This is Wal's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Wal's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
wili | December 08, 2013 at 22:46 said Just folks sharing strategies for most effectively reducing their carbon print. Reducing the carbon footprint won't hold temperatures below 2C (or 1.5C for that matter). Humanity must remove about 100Gt C from the atmosphere. But your post implied (to me anyway) that skipping flights was a significant help. I wanted to counter that message. The only suggestion I've seen that I think has a chance I referred to here. Twemoran | December 08, 2013 at 22:50 said faux skeptics ?
Toggle Commented Dec 9, 2013 on PIOMAS December 2013 at Arctic Sea Ice
wili | December 07, 2013 at 04:27 said: Was there a point there somewhere? It took me a while, but I thought of a point that might not have been obvious. When I said the Japanese were privately suing for a cessation of hostilities for months before the bombing, I meant that if the yanks had accepted that plea, a lot more lives would have been saved than continuing hostilities until the war was stopped after the use of the a-bombs, whereas the original assertion by NeilT was that the use of the bomb saved millions of lives. Does that answer your question? Then, again for what it's worth, my other rant was an attempt to convey a little piece of logic, admittedly with somewhat shocking language, but then I thought the use of a bit of shock was what we were talking about, outside of other elements of fact and logic. The logic is: if the state does not act to promote important information about things like externalities and limits nor meaningful action to address same then I can hardly be blamed for my continued use of systems in place. I'd go further, hopefully not into concern troll territory, and say you should expect others to respond similarly. Further, I think individual abstinence is just acquiescence to a divide-and-conquer outcome. The only worthwhile outcome is that which I think highly unlikely for a while yet, which is majority awareness and then majority action that puts in place a real solution.
Toggle Commented Dec 8, 2013 on PIOMAS December 2013 at Arctic Sea Ice
Kevin McKinney | December 07, 2013 at 01:12 said Anyway, it will just be 'furniture' after the first couple of times. So there's no point in it being there at all then?
Toggle Commented Dec 7, 2013 on PIOMAS December 2013 at Arctic Sea Ice
wili | December 06, 2013 at 23:41 said Wow. Do you think I was similarly breathless about my a-bomb observations in the same post you quote from?
Toggle Commented Dec 6, 2013 on PIOMAS December 2013 at Arctic Sea Ice BBC Global Dimming Documentary About Geoengineering & Global Warming posted by GlobalClimateNews Another example of the value of long term data gathering.
NeilT | December 05, 2013 at 11:38 said: It undoubtedly saved millions of lives. Noam Chomsky, I'm pretty sure, would disagree. My understanding is the Japanese were privately suing for a cessation of hostilities for months, in exchange for a conditional surrender. The yanks wouldn't have it. They wanted an unconditional surrender. But further, I suspect it is reasonable to think they wanted to drop the bombs anyway, for the purposes of showing the Russians a) who's boss b) how ruthless yanks can be. I'm somewhat inclined to agree with Ostepop. For what little it's worth, I fly as much as I can. Should I feel guilty? No. No-one in government told me about peak oil. No-one in government told me about global warming. TPTB have deliberately contrived to prevent meaningful action to prevent global harm. I'm in a small minority even yet who think there's any problem. It's not my fault there's a problem. We live in a shit world wrt what humans can do to each other. I've done my best with the knowledge I had. I know how it could have been solved. That knowledge was available to TPTB decades ago. So fuck you all, if I can afford to fly, I will.
Toggle Commented Dec 5, 2013 on PIOMAS December 2013 at Arctic Sea Ice
james cobban | November 05, 2013 at 23:53 said: @Wal Could it have been William Rees. On reflection, a more likely candidate is Jack Alpert.
james cobban | November 04, 2013 at 22:41 said: that the carrying capacity was a mere 70 million Could it have been William Rees.
Of course NZ cannot be a lifeboat. They don't believe in nuclear power. Essentially they are luddites. Luddites had some points. They understood that, under the extant system of apportioning livelihoods, increased use of systems that decrease the worth of common humans is essentially inhumane. That extant system remains extant essentially unaltered by the passage of time from Adam Smiths time and now. So what do we do? The probability is a plummet through the Endocene. Humanity is in the aggregate, which is what matters in a democracy, too stupid to make the right, informed, choices. Nuclear power is one of the right choices. There are a bunch of other right choices. None of these mean shit unless the whole planet takes them. And I think that's not going to happen, because humans are either too fucking stupid or too fucking psychopathic to average out to anything sustainable.
Posted by: Neven | October 14, 2013 at 18:24 Just to make clear, I don't have much of a problem with what Garethman has said or is saying, ... I do. I like this blog because of the knowledge and insight displayed on an immediate basis. I think it was A-Team (or else it was Beckwith) who said that's the value of the blog - NSIDC level (or more) knowledge and insight but not offered late and bland. It's not my blog, but if it was, when some wanker comes on and clogs up the threads with what smells at first stink like crap, I'd ban them immediately.
TenneyNaumer | October 10, 2013 at 20:15 said: ...Pitcairn man... = Piltdown dude
Topographically, to my amateur eyes, the WAIS and Greenland both have the feature of grounding lines. The difference is that the WAIS grounding line is already under attack, per WALSE 2007.
Toggle Commented Oct 4, 2013 on Pinpointing the minimum at Arctic Sea Ice
Sam | August 15, 2013 at 13:17 said No, fission not. There is no answer there. All I'll say is, after you convince James Hansen (and James Lovelock for that matter) then you can convince me.
Toggle Commented Aug 15, 2013 on Perception of the Arctic 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
Posted by: Wal | August 15, 2013 at 12:16 ... (see Bertram Cohen). Meant Bernard Cohen.
Toggle Commented Aug 15, 2013 on Perception of the Arctic 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
Jai Mitchell | August 14, 2013 at 23:40 said Sam, we will simply have to develop a renewable technology that also can also provide an environment for the removal of CO2 from the atmosphere. I am actually working on just such a project. A lot of people will say nuclear power is not renewable. However breeder reactors can provide our primary energy needs at current levels for hundreds of millions of years (see Bertram Cohen). One way of sucking CO2 out of the atmosphere has been advocated by GRLCowan - build a lot of IFRs or MSRs and use the energy to grind up olivine to micron size and throw it up several km into the nearest jetstream (while there is one I guess). Like our more familiar aerosols it stays up for a few weeks then comes back down. Because of increased surface area to volume ratio it does rock-weathering of CO2 faster than rocks do. The olivine part is being tested by Olaf Schuiling. The IFR part is already proven.
Toggle Commented Aug 15, 2013 on Perception of the Arctic 2 at Arctic Sea Ice
Shared Humanity | July 26, 2013 at 20:25 said: Please tell me that a near total extinction of life on earth is not the trigger you have for deciding we have a problem? I first heard about global warming 30 years ago and was surprised it didn't kick in faster. I guess I didn't realize the heat would go into melting ice and warming the ocean, and not just heating the atmosphere. But this only delays when it kicks in. I think Wadhams and others think this delay means humans will not act until too late. I wanted to know when too late is and how fast it ramps up after that. I have read some about this and asked some senior academics about it and some are hopeful it is not too late and some think it is not at all clear that it is not too late to hold off something drastic.
Toggle Commented Jul 26, 2013 on Arctic time bombs at Arctic Sea Ice
Total amateur here. I watched a Horizon documentary about the Permian Triassic extinction. It said it took about 10000 years (in roughly two phases - a big release of CO2 that warmed the planet about 5C, then this triggered a big release of methane that warmed the planet another 5C). I'm as concerned about global warming as anyone, but can someone explain in short words if/how the equivalent problem would happen faster this time?
Toggle Commented Jul 26, 2013 on Arctic time bombs at Arctic Sea Ice
Wal is now following The Typepad Team
Jul 26, 2013