Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Climate Change and YSSY crosswinds?

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Climate Change and YSSY crosswinds?

Old 26th Nov 2019, 10:28
  #101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 150
Whats that phrase."correlation does not equal causation".

https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
Lookleft is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 10:29
  #102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 355
Correlations are definitely worthy of further investigation.


itsnotthatbloodyhard is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 10:39
  #103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 355
More seriously, this might be worth a read: https://www.forbes.com/sites/michael.../#13263e8212d6

The title of the link is quite misleading, as the article doesn’t claim that ‘everything they say about climate change is wrong’ at all. I haven’t had a chance to try and fact-check it or look into the bona fides of the author, but at face value it seems like a reasonably balanced take by someone who is a long way from being a ‘denier’.
itsnotthatbloodyhard is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 10:48
  #104 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 921
Ok, I’m just trying to entertain the possibility that some here might see the correlation and do further research, rather than regurgitating the garbage.

Of course correlation doesn’t equal causation, but sometimes correlation encourages one to do further research. Sometimes with a mission to prove it, sometimes with a mission to disprove it, or for a scientist, with a mission to discover, without prejudice.

Derfred is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 11:27
  #105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 150
With idiots like this in the world sometimes it amazes me that we managed to get this far at all. I guess the difference is that the internet wasn't around back then, so these morons couldn't voice their uninformed opinion to a large audience.
No the idiots and morons are the ones who look at those charts and decide that the world is going to end in 2030 and that 14 year old Swedish schoolgirls have more insight into the worlds problems than those who have inhabited the planet a little bit longer. Which type of moron are you?
Lookleft is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 13:04
  #106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: perth
Posts: 68
I'm not interested in backyard experiments. If someone can point to a link to an experiment where someone might have spent $100,000 out of the many billions of dollars already spent, demonstrating each greenhouse gas. Is water vapour worse than CO2? Is the average water vapour content a lot more than 420 ppm? If so, why don't we have runaway global warming due to water vapour?
Warning. These sorts of questions usually brings these types of threads to a shuddering halt.
bolthead is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 14:29
  #107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 522
Originally Posted by bolthead View Post
Warning. These sorts of questions usually brings these types of threads to a shuddering halt.
Not really:

Explaining how the water vapor greenhouse effect works
dr dre is online now  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 14:34
  #108 (permalink)  
601
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 1,034
With the majority in Oz accepting climate change a lot of us see the need to change from carbon based power to renewables. In include those who have installed PVs etc to foster that change. Even though the Govt is accused of not having a "policy" there seem to be an heck of a lot of renewables entering the supply with a lot more in the pipeline.

There is one thing wrong with the install renewable at any cost approach. No one is investing in large scale storage of renewable power.

What should be occurring is that the carbon based power generators be issued with a licence that covers the amount of power their present day generators produce.

Take a large 2000MW coal generator. The operator is issued with a licence to produce that 2000MW 24/7. When the operator decides that the generator is no longer financial and elects to replace it, the licence will have a provision that the retired generator shall be replaced with renewables (Solar/Wind) of sufficient generating capacity and storage to produce 2000MW power 24/7. Not 200MW of installed renewable, but sufficient generating capacity and storage capacity to produce the amount of power 24/7. It would therefore be a "baseload" generator.

This would prevent an operator replacing a retired generator with a gas powered plant that would only come on stream when the market is high which keeps power prices high.

The way the renewable are progressing at present, we will end up with no coal generators but with excess of power from solar and wind with absolutely no reliability.

I only have to look at the output from my domestic solar system to see how unreliable solar is without storage.

Weather this will make a difference to the wind direction at SY, I have no idea.
601 is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 15:41
  #109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
Always amazes me that so few people in Australia have solar panels on their roofs - the take-up looks similar to NW Europe
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 15:42
  #110 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 121
It's bizarre, Lookleft, that you refer to your experiences of hearing about the hole in the ozone layer and the Y2K bug as reasons you think you should ignore experts working in the field and treat climate science as an overblown hysterical scam. In both those cases large numbers of experts working in the field gave their advice, just as climate scientists are doing now, and based on that action was taken to resolve them with widespread public action and laws. The hole in the ozone layer is shrinking now because regulators, governments and the general public listened to the scientists and meteorologists working in the field, and laws were changed to virtually eliminate the production and use of CFCs that depleted the ozone layer. Result - a diminishing hole in the ozone layer, that is recovering gradually. Regarding the Y2K bug, a significant number of IT experts put in vast amounts of time and effort to prepare legacy systems for the Y2K issues, so at the turn of the century there were minimal impacts - again, action based on the recommendations of large numbers of highly qualified experts in the field. Just because it wasn't visible within your personal experience doesn't mean it didn't occur.

How many of the active pilots here would be happy to have an atmospheric physicist with no aviation experience wander into their flight deck and explain how the pilots are getting everything wrong based on the physicist having read some blogs and listened to some radio commentators? But when the reverse is happening, there's a few people who claim to be pilots here who love to explain to the experts how they are getting everything wrong in climate science, based on having no formal qualifications in the field but reading a few websites and listening to a few radio hosts.

Whether that has anything to do with on time performance at Sydney is another thing entirely...there are plenty of other things I can think of to improve that particular bottleneck in Australia's aviation infrastructure, but it can certainly be a useful distraction for an airline executive who has his bonuses linked to on time performance.
De_flieger is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 15:43
  #111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
"and storage to produce 2000MW power 24/7. "

That sin't going to cheap - nor is it going to good for parts of the planet where you mine things like Lithium
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 16:39
  #112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 121
Originally Posted by bolthead View Post
I'm not interested in backyard experiments. If someone can point to a link to an experiment where someone might have spent $100,000 out of the many billions of dollars already spent, demonstrating each greenhouse gas. Is water vapour worse than CO2? Is the average water vapour content a lot more than 420 ppm? If so, why don't we have runaway global warming due to water vapour?
Warning. These sorts of questions usually brings these types of threads to a shuddering halt.
NASA has spent a fair bit more than $100,000 on instruments on satellites over many years, that measure water vapour through various levels of the atmosphere and working out some of the answers to these questions. Here's a couple of resources, some of them a few years old but still relevant. Water vapour isn't something that is unheard of, or not considered by atmospheric scientists.
https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/fe...r_warming.html
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/c...t-the-co2.html
De_flieger is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2019, 19:23
  #113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 51
Waiting for Lookleft to return and bang on some more about a 16 year old girl. You're a big man continually targeting a single teenager who never claimed to be an expert.
TimmyTee is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2019, 00:03
  #114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 522
Originally Posted by TimmyTee View Post
Waiting for Lookleft to return and bang on some more about a 16 year old girl. You're a big man continually targeting a single teenager who never claimed to be an expert.
They target a 16 year old girl because it’s easier than targeting hundreds of thousands of scientists who have spent decades researching this topic and have come to an undeniable conclusion. All that 16 year old girl is saying is basically “listen to the scientists”.
dr dre is online now  
Old 27th Nov 2019, 02:50
  #115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Canberra
Posts: 124
De_flieger

+1 about Y2K. 19 years on and the ‘flat-earthers’ still don’t understand how much work went into making Y2K a non-event.

Those (most of us?) trying to educate people to the negative impacts of global-warming still have a lot work ahead!
layman is online now  
Old 27th Nov 2019, 07:19
  #116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: perth
Posts: 68
Yipee! More ozone. Another greenhouse gas. Is it true ( Wiki ) that with no greenhouse gases, the ISA temp would be -18C?
bolthead is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2019, 08:43
  #117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 370
"+1 about Y2K. 19 years on and the ‘flat-earthers’ still don’t understand how much work went into making Y2K a non-event."

I heard that several VERY large organisations had problems but as they were so few they just kept very, very quiet out of embarrassment.
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2019, 09:29
  #118 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: deepest darkest recess of your mind
Posts: 999
**** me, what a surprise. Another climate change thread.
porch monkey is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2019, 10:35
  #119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 522
Originally Posted by bolthead View Post
Yipee! More ozone. Another greenhouse gas. Is it true ( Wiki ) that with no greenhouse gases, the ISA temp would be -18C?
Nope, try again bolthead (not named after your uncle Andrew, huh?):

Ozone stops declining while climate warms
dr dre is online now  
Old 27th Nov 2019, 14:45
  #120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Farum
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post


They target a 16 year old girl because it’s easier than targeting hundreds of thousands of scientists who have spent decades researching this topic and have come to an undeniable conclusion. All that 16 year old girl is saying is basically “listen to the scientists”.
Thousands of scientists? Really? How many of them are real climate scientists working with climate dynamics?
mjohansen is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.