Australian Politics Forum - Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #15 - Sep 6^th, 2013 at 7:23pm

Ajax wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 3:49pm:

Are you saying mammals wouldn't survive if there was 7000ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere......???

Correct. They wouldn't survive. What kind of mammals lived on Earth when the Atmospheric CO2 was in that range?

Ignore that question if you want. I wouldn't like you to go to the trouble of Googling Prehistoric Life in the Cambrian Period" or "First Mammals"`

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 6^th, 2013 at 7:42pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #16 - Sep 6^th, 2013 at 7:25pm

Ajax wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 3:49pm:

# wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 2:18pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 1:02pm:

...
Well once upon a time we had 7000ppm and the planet Earth thrived.
...

Can you substantiate that? What was the human population at the time?

Are you saying mammals wouldn't survive if there was 7000ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere......???

http://i42.tinypic.com/29ay7aq.jpg

http://s155.n46.n171.n68.static.myhostcenter.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/Geocar...

Looks as though you want to drag humanity even further back than the Stone Age.

Why do you detest renewable energy options?

It's a disgrace that a nation such as Germany has more solar energy uptake than Australia when their solar resources due to geography are far less than ours.

I suppose that's why Germany is the worlds biggest exporter hey?

They can not only think, but think many decades ahead.

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #17 - Sep 6^th, 2013 at 9:54pm

That temperature graph over geologic time has been got at! I just looked at the original. The graph also doesn't correspond with the paper that you posted. The wonderful use of colour suggests that it was the work of Monckton. I'm going to investigate further.

Whoever did it, changed the graph and removed Delta T and replaced it with a temperature scale.

How sneaky. I bet it was Monckton.

Here is a respectable paper:

http://journalofcosmology.com/ClimateChange101.html

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 6^th, 2013 at 10:27pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

miketrees Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6490 Gender:	Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year Reply #18 - Sep 6^th, 2013 at 10:15pm Its an interesting exercise to rank countries by CO2 per head of population. So if Australia doubled its population it would halve its per head CO2 production. Not sure if that would be a good idea for the environment.
Back to top	IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #19 - Sep 6^th, 2013 at 10:40pm

miketrees wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 10:15pm:

Its an interesting exercise to rank countries by CO2 per head of population.

So if Australia doubled its population it would halve its per head CO2 production.

So you are saying that if Australia doubled its population from 22 million to 44 million, the additional 22 million people will not contribute to Australia's net CO2 emissions

You haven't quite grasped the per capita idea it seems.

If Australia doubles its population or halves it or triples it, all things being equal the per capita CO2 emissions will not change.

To change the per capita emission value, Australia would need to to reduce its CO2 net emissions for a fixed population. This can be done by conservation of energy, shifting to carbon neutral or a carbon less energy option, or even capturing and storing carbon.

Planting trees will reduce the per capita CO2 emissions value for our country. Likewise deforestation will increase it.

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year Reply #20 - Sep 7^th, 2013 at 7:16am Well, more people would mean more transport sector emissions, more electricity generation emissions etc right across the board, so the per-capita emissions would probably be about the same. A lot depends on whether there was a transition to renewable energy or not.
Back to top	weblarge_Graphic_PieChart.jpeg (64 KB \| 24 ) 1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #21 - Sep 7^th, 2013 at 9:15am

muso wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 7:23pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 3:49pm:

Are you saying mammals wouldn't survive if there was 7000ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere......???

Correct. They wouldn't survive. What kind of mammals lived on Earth when the Atmospheric CO2 was in that range?

Ignore that question if you want. I wouldn't like you to go to the trouble of Googling Prehistoric Life in the Cambrian Period" or "First Mammals"`

In your eagerness to prove me wrong you haven't done your research first.

The first mammals appeared approximately about 200 to 300 million years ago depending upon who you believe on the internet.

They still would have been exposed to 3000ppm in the atmosphere if not more.

The other thing is what is the toxic level of CO2 for humans.

Its estimated that humans can work in atmospheres with 10000ppm to about 20000ppm with 10 minute exposures to 30000ppm.

7000ppm would have been no problem at all......??!!

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/pel88/124-38.html

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #22 - Sep 7^th, 2013 at 9:16am

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 7:25pm:

Looks as though you want to drag humanity even further back than the Stone Age.

Why do you detest renewable energy options?

It's a disgrace that a nation such as Germany has more solar energy uptake than Australia when their solar resources due to geography are far less than ours.

I suppose that's why Germany is the worlds biggest exporter hey?

They can not only think, but think many decades ahead.

I don't mind renewable energy as long as it is cheap as fossil fuels.

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #23 - Sep 7^th, 2013 at 9:17am

muso wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 9:54pm:

That temperature graph over geologic time has been got at! I just looked at the original. The graph also doesn't correspond with the paper that you posted. The wonderful use of colour suggests that it was the work of Monckton. I'm going to investigate further.

Whoever did it, changed the graph and removed Delta T and replaced it with a temperature scale.

How sneaky. I bet it was Monckton.

Here is a respectable paper:

http://journalofcosmology.com/ClimateChange101.html

Knock yourself out......!!!!!

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #24 - Sep 7^th, 2013 at 10:59am

Ajax wrote on Sep 7^th, 2013 at 9:15am:

In your eagerness to prove me wrong you haven't done your research first.

I studied Geology at University. I didn't need to research something so basic.

Quote:

The first mammals appeared approximately about 200 to 300 million years ago depending upon who you believe on the internet.

The end of the Triassic. About 200 million years give or take.

Quote:

They still would have been exposed to 3000ppm in the atmosphere if not more.

Read the graph again properly. I'm not sure about the provenance of that graph, but for the moment, let's use it.

Quote:

The other thing is what is the toxic level of CO2 for humans.

Its estimated that humans can work in atmospheres with 10000ppm to about 20000ppm with 10 minute exposures to 30000ppm.

7000ppm would have been no problem at all......??!!

The toxicity is not in question, although you would start to notice some effects at 3000ppm.

It's academic since there were no humans back then. What was more to the point was the deep ocean temperature. Did you get that from the articles I linked? Imagine what the land surface temperature would have been. What was the atmospheric oxygen content in the Cambrian? Say 13%? How long would you survive that? There were no land animals or plants during the Cambrian. You do understand that?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 7^th, 2013 at 11:11am by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #25 - Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:29am

BTW where did you get that graph.....???

Quote:

OSHA's former limit for carbon dioxide was 5000 ppm as an 8-hour TWA. The ACGIH has a 5000-ppm TLV-TWA with a 30,000-ppm TLV-STEL, and these were the limits proposed. NIOSH has a TWA REL of 10,000 ppm with a 10-minute 30,000-ppm ceiling limit; however, NIOSH (Ex. 8-47, Table N1) concurred that the proposed limits were appropriate. After carefully reviewing the record evidence submitted in response to OSHA's proposal for carbon dioxide, the Agency has determined that exposure limits of 10,000 ppm (8-hour TWA) and 30,000 ppm (15-minute STEL) are appropriate. Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless, noncombustible gas.

Both the ACGIH (1986/Ex. 1-3) and NIOSH (1976a, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 102) cite studies indicating that continuous exposure to between 1.5 and 3 percent carbon dioxide (15,000 to 30,000 ppm) results in few, if any, adverse effects. However, electrolyte imbalances and other metabolic changes have been associated with prolonged exposures to 10,000 to 20,000 ppm CO(2) (Schulte 1964/Ex. 1-366; Gray 1950, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 102). Increases in the rate of respiration have been observed among resting subjects exposed to 39,500 ppm for periods shorter than a day and among exercising subjects exposed to airborne concentrations below 30,000 for the same period (Sinclair et al. 1969, as cited in ACGIH 1986/Ex. 1-3, p. 102).

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/pel88/124-38.html

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #26 - Sep 12^th, 2013 at 5:51pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 7:25pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 3:49pm:

# wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 2:18pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 1:02pm:

...
Well once upon a time we had 7000ppm and the planet Earth thrived.
...

Can you substantiate that? What was the human population at the time?

Are you saying mammals wouldn't survive if there was 7000ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere......???

http://i42.tinypic.com/29ay7aq.jpg

http://s155.n46.n171.n68.static.myhostcenter.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/Geocar...

Looks as though you want to drag humanity even further back than the Stone Age.

Why do you detest renewable energy options?

It's a disgrace that a nation such as Germany has more solar energy uptake than Australia when their solar resources due to geography are far less than ours.

I suppose that's why Germany is the worlds biggest exporter hey?

They can not only think, but think many decades ahead.

They also have more pride where as our country is just full of crack smoking wankers with semi-wealthy parents that don't mind how the spare rental gets paid off as long as the try-hard dynasty appears to prevail!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #27 - Sep 12^th, 2013 at 5:54pm

muso wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 7:17pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 12:43pm:

Do you want to go back to living in caves then.....????

You first, set the example and I'll see how you fair and decide later.

It's ironic that you speak about living in caves when we're talking about renewable energy in Germany.

While Australia talks about high speed trains by say 2050, Germany is already doing it. You're talking about the richest nation in Europe.

That well worn cliche of living in caves has seen better days.
http://blog.monty.de/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/transrapid.jpg

http://www.businessweek.com/videos/2013-07-29/the-battle-for-the-luxury-electric...

Nice Video on BMW's latest luxury vehicle there. The BMW i3.

Living in caves indeed Roll Eyes

Australia is no longer the clever country: too many lay back on daddys wealth and smoke crack and get arrogant at the tv behind closed doors! Cool

GO AUSTRALIA!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #28 - Sep 12^th, 2013 at 6:41pm

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Sep 12^th, 2013 at 5:54pm:

muso wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 7:17pm:

Ajax wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 12:43pm:

Do you want to go back to living in caves then.....????

You first, set the example and I'll see how you fair and decide later.

It's ironic that you speak about living in caves when we're talking about renewable energy in Germany.

While Australia talks about high speed trains by say 2050, Germany is already doing it. You're talking about the richest nation in Europe.

That well worn cliche of living in caves has seen better days.
http://blog.monty.de/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/transrapid.jpg

http://www.businessweek.com/videos/2013-07-29/the-battle-for-the-luxury-electric...

Nice Video on BMW's latest luxury vehicle there. The BMW i3.

Living in caves indeed Roll Eyes

Australia is no longer the clever country: too many lay back on daddys wealth and smoke crack and get arrogant at the tv behind closed doors! Cool

GO AUSTRALIA!

We have never been THE CLEVER country - the biggest self perpetuated myth to emerge from our shores

We are also ordinary in sport as well - another myth

have you noticed that in sports that everybody participates in on a level playing field, like athletics and soccer, we are basically average in the OECD - sometimes even below average

We use to dominate Tennis when hardly anybody played in the world. Now that All of Europe, Russia and Asia take the sport seriously we struggle to get a top 10 player and only have about 2 or 3 players in the top 100.

We are certainly a dumb racist nation - no doubt about that

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Renewables save Germans $8.5bn a year
Reply #29 - Sep 14^th, 2013 at 9:42am

Ajax wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:29am:

BTW where did you get that graph.....???

I got the table from government source material on sick building syndrome. I don't have a url for it. However, let's look at the information that is freely available.

The OSHA TLV figure thst you quoted applies to US workplaces. It agrees with the exposure standard in Australia.

The Workplace Exposure standard for carbon dioxide (TWA) in Australia is 5000ppm.

http://www.hsis.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/ExposureStandards/Details?exposureStand...

A TWA exposure has a frame of reference around an 8 hour working day, working 5 days per week and normal healthy individuals.

That is totally different to a 24 hour exposure for healthy individuals (as opposed to the whole population). Worksafe Australia refers to the calculation for extended exposures. The usual calculation that applies is the Brief and Scala Model. That's the one recommended by SafeWork Australia.

Reduction Factor = [8/daily hours worked] x [24-(minus) daily hours worked/16]

For example, a 12 hour exposure standard would be 0.50* 5000 = 2500ppm.

An 18 hour exposure standard would be 0.17* 5000 = 850ppm.

Another consideration is that currently, CO2 levels inside a poorly ventilated house is typically around 600ppm. That will rise as atmospheric concentrations rise.

It's not difficult to see how continuous atmospheric levels of 1000ppm would result in concentration problems for at least some people.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 14^th, 2013 at 9:54am by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged