Meh, just go plant more trees.
 
2013-06-24 01:54:11 PM  

NuttierThanEver: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 720x480]

We'll just have to establish new cities further inland for our ports and coastal luxury resorts like Marina Del Lexe or Otisburg


Otisburg?

And this is the first time I've noticed "Teschmacher Peaks".  LOL.
 
2013-06-24 01:54:14 PM  

FrancoFile: Not trying to buzzkill you here, but solar cells are not consequence free. You do understand that we have to use hazardous chemicals to make photoelectric cells, right? Arsenic, Chlorine, etc? Every ton of arsenic you mine = X grams of arsenic released into the air or water.


This is true of all energy generation.  Even modern windmills require the creation of 50-meter blades of laminated composites that use a bunch of not-so-friendly chemicals.  Hydro plants require tons of concrete and disrupt aquatic ecosystems.  Fission has its own mining and disposal chains.

The point is that among these options, the creation of a solar panel is very low impact.  You're talking about adding a fraction of an inch of silicon to half a roof or so, and the equipment is typically guaranteed for 25 or 30 years of operation.  Any chemicals used in fabrication are used in a plant where they're disposed of per reasonably stringent regulations.  Companies have tremendous financial incentives to use as little as possible during processing.

If you compare that to the waste produced by, say, mining, transporting, and burning 30 years' worth of coal, PV is a very good upgrade.  The perfect should never be the enemy of the very good.
 
2013-06-24 01:54:40 PM  
The article's suggestion of 20 inches as a "very conservative estimate" and subby's suggestion of 20 inches as the "most conservative estimate" are incorrect.  IPCC4A:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_AR4#Temperature_and_sea_level_rise _i n_the_various_scenarios


Scenario B1
Best estimate temperature rise of 1.8 °C with a likely range of 1.1 to 2.9 °C (3.2 °F with a likely range of 2.0 to 5.2 °F)
Sea level rise likely range [18 to 38 cm] (7 to 15 inches)
Scenario A1T
Best estimate temperature rise of 2.4 °C with a likely range of 1.4 to 3.8 °C (4.3 °F with a likely range of 2.5 to 6.8 °F)
Sea level rise likely range [20 to 45 cm] (8 to 18 inches)
Scenario B2
Best estimate temperature rise of 2.4 °C with a likely range of 1.4 to 3.8 °C (4.3 °F with a likely range of 2.5 to 6.8 °F)
Sea level rise likely range [20 to 43 cm] (8 to 17 inches)
Scenario A1B
Best estimate temperature rise of 2.8 °C with a likely range of 1.7 to 4.4 °C (5.0 °F with a likely range of 3.1 to 7.9 °F)
Sea level rise likely range [21 to 48 cm] (8 to 19 inches)
Scenario A2
Best estimate temperature rise of 3.4 °C with a likely range of 2.0 to 5.4 °C (6.1 °F with a likely range of 3.6 to 9.7 °F)
Sea level rise likely range [23 to 51 cm] (9 to 20 inches)
Scenario A1FI
Best estimate temperature rise of 4.0 °C with a likely range of 2.4 to 6.4 °C (7.2 °F with a likely range of 4.3 to 11.5 °F)
Sea level rise likely range [26 to 59 cm] (10 to 23 inches)


So, the high ranges of the least conservative estimates get you to around 20 inches.  Being Chicken Little trying to scare people is just going to get them to stop believing the truth when it comes out.

Of course, no one has put out a reasonable plan that would actually work and people who claim the most to be in favor of fighting global warming spend as much time railing against moving from coal to natural gas or building nuclear plants or creating genetically modified crops able to live in warmer weather or taking action to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
 
2013-06-24 01:55:33 PM  
Ah yes, the religion for those who otherwise eschew religion.

/atheist
 
2013-06-24 01:56:13 PM  

Shostie: WHERE WILL YOU RUN TO, NOW, MICHAEL WESTON?!?!


LOLOLOL

I don't really like that show, but my BF makes me watch it. I kind of want to see Michael Weston and Fi get blowed up together, Bruce Campbell go back to Evil Dead movies, and the token semi-minority guy to get some self respect.
 
2013-06-24 01:57:32 PM  
Good idea to give yourself 87 years for a dubious prediction so that you're safely dead when its supposed to happen.
 
2013-06-24 01:57:35 PM  

Mrtraveler01: TuteTibiImperes: Galloping Galoshes: BitwiseShift: I, for one, will miss mainland Cuba.

There'll be plenty of Cuba left.  It just won't be 90 miles from Key West anymore.

I believe he was referring to Little Havana, or maybe just Miami in general.

In the US Miami, NYC, New Orleans, and the VA Tidewater area are the most at risk to flooding due to climate change.  What's interesting is that according to this report, China has the most to potentially lose from rising sea levels, yet they're responsible for almost a quarter of all global greenhouse gas emissions, and while the US is starting to trend down, China is spiking with a huge upsurge.

That's because China views things like basic environmental standards as inconveniences that get in the way of business.

For a bunch of Communists, they really do sound like Conservatives in that regard.


The only difference between China's economy and conservatives/libertarians/republicans is that china has already achieved what the others wish they did. With all the irony of beating us at our own game because we tell them how.
 
2013-06-24 01:58:58 PM  

chimp_ninja: FrancoFile: Not trying to buzzkill you here, but solar cells are not consequence free. You do understand that we have to use hazardous chemicals to make photoelectric cells, right? Arsenic, Chlorine, etc? Every ton of arsenic you mine = X grams of arsenic released into the air or water.

This is true of all energy generation.  Even modern windmills require the creation of 50-meter blades of laminated composites that use a bunch of not-so-friendly chemicals.  Hydro plants require tons of concrete and disrupt aquatic ecosystems.  Fission has its own mining and disposal chains.

The point is that among these options, the creation of a solar panel is very low impact.  You're talking about adding a fraction of an inch of silicon to half a roof or so, and the equipment is typically guaranteed for 25 or 30 years of operation.  Any chemicals used in fabrication are used in a plant where they're disposed of per reasonably stringent regulations.  Companies have tremendous financial incentives to use as little as possible during processing.

If you compare that to the waste produced by, say, mining, transporting, and burning 30 years' worth of coal, PV is a very good upgrade.  The perfect should never be the enemy of the very good.



But if you compare to a 30-year fuel cycle for a fission plant, it's a toss of the coin.

/I think you underestimate the nastiness of the stuff involved in manufacturing doped silicon - or even worse, GaAs
 
2013-06-24 01:59:09 PM  

Mrtraveler01: TheDumbBlonde: Andromeda: Shostie: AdolfOliverPanties: Why is Miami considered the biggest vulnerability?  What will this do to Hawaii, or the Bahama?  Is Miami one of those dumbass cities that is built below sea level, like New Orleans?

First off, New Orleans didn't "build below sea level," so much as the city is actively sinking. Because cities weigh a lot. And from what I understand they've been tapping into natural gas reserves below the city which hasn't been helping much.

Second, Miami is AT sea level. If a hurricane goes through, there's virtually nothing to cushion the blow.

IRC the last time a category 5 hurricane hit Miami in the 1930s it took like two decades to recover.  So we have that to look forward to someday sooner instead of later I'm sure...

I live in Amsterdam these days which is of course famously below sea level (they built my institute just outside of the big door they can automatically shut in the event of flooding in the barrier, so hooray I am left to die).  I'm sure a lot of the flooding protections they have in this country are going to seem commonplace in the lot of the USA as well sooner instead of later, it's just the Dutch have a few hundred year head start on a lot of these things.

Er, Hurricane Andrew was a Cat 5.

Andrew didn't hit Miami head on.

It made landfall 30 miles south in Homestead. But it took a very long time for Homestead to recover. Can't imagine what that would do to Miami if it got hit directly.


It's been like 6 or 7 years since I've been through Homestead, but I seem to remember lots of visible signs of damage and empty lots from Andrew. Has it gotten any better since?
 
2013-06-24 01:59:44 PM  

Egalitarian: Shostie: WHERE WILL YOU RUN TO, NOW, MICHAEL WESTON?!?!

LOLOLOL

I don't really like that show, but my BF makes me watch it. I kind of want to see Michael Weston and Fi get blowed up together, Bruce Campbell go back to Evil Dead movies, and the token semi-minority guy to get some self respect.


on second thought, how about Dexter, Dexter's poisoning GF, Michael and Fi kill each other in bloody explosive flooding tragedy. And Michael's mom too. Bruce Campbell gets on an exercise bike in Montana. Jesse establishes a family, adopts Michael's nephew, starts a business, and lives happily ever after.
 
2013-06-24 02:01:32 PM  

Cyno01: vpb: Denying global warming is like denying that water is wet.

Really.  The liquid phase of water is an observable physical property of water just as the fact that carbon dioxide is opaque to infrared light and transparent to visible light is are observable physical properties.

You know what else is an observable property? The solid phase of water being LESS dense than the liquid. If all the ice melted the sea level would probably go down a little bit. This whole rising sea level chicken little attitude doesnt make any sense to anyone with half a brain. Go get a glass, put some ice in it, fill it to the top with water , and wait for the ice to melt. Did the glass overflow?

Damn scientists just looking for grant money...


Now take the same glass, add lots of ice-- so that there is ice stacked over the top of the glass, then add water to the top of the glass.  Now when the ice melts-- including all the ice that's not in the glass, but is above the glass and resting on the ice below it -- will the cup overflow?

That above-the-glass ice represents all of the glaciers, as well as the polar ice caps.  All above ice, all melting and flowing into the sea

// pretty sure you're just being sarcastic, but some people make those arguments seriously.
 
2013-06-24 02:02:32 PM  
Ftfa
Lyden says a rise of 3 feet by the middle of the century

The other guy says a rise of 3 feet by the end of the century


Some concensus.
 
2013-06-24 02:02:34 PM  
Eponymous:

I hate to bring this up because it looks like you're comfortable in your tiny little logic box....but you don't need to work about deniers....you need to worry about China and India.   The US represents only 4% of the population of those 2 countries...and having to travel to both of them, I can readily attest that the best air quality in China or India is much worse than the very worst fire/smog day in LA.   From an economic standpoint, why should the US seriously disadvantage ourselves by unilaterally taking on the cost of "not quite ready yet" green energy when China, Russia, and India aren't doing jack shiat to curb any of their emissions?  Stand back and take a look at the leaps in technology in 50 years...computers, internet, space travel, wireless communications.  Do you honestly think that we can't come up with a solution to the problem over the next 100 years as technology continues to advance along Moores Law?

Finally, the oceans are going to rise 3 feet in 50 years?  Really, is that coming from the same models that have been predicting temps would be going up for the last decade?  You can believe in climate change but still believe that their models are farked up and their predictions are bullshiat.  In my business, if I created forecasting models that were consistently wrong for the last 15 years, I'd be fired.  But in the climate world, you just get more grant money to do it right.   Once they start, getting their models tuned in to start predicting temperature changes that actually come to pass, I will start giving their forecasts on ocean levels some credence....until then, garbage in, garbage out.



Well said.
Damn, your account # is under 10g's. whoa
 
2013-06-24 02:03:00 PM  
So we plant more trees.  I am looking at you NYC.
 
2013-06-24 02:03:08 PM  
If it happens so fast that none can escape, it sounds good to me.

Fingers crossed for Southern California as well...
 
Displayed 50 of 299 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report