header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy

 (Read 539705 times)

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25343
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9884 on: May 07, 2024, 09:26:09 AM »
808 847badgerfans would be awesome.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Gigem

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2150
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9885 on: May 07, 2024, 09:29:31 AM »
Sept 2020 things were not even close to normal.  Big 10 barely had a football season, SEC played only conference games, very little attendance.    I recall A&M didn't play our bowl game.....the following season due to COVID.  I think my kids were still required to wear masks in school the first half of the year.  We were still wearing masks at work.  

So no, not even close to normal.  Maybe Sept 2021, but not Sept 2020.  

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71796
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9886 on: May 07, 2024, 09:31:40 AM »
The Monmouth University poll, conducted on April 18-22 shows a 10-point decline in Americans who says climate change is a “very serious” problem, falling from 56 percent in September 2021 to 46 percent in April.


The idea is that opinions have evolved because other situations changed in the background of this, from 2021.

Maybe so.

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25343
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9887 on: May 07, 2024, 09:34:16 AM »
Sept 2020 things were not even close to normal.  Big 10 barely had a football season, SEC played only conference games, very little attendance.    I recall A&M didn't play our bowl game.....the following season due to COVID.  I think my kids were still required to wear masks in school the first half of the year.  We were still wearing masks at work. 

So no, not even close to normal.  Maybe Sept 2021, but not Sept 2020. 
It felt normal around here. That's where I was going. We travelled to places that we were allowed to. Didn't go to Chicago because of their quarantine nonsense, although we did blow right through O'Hare a couple of times and hit up our friends in the burbs and family in Wisconsin.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71796
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9888 on: May 07, 2024, 09:40:02 AM »
I agree a LOT of stuff was not normal in September 2020.  But the poll dates from 2021.

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11249
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9889 on: May 07, 2024, 09:40:54 AM »
We didn't have a lot of restrictions here, but it was far from normal. Like half of California was squatting here in their motor homes in order to escape their own archaic restrictions. 
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12251
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9890 on: May 07, 2024, 09:51:08 AM »
I will say Sept 2021 felt fairly normal even here in CA. By summer 2021 we had taken an overnight trip to San Diego and then a vacation to Seattle, so obviously we were willing to get on an airplane for non-work reasons. 

However when Omicron hit in Nov 2021, it threw everyone for a bit of a loop. We didn't all know it was going to be so mild when cases started spiking like crazy. 

But the entire point was that outside events might be coloring how people responded to the two polls over a two-year gap. Someone who is worried about outside things, such as inflation, two wars, the coming election, etc, might not be thinking as much about climate change and even if they rationally believe the problem is as serious as they believed two years ago, may not say "very serious" when a pollster asks them because they're preoccupied with other stuff right now. 

And as I mentioned in my response to badge, the current poll was listed as only 808 participants with a +/- 4.1% margin of accuracy, which is pretty wide. Especially since they tried to dive deeper into the sub-demographics of the polling group and track changes within young people vs older people, which probably has an even wider margin of accuracy as the sample sizes of the sub-demographics are smaller. 

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37696
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9891 on: May 07, 2024, 10:16:57 AM »
Monmouth University poll of 808 people

***yawn***

I'm not putting much stock in it
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71796
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9892 on: May 07, 2024, 10:19:07 AM »
It suggests an interesting possible trend, that's all.

betarhoalphadelta

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12251
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9893 on: May 07, 2024, 10:22:59 AM »
It suggests an interesting possible trend, that's all.
Or it's publication bias...



847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25343
  • Liked:
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71796
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37696
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9896 on: Today at 09:05:18 AM »
The world’s largest direct air capture plant is set to open in Iceland this week, a potentially significant development in the fledgling carbon dioxide removal industry’s quest to lower global temperatures.

Designed by the pioneering Swiss startup Climeworks, the so-called Mammoth plant would use fans, filters, piping and geothermal energy to permanently remove up to 36,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each year. That’s nine times the annual removal capacity of Orca, another Climeworks facility that is currently the world’s largest operating direct air capture plant.

Despite the technological achievement, Mammoth would only be able to remove less than 1 percent of the annual emissions of a typical coal-fired power plant, according to EPA data. But it is poised to be at least the second commercial facility that could pull tens of thousands of tons of carbon from the air annually, with much larger plants in development.


“It’s a signal of growth for the carbon removal ecosystem,” Ben Rubin, executive director of the Carbon Business Council, said of Mammoth’s planned debut Wednesday. The trade association represents more than 100 carbon management startups, but Climeworks, one of the industry’s most established players, is not a member of the council.

The new plant is opening as the planet continues to blow past heat records, with 10 consecutive months through March setting all-time highs. To avoid catastrophic temperature increases, scientists have determined that the world needs to both slash heat-trapping emissions while also massively scaling up deployments of carbon dioxide removal facilities.

Buyers from the private and public sectors have stepped in to create demand for such plants. Microsoft on Tuesday inked a record-setting 3.3-million-metric-ton agreement with Stockholm Exergi, a Swedish firm that would remove carbon by burning biomass for energy while capturing and storing the emissions. Last month, Denmark’s energy agency awarded contracts to three firms that have promised to collectively remove over 1.1 million metric tons of carbon from the air.

Meanwhile in the U.S., a biomass burial facility run by Graphyte — likely the world’s largest operating carbon removal plant — is on pace to scrub 15,000 metric tons of CO2 from the atmosphere in 2024. The company plans to increase the removal capacity of that Pine Bluff, Arkansas, plant next year to 50,000 metric tons.
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71796
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Weather, Climate, Environment, and Energy
« Reply #9897 on: Today at 09:23:49 AM »
A typical passenger vehicle emits about 4.6 metric tons of CO2 per year. This assumes the average gasoline vehicle on the road today has a fuel economy of about 22.2 miles per gallon and drives around 11,500 miles per year. Every gallon of gasoline burned creates about 8,887 grams of CO2.

So, for reference, 36,000 mt of CO2 is equivalent to about 8,000  cars per year.  We emit about 35 BILLION mt per year overall.  So we'd need 70,000 of these plants to offset that.

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.