Navitron Renewable Energy and Sustainability Forum

Announcements & News => Astronomy & Science => Topic started by: Ivan on July 06, 2015, 01:16:08 AM



Title: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: Ivan on July 06, 2015, 01:16:08 AM
Another consequence of global warming - from   http://www.space.com/29831-water-escapes-a-warm-planet-will-earth-become-like-mars.html




This article was originally published on The Conversation. The publication contributed this article to Space.com's Expert Voices: Op-Ed & Insights.

We already knew about Venus. We had our suspicions about Mars. Now we’re sure.

Our two closest solar system neighbors once had oceans – planet-encircling, globe-girdling, Earth-like oceans. But waterbearing planets are fragile. Venus didn’t have the right stuff and lost her oceans to space. We have the smoking gun. And now we know that Mars, also, poor Mars, couldn’t hold on. Mars has lost to space at least 80% of all the water it once had.


Et tu, Earth? What about you? More to the point, what about us? Despite water’s apparent abundance, what does the future hold for the most precious material on our planet? Will we find a way to mistreat our reserve of irreplaceable water and turn our planet into a planetary desert, like our neighbors Venus and Mars? Kick the temperature up a few more notches, thanks to a runaway greenhouse effect, and the ultimate consequence of global warming could be ejecting the water from our planet.

Water on the atomic level

Let’s try our hand at interplanetary forensics. First, let me introduce you to the atomic constituents of that substance chemists call H2O, which most of us more commonly know as water. The H represents the atom hydrogen. The O represents the atom oxygen. The number two after the letter H tells us that a single molecule of water is composed of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom.

In order to enter the world of CSI: Solar System, we need to understand the structure of atoms in a bit more detail. Hydrogen is hydrogen because its nucleus has one positively charged proton, which is orbited by one negatively charged electron. The nucleus, however, can also include one neutron, which lacks a charge. Even with one neutron, the atom still has a positive charge in the nucleus of +1. It’s therefore still hydrogen, but with one critical difference: it is much heavier, about twice as heavy, in fact, thanks to the additional neutron.

Chemists call this kind of heavy hydrogen deuterium. Deuterium behaves identically in chemical reactions to regular hydrogen; it’s just heavier. Remember that H2O molecule? When made with a deuterium atom, it’s an HDO molecule. It would taste the same, and it would provide the same sustenance to your flowers and gerbils, but it would weigh more.

That extra weight makes all the difference, because Isaac Newton’s and Albert Einstein’s unavoidable law of gravity says that deuterium is pulled downward toward the surface of a planet much more strongly than is regular hydrogen. When deuterium and regular hydrogen are both free to bounce around in a planet’s atmosphere, the regular hydrogen will bounce much higher. And if the planet’s gravity is weak enough – which is the case for Earth, Venus and Mars – regular hydrogen can bounce so high that it can escape into space, whereas the deuterium remains forever bound by gravity to the planet.

Artist conception Galileo’s probe
Pin It Galileo’s probe lasted less than an hour before being destroyed by Jupiter’s atmosphere.
Credit: NASA, CC BYView full size image
A base-level ratio for the solar system

In 1995, NASA’s Galileo probe measured the ratio of hydrogen to deuterium in the atmosphere of the giant planet Jupiter and found that ratio to be about 40,000-to-1.

Jupiter is such a massive planet that neither hydrogen nor deuterium can escape. Consequently, planetary scientists are quite certain that all the materials involved in the mixture of gases and dust that formed the sun and all the planets in our solar system formed with the same ratio of hydrogen to deuterium as the Galileo probe found for Jupiter’s atmosphere. We take it as a given that all the water originally deposited on Venus, on Earth, and on Mars also had that same ratio of hydrogen to deuterium.

Now let’s do some chemistry. If I wanted to make 20,000 water molecules, I would need a total of 40,000 hydrogen (H) and deuterium (D) atoms (of which 39,999 would be H and 1 would be D), plus, of course, 20,000 oxygen (O) atoms. In my mixture of 20,000 water molecules, I would be able to make 19,999 H2O molecules and one HDO molecule, given my initial ratio of hydrogen to deuterium atoms.

The real H-to-D ratios

In a cup of water scooped from any part of any of Earth’s oceans, in any local freshwater pond from any continent, in any cup of tea in any city, in an Alpine glacier or a hot spring in Yellowstone, the hydrogen-to-deuterium ratio is 6,250-to-1, not 40,000-to-1.

Why so low? The evidence suggests that early in Earth’s history, our planet lost a great deal of hydrogen (but not deuterium). As the hydrogen atoms escaped to space, the H-to-D ratio would have dropped from 40,000-to-1 to only 6,250-to-1. In fact, the Earth may have lost as much as 80% of its original population of hydrogen atoms, and since, on Earth, most hydrogen atoms are bound into water molecules, the loss of hydrogen atoms is likely equivalent to the loss of water.

Artist conception atmospheric probe on VenusPin It An atmospheric probe descends through the Venusian cloud deck.
Credit: Ames Research Center and Hughes Aircraft Company, CC BYView full size image
NASA’s Pioneer Venus spacecraft, way back in 1978, dropped a probe that parachuted into and measured the properties of Venus’ atmosphere. One of its shocking discoveries was that the hydrogen-to-deuterium ratio on Venus is only 62-to-1, fully 100 times smaller than the ratio on Earth.

The clear implication of this discovery is that Venus was once wet but is now bone-dry. Venus, as we now know, has a surface temperature of 867 Fahrenheit (463 Celsius). Venus once had oceans, but Venus warmed up and the oceans boiled off the surface. Then ultraviolet light from the sun split the water molecules apart into their constituent atoms. As a result, the lighter hydrogen atoms bubbled up to the top of the atmosphere and escaped into space, while the heavier deuterium atoms were trapped by Venus’ gravitational pull. The hydrogen-to-deuterium ratio in Venus' atmosphere is the crucial clue that provides the evidence for what happened a billion or more years ago on Venus.

Mineral veins on Mars
Pin It Mars looks pretty dry now, but mineral veins were deposited by fluids moving through rock.
Credit: NASA, CC BYView full size image
Now, in research just published in Science this spring, a team of scientists led by G L Villanueva of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center has used powerful telescopes on Earth to map water (H2O) and its deuterated form (HDO) across the surface of Mars. They’ve confirmed the results obtained by NASA’s Curiosity/Mars Science Laboratory in 2013 that the hydrogen-to-deuterium ratio on Mars is smaller by a factor of about 7 compared to that on Earth. This measurement tells us that Mars, like Venus, has lost lots of hydrogen, which means Mars, like Venus, has lost lots of its water.

The total amount of water identified in all currently existing water reservoirs on Mars (the ice caps – which have some water but are mostly frozen carbon dioxide; atmospheric water; ice-rich regolith layer; near-surface deposits) would generate a global ocean about 21 meters (68 feet) deep. The deuterium measurements tell us that Mars once had about seven times more water, enough water to create an ocean that would have covered the entire planet to a depth of at least 137 meters (445 feet). The evidence is now clear: Mars has lost at least 85% of the water it once had. (And that estimate assumes the Earth has not lost any of its water; if the Earth also has lost 80% of its original water reservoir, then Mars has lost 97% of its original water reservoir.)

Venus, dry
Pin It Is Venus' present Earth’s future?
Credit: Magellan Project, JPL, NASA, CC BYView full size image
Whither goest Venus and Mars….

Venus and Mars. Mars and Venus. Planetary scientists know that both planets were wet and Earth-like in the beginning; they also know that neither Venus nor Mars could hold onto their water for long enough to nurture advanced life forms until they could flourish. The lessons from Venus and Mars are clear and simple: water worlds are delicate and fragile. Water worlds that can survive the ravages of aging, whether natural or inflicted by their inhabitants – and can nurture and sustain life over the long term – are rare and precious.

If we allow the temperature of our planet to rise a degree or two, we may survive it as a minor environmental catastrophe. But beyond a few degrees, do we know the point at which global warming sends our atmosphere into a runaway death spiral, turning Earth into Venus? We know what the endgame looks like.

David A Weintraub is Professor of Astronomy at Vanderbilt University.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. Follow all of the Expert Voices issues and debates — and become part of the discussion — on Facebook, Twitter and Google +. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher. This version of the article was originally published on Space.com.


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: biff on July 06, 2015, 08:25:40 AM
Scary stuff,
           One wonders when we will all waken up and get it into our head that we have to change our attitudes,
        It is all such deadly serious stuff. There is plenty of talk from the powers that be but very little action .
    It seems to me,that the different countries are more interested in crippling each other,s respective currencies than trying to reverse climate change.
                                               Biff


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: HyperUniverse on July 06, 2015, 08:48:27 AM
As long as our global economy is based on accumulating wealth, we will continue to kill other humans, other animals, our Earth, and soon our Solar System when space travel will become more easily (keep it this way and in a million years we will destroy the Universe, too).

Let's be honest, we will never go back to living standards from a 1000 years ago, with no electricity (no electric power plants to pollute); no mechanical vehicles to pollute, no steam trains either, just clean natural living.

So it seems our fate is sealed......


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: Ivan on July 06, 2015, 05:44:13 PM
Well there are ways to live a comfortable lifestyle with nothing like the CO2 emissions that we currently produce. However, individuals, companies and governments would need to commit money to things like large PV arrays, battery storage etc, rather than costa-del-sol package holidays, jet skis and the latest four wheel drives. There's still plenty of opportunity for industry and employment, and as anyone who lives off-grid knows, there are some serious capital expenditures at the beginning, but running costs are much lower and life can still be comfortable.

I liked this article, because it's talking about some fairly complex stuff, but in a way that is very easy to understand.


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: AndrewE on July 06, 2015, 07:50:07 PM
I think there's a flaw in this.  If I remember my school science...
Hydrogen gas (H2) molecules are so small (Molecular Weight 2) and hence so fast that (because of fewer collisions) they diffuse faster than the escape velocity from our atmosphere, so they effectively rise through it and disappear into space. However there isn't a lot of hydrogen gas generated on earth...   Photosynthesis may split water - but it creates oxygen and sugars.  I can't think of any natural hydrogen generators, it's not even very significant in volcanic emissions (0.5 to 1.4% according to http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/)
Deuterium gas (if any such molecules should happen to exist) might well hang around (MW around 4)... BUT water vapour in the atmosphere is H2O so the molecular weight is around 18, but still only 19 if one of the atoms is deuterium, HDO.  One hydrogen atom in 40,000 may be Deuterium, but only one MOLECULE in 160,000,000 will be D2 - if you can find a "hydrogen" molecule.

Are they saying that the difference in the diffusion rates between molecules of weight 18 and 19 is enough for the light water to disappear?  In that case why haven't the other planets got residual D2O lakes? or that this just illustrates the end point after the fractional distillation of an atmosphere?
If they are saying that runaway warming would eventually heat the atmosphere to the point where that difference in molecular weights (18 vs 19) would strip the H2O off and leave the HDO, I would imagine that we'd all be long gone by then anyway, so  it's not much of a concern to us or a very effective propoganda tool either...

We need to worry about the next degree or two of warming (which will probably finish us off), not the subsequent 10, 20, or even 50![/sub]


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: RIT on July 06, 2015, 10:37:07 PM
Throwing some facts down on a page and then asking a question is not an article - its a question.

Its also a question that is easy to research by just finding out what happen in the past, such as

     https://www.ncas.ac.uk/index.php/en/climate-blog/397-warm-past-climates-is-our-future-in-the-past

Which contains the following 

Quote
During the Eemian (125,000 years ago) the climate was warmer with summer temperatures in the Arctic region about 2-4°C higher than today.

Temperature rises are not an issue for the Earth's hydrogen, they are an issue for Mankind and its ability to support 7B+ people.

Also talking a lot about Venus means nothing if some details are not provided. Most people are told that Venus is about the same size as the Earth, fewer are aware that its mass is about 82% of Earth's. So its ability to retain hydrogen atoms is a lot less regardless of the fact that it is also a lot nearer the sun and so receives more heat radiation. It also has only a weak magnetic field (compared to the Earth) so solar winds can reach the outer atmosphere and so strip it of atoms all the way up to oxygen.


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: desperate on July 06, 2015, 11:12:56 PM
I think there's a flaw in this.  If I remember my school science...
Hydrogen gas (H2) molecules are so small (Molecular Weight 2) and hence so fast that (because of fewer collisions) they diffuse faster than the escape velocity from our atmosphere, so they effectively rise through it and disappear into space. However there isn't a lot of hydrogen gas generated on earth...   Photosynthesis may split water - but it creates oxygen and sugars.  I can't think of any natural hydrogen generators, it's not even very significant in volcanic emissions (0.5 to 1.4% according to http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/)
Deuterium gas (if any such molecules should happen to exist) might well hang around (MW around 4)... BUT water vapour in the atmosphere is H2O so the molecular weight is around 18, but still only 19 if one of the atoms is deuterium, HDO.  One hydrogen atom in 40,000 may be Deuterium, but only one MOLECULE in 160,000,000 will be D2 - if you can find a "hydrogen" molecule.

Are they saying that the difference in the diffusion rates between molecules of weight 18 and 19 is enough for the light water to disappear?  In that case why haven't the other planets got residual D2O lakes? or that this just illustrates the end point after the fractional distillation of an atmosphere?
If they are saying that runaway warming would eventually heat the atmosphere to the point where that difference in molecular weights (18 vs 19) would strip the H2O off and leave the HDO, I would imagine that we'd all be long gone by then anyway, so  it's not much of a concern to us or a very effective propoganda tool either...

We need to worry about the next degree or two of warming (which will probably finish us off), not the subsequent 10, 20, or even 50![/sub]

Ozone layer I think is the Key, lots of UV up there that splits water vapour into monatomic Hydrogen and Oxygen, and Hydrogen atoms are easily fast enough to escape gravity whereas oxygen is not. O3 is the result I think.

Desp


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: RIT on July 07, 2015, 01:36:36 AM

Ozone layer I think is the Key, lots of UV up there that splits water vapour into monatomic Hydrogen and Oxygen, and Hydrogen atoms are easily fast enough to escape gravity whereas oxygen is not. O3 is the result I think.

Desp

I think Ozone is formed from the spiting and recombine of just Oxygen which is normally found in a stable O2 configuration while Ozone is O3.   


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: Ivan on July 07, 2015, 02:07:09 PM
If there aren't any hydrogen generators on earth, then there are probably even fewer on Mars and Venus!

This loss is nothing to do with water, only to do with free hydrogen gas.

There are some bacteria that produce hydrogen, though I cannot remember which. Lightning produces hydrogen, as do electrolytic processes. Hydrogen is in the Earth's atmosphere at 1ppm.

What is interesting is that Mars and Venus lost most of their water despite meteoric / comet delivery. It's also interesting to consider that Earth has probably lost 80% of its water already (which is probably why we don't have a planet-wide ocean), presumed through this mechanism


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: HyperUniverse on July 07, 2015, 03:58:54 PM
....Earth has probably lost 80% of its water already (which is probably why we don't have a planet-wide ocean), presumed through this mechanism

I wouldn't agree with that .

Earth was fully covered by water, when a celestial body has hit our planet.
Thus one single mass of land appeared over the sea level.

If you bring all the continents together, they fit quite perfect in a single land mass.
And ever since that impact, you can see the tectonic plates movement are spreading the continents apart.

So I don't agree with Earth's lost 80% of its water.


Regards


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: Ivan on July 07, 2015, 04:06:43 PM
Well in that case, you're basically disputing the deuterium/hydrogen ratio difference, for which there is unequivocal evidence.


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: HyperUniverse on July 08, 2015, 09:18:28 AM
I didn't comment anything about your precious deuterium/hydrogen ratio difference,
I was just not agreeing with you on why Earth is not fully covered by water,

But if you really want to tell us something about this deuterium/hydrogen, then can you explain it better - when Earth has lost this 80% of it?
As I understand from other clever people (called scientists) Earth is 4.54 billion years old.

And you say that Earth's lost 80% of its precious gases over what....the same 4.54 billion years, or in the last 1000 years?



Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: Ivan on July 10, 2015, 12:15:36 AM
Have a read of the article. The 80% loss of water is a direct deduction from the D/H ratio.

What they're saying is that we all start off with the same Deuterium/hydrogen ratio - basically from the protoplantary disc. Jupiter is so massive that hydrogen can't diffuse away. So that sets the starting D/H ratio. Then we look at Mars and Venus that have pretty much lost all their water - and the more recent geological evidence from rovers on Mars have pretty much proved that there was once vast quantities of water on Mars. The D/H ratio on these planets is vastly different - demonstrating that a lot of hydrogen has disappeared over time. Then look at the earth - it also has a much higher ratio of D to H than Jupiter, though not as much as Mars or Venus - showing that we too have lost a large amount of water and from the difference in ratios we can work out more or less how much.

The loss is over 4.5billion years, not 1000.

The question is, with global warming, will the extra kinetic energy within the atmosphere accelerate the rate of hydrogen loss?


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: HyperUniverse on July 10, 2015, 08:57:03 AM
Well from my understanding, the other planets have lost their gases because they didn't have enough planetary mass, to hold onto these gasses,
So in my mind no matter how hot Earth's atmosphere will get (global warming) our planet will hold onto these gases (or loose just a tiny amount of them), because Earth's mass is bigger than the others'.

So as long as we don't "export" too much mass out of our planet, I think we are pretty safe for the next 4.5 billion years.........

Or am I not thinking straight?


And another reason that keeps me calm over the matter, is that we humans will soon make space travel easier, at least for unmanned spacecrafts.
Just send few of these to the nearest planet or moon covered by water or ice, and extract and bring here on Earth large amounts of it.

It doesn't matter the time to travel there and back will be 100 years.
Sending 10 such crafts, means we get a boost in water supply every 10 years,
Add more crafts later, and it means a boost every 5 years, or even every year,
....and so on.....

Now the question is....should we stop developing new technologies to allow us to do that in the future, just because the research and development of such technologies is a pollutant itself too?
Would be better to save some CO2 now, or shall we exploit this planet as much as we can with the knowledge that in the future we will replenish our supplies from other planets?

Another reason why I am not afraid of this global warming.....
in the past all living things on Earth were relying on Earth & Sun to supply them with the necessary materials & energy to stay alive.
I think we've past that stage, now we have the knowledge and power to keep ourselves alive without the nature's help.
Is that today we are just more concerned with who should rule over the others, rather than applying such technologies.
Imagine instead of building arsenals to kill other people, we would build giant filters to clean up the CO2 in the atmosphere.....

So to be clear in everybody's mind.....
if we don't develop such technologies (mass space travel), all living things on Earth will DIE, not because of humans polluting the planet, but because of our Sun will one day die.
And then no matter how "green and unpolluted" Earth will be, it will still die.
And the intelligence that will live at that point on this planet, has the duty to move the seeds of life on another celestial body, and make a home for them there.
But if that intelligence will be indoctrinated by their ancestors, not to develop any technologies because they will dump CO2 and other harmful gasses in the atmosphere, then they will be singing and dancing happy in Earth's green pastures while the planet will be engulfed by the dieing Sun.

There is no hope for LIFE to carry on, on this planet.
We need the technology and power to move to another.


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: A.L. on July 10, 2015, 10:33:08 AM
or shall we exploit this planet as much as we can with the knowledge that in the future we will replenish our supplies from other planets?

- no comment required


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: desperate on July 10, 2015, 06:20:48 PM
We're barely able to get stuff 300miles up and back due to energy and financial constraints at the moment, bringing meaningfull amounts of stuff back from other planets and solar system bodies is never going to happen. Small samples maybe if we are lucky.

Desp


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: Ivan on July 10, 2015, 11:23:58 PM
PV=nRT. If the temperature increases, the pressure increases, and the kinetic energy of the molecules of atmosphere. Easier diffusion into space. I'd be interested to see figures for earth's rate of gas loss. The magnetic field certainly helps to hold onto a fair bit of it, but as Venus found out, even with a good magnetic field, increase the temperature and the gases boil off more quickly. I'm sure NASA's got a satellite or two measuring ion loss from Earth in the solar winds.

So far we've returned something like 30kg of moonrock, a few bits of comet dust and pretty much nothing else from any other worlds during the 50years or so that we've been capable of visiting other worlds, so there's some ground to make up!


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: Ivan on July 12, 2015, 12:49:28 AM
I thought I'd answer my own question:

The loss rate is currently tiny, only about three kilograms of hydrogen and 50 grams of helium (the two lightest gases) per second

....from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-planets-lose-their-atmospheres/


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: HyperUniverse on July 21, 2015, 09:29:33 AM
I don't understand why some people are so negativists.

Saying that mining & exploiting other planets will NEVER happen, sounds like someone who thinks technology has reached its peak,
There is NOTHING more to be discovered & invented in the future, and thus, no means of generating more power will EVER be discovered.
Resulting in a conclusion that we can NEVER bring useful stuff from other planets.

Or it sounds like someone who thinks we have only a couple of years before Earth goes bust, or at most 10 years probably.
Thus we won't have time to develop these new technologies.....

After 4.5 billion years, Earth is looking pretty good to me.
And don't forget, there were times (I repeat TIMES, not just a time), in Earth's history when it was MUCH more hotter than today (with no humans around to dump CO2 gasses),
And also there were TIMES when Earth was MUCH colder,

Science has proved that Earth is going through cycles (because of Solar activity, not because of living beings' activity)....peaking at very hot, and very cold, with medium in between.
Well it's clear that we are in a medium, going towards hot.
When Sun's output is like trillions of trillions of trillions of trillions of what we humans can produce, do you really think WE are responsible for Earth going hot?

People are just scaring you, so you can pay more taxes, and they can have better income from doing NOTHING.
Because there is NOTHING that will stop Earth from going in the next peak (which looks like I said, it's going to be HOT).
What we NEED to do, is stop thinking we can keep the planet from going hot, and instead use our energy and time to develop technologies to help us live a happy life throughout the next cycle of HOT EARTH.

Stop tilting at windmills, people.




Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: biff on July 21, 2015, 09:48:06 AM
Very good post HU,
                I am overcome with admiration for your brave stance and refusal to back down to the browbeaters of this world. I know there are certain people who will give you funny looks for expressing your opinion as you have but I am not one of them. I admire bravery and straight talking and your post was a breath of fresh air. Poetry in motion, I would call it. In fact I would put you along side the great Mc Gonagall. The one and only William Mc Gonagall whose parents came from this neck of the woods. William , like you, refused to be browbeaten and soldiered on to the end.
  You have my full support to express your point of view and the next time you hear of a space ship heading off to work on the mines,do please let me know. There are a lot of us Irishmen out of work and are not afraid to handle a pick and shovel.
                                                       Biff


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: oliver90owner on July 21, 2015, 10:39:07 AM
Agree with some of what he has to say.  BUT, there are coming up to 9 billion parasites (along with all the animals they nurture for food/transport/pets/etc) taking from the planet and giving back next to  uck all.  Not many animals would tolerate that many parasites without getting sick.  A symbiotic relationship would be tolerable but just acting like parasites is not sustainable in those numbers.


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: Nickel2 on July 21, 2015, 10:42:43 AM
We may be losing a few kg per day of gasses to space, but every day the earth is hit by between 5 and 300 tons of space rocks. (Not man-made space-junk). These rocks are a mixture of many compounds; some of them gasses, some solids, bits of left-over comet-ice etc. They vapourise when they hit the atmosphere, so I suspect the balance is a gain in gas quantity rather than a loss.
Space may appear to be empty, but there gas molecules and dust particles in every cubic kilometre of space. There are a lot of cubic kilometres out there!


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: desperate on July 21, 2015, 08:26:30 PM
Saying that mining & exploiting other planets will NEVER happen, sounds like someone who thinks technology has reached its peak,
There is NOTHING more to be discovered & invented in the future, and thus, no means of generating more power will EVER be discovered.
Resulting in a conclusion that we can NEVER bring useful stuff from other planets.


It's nothing to do with technological limits, but rather energy and economic limits. It takes an enormous amount of energy to send a few kilos of mass up to low orbit let alone to bring it back without it burning up in the atmosphere. To get to even a close by asteriod or comet is a few years project at least and then to extract and recover a meaningfull mass in a meaningfull time span is not going to be even remotely worthwhile. It's not about what may or may not be developed in the future but the laws of physics as we understand them at the moment.

Or it sounds like someone who thinks we have only a couple of years before Earth goes bust, or at most 10 years probably.
Thus we won't have time to develop these new technologies.....


There is a fairly well developed theory that posits that we don't see or detect any alien life forms despite there probably being billions of planets in habitable zones because intelligent life tends to wipe itself out by messing up its host planet in one way or another. You don't have to look that far to see many examples of how that could happen.

After 4.5 billion years, Earth is looking pretty good to me.
And don't forget, there were times (I repeat TIMES, not just a time), in Earth's history when it was MUCH more hotter than today (with no humans around to dump CO2 gasses),
And also there were TIMES when Earth was MUCH colder,


Humans have only been capable of altering our environment for a couple of hundred years though, give us another 500 years and it wont look so pretty.

Science has proved that Earth is going through cycles (because of Solar activity, not because of living beings' activity)....peaking at very hot, and very cold, with medium in between.
Well it's clear that we are in a medium, going towards hot.
When Sun's output is like trillions of trillions of trillions of trillions of what we humans can produce, do you really think WE are responsible for Earth going hot?


What science has gathered a lot of evidence for, is that over the last two hundred years we have altered the global climate much faster than anything that has happened before. Your argument that we are insignificant compared to the inputs of nature does not hold water IMHO. It is all about balance,  take CO2 for example, we release 34GT into the atmosphere every year which is a small fraction of the amount nature releases, but don't forget that nature also absorbs CO2 as well and for millions of years the two have almost been in balance, when it gets a bit out of balance then as you say we head for a hot or cold millennia or two. The 34GT we release is not balanced in natures budget so it is gradually increasing the overall levels which will overwhelm the atmospheres capability to absorb.

TBH I believe that your conspiracy theory is a lot of baloney, I'm not saying that politicians are above over doing the gloom and doom scenarios, but to dismiss it all as a scare story.........................sorry I just don't belieeeeeeeve it   ;D


Desp


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: biff on July 21, 2015, 09:50:29 PM
I am not so sure Desp,
              You never can be sure. HU is only repeating what a friend of mine said many years ago when the Russians landed on the moon. He laughed and laughed.. " Have you had a look at the kind of cars those Russians build", ? He would roar, "How in the name of be jemmedie could they build a rocket to get to the moon and back when they cannot build a car that can keep its exhaust intact for a week and sport a decent set of brakes.
  His Brother came home from England driving a Moscovitch saloon, pale blue and no brakes.. ( and gave him the car as a gift.)
 J said it was a rotten tax dodge and that they had this big film set inside an aircraft hanger all decked out with all kind of Sc-fi stuff and now the americans and the British and the Irish Governments were going to take part in the next race to the moon and double all the tax bills. J was in the dole all his life and had plenty of time for exciting theories. We all agreed because he could get quite aggressive and very insulting. Well what do you know ?..About a week or so afterwards, there was a film on the box about exactly the same scenario.,Yes,,and all taking place inside an aircraft hanger. The guys were bouncing about in space hanging from invisible ropes and doing all kinds of exciting stunts until they fell out over the lead woman..(she was nice)
 It is a bit like the story where the guy answers the add for a zoo keeper..He gets there and the boss tells him that the Gorilla died and he would have to wait until they got a new gorilla before he could start work,,,,,Unless of course he wanted a start right away, acting the part of the gorilla in a specially provided gorilla suit...After a little training in front of a mirror the guy gets up enough courage to venture into the gorilla cage and perform as a gorilla. It went really well and the boss said he was a natural. he could swing from branches and beat his chest , blow kiss,s at the ladied and give the kids sweets( He only did that once, the boss threatened to sack him), Every morning when the visitors came, this guy would scamper up the trees and behave like the most macho gorilla on the planet, So he is swinging about, getting careless and did he not fall down into the cage next door on top of the lion who was sprawled on the floor dozing... "Help,!, help! " he screamed.. but the lion grabbed him by the throat and hissed at him to " SHUT IT" " YOU WILL GET THE BOTH OF US THE SACK,!". (True story)
        J also had a big red beard down to his chest and he smoked a pipe as well and very often he would fall asleep in front of the fire, smoking the pipe and the pipe would slip out from between his dentures and fall into the middle of his beard. He kept a wet towel hanging on the back of the kitchen door specially for beard fires and when he put the fire out, he would smell to the high heavens and have a hole in the middle of his beard, a bit like the entrance to a birds nest.. If you shouted,, "Hey J,, your beard is on fire", He would throw up his jacket over his head and run into the house but you needed to lay low for a few weeks afterwards.
    I am not so sure that they actually got as far as the moon anyhow.. If you look and listen to all the other things that these politicians have told us, none of that is true either. Getting to the moon is a lot lot harder than reducing the income tax to the workers by 25% and they certainly have not managed to reduce the tax like they promised. J once won a ticket to an all Ireland final between Dublin and Kerry, Kerry won and J ended up in Kerry for a week, In Listowel of all places. I like Listowel and would have loved a week down there myself. They kept J for the week and sent him home looking well fed and full of more stories. He said that the Kerry men were very intelligent and that they were not fooled by this trip to the moon either and they came from all over Listowel to listen to J explain away the tax dodge and the trip to the moon till he was fed up repeating it. They took him to a faiery fort at closing time and explained how you had to walk very respectfully past the place or you would be cursed for all eternity but j fell over in the dark and that was when he decided he would be better off going home as soon as possible before the Faieries got on to him.
        I know, it a lot of mumbo jumbo but you can never be 100% sure and it is better to bet on the two sides, to be sure to be sure, if you know what I mean.
                                         Biff


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: Nickel2 on July 22, 2015, 10:39:33 AM
Never underestimate Russian technology. There is a wonderful expression my brother got from the building trade: "It may be strong, but it's rough". (I still laugh at that).
I still own one of my father's old cameras, a 1960's Zorki 4. It took excellent photographs in it's day, that my father processed and printed. Later on he bought a voigtlander and I was given the Zorki.
Having grown up in aerospace surroundings I got to see several Russian planes close-up. The interiors are like the inside of a brickie's transist, the mechanical stuff outside has got lots of bits riveted on that look as though they may fall off at any time. They may be rough, but they are strong. Function over form is the way of things and function they certainly can. I flew in a Tupolev 134 & 154, (thankfully never the 144), they were noisy and uncomfortable but the pilots were mostly ex air force and although initially frightening in operation were remarkable smooth fliers. They have a cute little oval window that looks down at the front for the navigator! Some of the airports were a bit disconcerting where crashed planes were just pushed to the side of the runway and left there.


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: biff on July 22, 2015, 11:25:45 AM
I would never underestimate the Russian technology,
                                        They have a different way of looking at thing than we have. They valued their pilots a lot more than the west did and invented the injector seats so that their highly trained pilots could survive and fly again unlike other countries who had to mourn the deaths of many brilliant pilots before they finally wised up and followed suit.
 You can tell a lot about a people by their approach to engineering problems. You honestly don,t know who you are dealing with until you see what they build or construct and how they go about solving the problems which rear their heads in all fields of engineering. Then you see the force of the personality breaking through.
 When I worked in Germany, I was baffled by the way they went about building ordinary houses,,semis, and solitary expensive houses. Everything was so over engineered that the actual constructions were struggling to cope with the weight of the timbers and steel. That was how I saw it. Yet their roads were a marvel, Not great surfaces but very clever bridges and flyovers. Now that got my attention and I noted the differences between the UK method of suspending motorways and the German way of doing it. The UK road engineers would suspend their roads on large H frames ,Two massive pillars and a cross piece for to carry the roads, The Germans would use one upright and one cross piece with the roads suspended on the crosspiece of the T, I drove over these flyovers over Cologne and was amazed to see that the cross pieces were guyed by massive wire ropes that ran down into someone back yard in the city below ;D. So by adjusting the guys they could bank the road for the high speed traffic. Now I thought that was one of the most brilliant ideas that I ever saw but if you were an engineer, you needed to have a strong nerve to back it and carry it out. So as the road curves and weaves above the city these massive guys are holding the whole lot under tension. If the single pillar that supports the roads sink a few mms then the guys can be adjusted to cope without a major engineering repair effort. I do not know any of the history or the engineers of these roads or even how successful they are but the engineers who thought it up were both bold and brave and not afraid to put their careers on the line, obviously. I ramble,,oops.
                                                            Biff
 


Title: Re: Another consequence of global warming
Post by: AndrewE on August 03, 2015, 08:17:36 PM
Reported wartime comment of a German general: "the Soviets will never win this war, just look at the cr*p finish on [the castings of] that tank..."  except that they did win, partly because they didn't waste time or resources grinding and polishing the bits that didn't actually need it.

Another off-topic comment: How can the carbon footprint and NOx emissions of space exploration be charged to the culprits?  In particular I would like to see Virgin/Branson's leisure offering stopped dead, as it's a total waste of money and resources for the benefit of literally a small handful of people...