Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Perhaps aviation biggest challenge....

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Perhaps aviation biggest challenge....

Old 23rd May 2019, 22:56
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by clark y View Post
There is just too many of us. I find it interesting that the state of the human population and the demands it puts on our one and only home is very rarely discussed. No one wants to touch the subject. As whether climate change is man made or not is a mute point. It will always change, the rate and degree will also vary. In the past, our ancestors had the opportunity to migrate. Why? It was because the population was minimal and the space and resources were available.
Totally agree: population growth is the elephant in the room that no one is talking about. We should have stopped at between 3 and 4 billion people. We can reduce each person's individual footprint all we can but if the world population just keeps rising it won't do any good. If we don't come up with a plan to stop and reverse this growth back to a sustainable level, pollution, disease, starvation and war will do it for us.
xorrox is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 03:07
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 290
How we talk about climate change is rapidly shifting as the ramifications of unchecked carbon pollution become ever clearer. The Guardian sped that shift along last week, when it updated its style guide to encourage reporters to refer to climate change as a “climate emergency, crisis or breakdown” and using “global heating” in lieu of global warming.



The outlet is a leading voice on climate coverage, meaning the move is more than symbolic. The new language could have lasting impacts on readers and how they perceive climate change, and inspire others to make similar shifts in how they talk about climate change. And with a million species at risk of extinction and a decade of rising carbon emissions turning up the broiler on the plane, describing our situation as “crisis” feels inspired. At the same time, the Guardian’s word choice has the potential to alienate some readers, further locking in gridlock.
The above is about a week old. I wonder if the emotive and choreographed language surrounding this subject is having an adverse effect on the mental health of our teenagers. Immature and irresponsible but I guess it sells newspapers.
73qanda is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 06:40
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: downunda
Age: 72
Posts: 113
Arrow We Await CO2 Equilibrium

As the level of atmospheric CO2 rises, we are witnessing more cloud, and greater storms.

This produces more precipitation, which plant life loves.

More plant growth will lead to plants converting more CO2 to C (retained) and O2 (released)

At some stage, there will be equilibrium, but it may take a million years or so

More CO2 = more atmospheric moisture = more precipitation = more plant growth = less CO2

To understand recursion, first you need to understand recursion.
flynerd is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 07:21
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 989
Originally Posted by flynerd View Post
As the level of atmospheric CO2 rises, we are witnessing more cloud, and greater storms.

This produces more precipitation, which plant life loves.

More plant growth will lead to plants converting more CO2 to C (retained) and O2 (released)

At some stage, there will be equilibrium, but it may take a million years or so

More CO2 = more atmospheric moisture = more precipitation = more plant growth = less CO2

To understand recursion, first you need to understand recursion.
You make a complex system sound simple. It isn't.
beardy is online now  
Old 24th May 2019, 07:22
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: england
Posts: 659
At the risk of stating the obvious, it seems to me that the global warming/climate change arguments seem to focus more on saving the planet, when I think they should be emphasising that we need to be saving ourselves. At the end of the day, the planet will adapt and survive, maybe over several million year period, and Im sure some life will still exist; it just may not be us.
If youre one of those people that believe the planet will do better without mankind on it, then I guess it is a win-win.
Alternatively, If you were an impartial bystander observing the process, I suppose it would be a difficult decision to decide whether to support the survival of mankind whilst killing off millions of other species, or just let us go extinct and keep the other species alive.
hunterboy is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 07:36
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 989
Originally Posted by hunterboy View Post
At the risk of stating the obvious, it seems to me that the global warming/climate change arguments seem to focus more on saving the planet, when I think they should be emphasising that we need to be saving ourselves. At the end of the day, the planet will adapt and survive, maybe over several million year period, and Im sure some life will still exist; it just may not be us.
If youre one of those people that believe the planet will do better without mankind on it, then I guess it is a win-win.
Alternatively, If you were an impartial bystander observing the process, I suppose it would be a difficult decision to decide whether to support the survival of mankind whilst killing off millions of other species, or just let us go extinct and keep the other species alive.
If we burn down the house with us in it we lose the house and our lives. If we burn down the house and run outside we have no house to live in.
It's better not to burn down the house in the first place.
beardy is online now  
Old 24th May 2019, 08:02
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 53
Posts: 2,329
f we burn down the house with us in it we lose the house and our lives. If we burn down the house and run outside we have no house to live in.
It's better not to burn down the house in the first place.
Allright, you had your populistic outburst. Now to a practical matter:

what ist THE solution ?

We are about to crack the 8 billion humans line soon. As we are a species that has very unique needs (as heating etcetc) we will ALWAYS use some "stuff". The break-even is directly depending on how much, that we probably can agree on. Now, who is to use these resources ? Is it our Kids or all Kids ? What do we do with those who wont play fair then ? Use resources to make em ? And how will you sustain "the change" here (say Europe) when we wont be communting, manufacturing, working any more ? The issue at hand for me is not change - by all means lets change, we always had to, as did and does the climate - but please in a intelligent way. Hamburg in Germany just announced that they are proud to be the city with the highest percentage in electric cars in Germany, that they love that change and that this is the way to go.
The very next report was, that Hamburg obtains 94% of its electricity from coal. As much as I love irony, thats not funny anymore if you look at your electricity bill, which our government has driven artificially through the roof for their announced "Energiewende" (change of direction in energy). To stick to your house analogy, they are building the roof before even thinking about the fundaments....

Even if "we", say, for the sake of argument Europe, are going to ZERO emission, the developing countries will nullify this in no time. What have WE won then ?

Last edited by His dudeness; 24th May 2019 at 08:32.
His dudeness is online now  
Old 24th May 2019, 08:20
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,010
Originally Posted by beardy View Post
That assumption may or may not be true, there is no proof. You are using it to justify your opinion, since it may not be true your opinion may not be true.
Countries (or territories) which will suffer a devastating set back in economy if the leisure air travel will not be available: all kind of islands (Maldives, Seychelles, Mauritius, Hawaii, Fiji, Caribbean, Malta, Cyprus, Greek islands, Bali, Madeira etc); locations too far from major customer base like Thailand, Turkey, Tanzania, Emirates, Egypt, Florida, Vegas. Even relatively not-so-far-away places like Spain and Portugal will no be able to cope without air travel.
CargoOne is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 08:22
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dublin
Age: 61
Posts: 3
The EU did a project on hydrogen powered aircraft, which reported in 2003. Advances in materials science may make this more of a runner as we go forward. A hydrogen powered aircraft would, in principle, have 0 carbon emissions.
There is a lot of work going on on carbon sequestration, and removing CO2 from the exhaust stream is viable for some applications, such as large power plants. The kit is heavy, and not cheap to do.
I cant see carbon capture at source from aircraft working, due to weight problems, and some for want of a better word, thermodynamic considerations.
Solar powered static capture from the atmosphere machines are available, we call them trees. The political will and the space to deploy them are problematic.
DrCuffe is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 09:10
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 989
what ist THE solution ?
There is no single answer to that, the atmosphere is too complex (in a mathematical sense) a system, as is our behaviour. The response is to alter our behaviour and expectations of ever increasing luxury from the over dependance on energy, particularly from combustion. Technology will help a lot, but will not be enough without behavioural change. The scale of the problem is enormous and without the actions those who can and are willing to change those who are more resistant to change (developing countries?) will not do so.

The example of the house was a simple analogy for those who are hard of understanding.

FYI my first degree was in energy production and fuel technologies.
beardy is online now  
Old 24th May 2019, 09:31
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 290
The only way we change is when we become motivated to change. We could be motivated sufficiently by a cost savings ( new technology) or by fear for our lives....not much else.
Can anyone think of something else that would motivate the majority of human kind to change their behaviours?
I can’t.
With that in mind we should be pouring a fair bit of money into R&D because Joe Bloggs won’t fear for his life until the waves are crashing at his door and it’s 48 degrees in the shade.
73qanda is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 09:46
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 989
Can anyone think of something else that would motivate the majority of human kind to change their behaviours?
Knowledge and understanding could help
beardy is online now  
Old 24th May 2019, 09:46
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,491
Originally Posted by hunterboy View Post
At the risk of stating the obvious, it seems to me that the global warming/climate change arguments seem to focus more on saving the planet, when I think they should be emphasising that we need to be saving ourselves. At the end of the day, the planet will adapt and survive, maybe over several million year period, and Im sure some life will still exist; it just may not be us.
If youre one of those people that believe the planet will do better without mankind on it, then I guess it is a win-win.
Alternatively, If you were an impartial bystander observing the process, I suppose it would be a difficult decision to decide whether to support the survival of mankind whilst killing off millions of other species, or just let us go extinct and keep the other species alive.
The planet would do just fine without us
Rated De is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 09:46
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 53
Posts: 2,329
There is no single answer to that, the atmosphere is too complex (in a mathematical sense) a system, as is our behaviour.
I know that, although I hold no degree and Im just an electrician and pilot.

If I look at the current discussion and climate of discussion, then on could think there is ONE solution. The cohorts that are at the forefront of the discussion right now (at least here in Germany) are commonly not the people I would give the task of planning a childrens birthday party (at least if I like said kid). An 16. old autistic girl seems to be the new Einstein right now and anyone daring to just try to ask a few questions about this is shouted down.

Last edited by His dudeness; 24th May 2019 at 10:34.
His dudeness is online now  
Old 24th May 2019, 09:47
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 53
Posts: 2,329
Originally Posted by Rated De View Post
The planet would do just fine without us
It would, no doubt.

So, who volonteers for the flying suicide squad ?
His dudeness is online now  
Old 24th May 2019, 10:02
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 290
Knowledge and understanding could help
I honestly don’t know about that. My sense is that without a direct threat to our wallets or our near-future wellbeing the majority won’t change behaviour. Happy to be proven wrong though.
73qanda is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 10:38
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: downunda
Age: 72
Posts: 113
Originally Posted by beardy View Post
You make a complex system sound simple. It isn't.
Yes, it is a complex issue, but can you tell us, whether equilibrium might occur in 100 years, or in 100 Billion years.

I do acknowledge that we, as a human race, should not continue releasing CO2 into the atmosphere at current rates. But ultimately, there will be a balance point where nature takes over again.
flynerd is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 10:44
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 53
Posts: 2,329
Originally Posted by 73qanda View Post

I honestly dont know about that. My sense is that without a direct threat to our wallets or our near-future wellbeing the majority wont change behaviour. Happy to be proven wrong though.
Youre probably wright. But then, how do i change in a MEANINGFUL way if Im a single mother of two working a job that just gets me through the month if Im lucky ?

Go to their wallets and you`re directly making people starve.

Over here, a lot of people are in this situation and even if youre way better off (as Im right now) the purely financial challenges arent easy... and if I have to face em, fine. But NOT as long as billions of other folks will continue as is. The by far largest emitters are still exempt or have left the C02 deal and will take every drop of oil and burn it too.
His dudeness is online now  
Old 24th May 2019, 10:50
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 30
The one little burp by Mt. Etna has already put more than 10,000 times the co2 into the atmosphere than mankind has in our ENTIRE time on earth but dont worry a scam is in the works to tax you your minuscule footprint.

Research :
https://bit.ly/30JtaIu

Video with some Facts:
https://bit.ly/2EqCN4X
paul_v1 is offline  
Old 24th May 2019, 10:54
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 989
Originally Posted by flynerd View Post
Yes, it is a complex issue, but can you tell us, whether equilibrium might occur in 100 years, or in 100 Billion years.

I do acknowledge that we, as a human race, should not continue releasing CO2 into the atmosphere at current rates. But ultimately, there will be a balance point where nature takes over again.
There has never been equilibrium in the past, if there were we would still be in it, why should there be in the future?
beardy is online now  

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.