Global Warming Stuff

[Neoteny]

Lol oh, ok. Thanks.

[_sabotage_]

All of those, which in no way support climate change theory, are added to the consensus:

Water vapor mitigates CO2 warming. "CO2 warming" -> consensus

C02 deflects incoming radiation. "CO2 deflects radiation" -> consensus

Ice core samples show a close link between temperature and CO2, CO2 levels rise several hundred years after temperature. "Close link between temperature and CO2" -> consensus

There is not one study proving any of the central themes necessary to establish climate change as fact. "Climate Change: Fact" -> consensus

[Ignoreme]

May be off as I haven't read all the post. At any rate, people want to change things for a reason. Some of those reasons some people believe and some don't. People will disagree if it's man made or not, or if it's even happening. Many will say to change for no reason is stupid.
I say really? Look at the pictures of some of the most polluted places in the world. We DO KNOW that is man made. And if it's not happening, and we try to prevent it anyway, what is the worst that could really happen? I think it's safe to assume we can all agree that fresh air to breath and clean water to drink is a GOOD thing.

[khazalid]

I think it's safe to assume we can all agree that fresh air to breath and clean water to drink is a GOOD thing.

as far as safe assumptions go, that's about a 2/10. this is humanity we're talking about, remember.

[_sabotage_]

What solutions have you heard climate scientists or anyone supporting AGW propose to deal with pollution?

What about any of the things that these folks have done leads you to believe they intend to? If anything, it's like an alarm goes off and their solution is to add more alarms than deal with what the alarm is supposed to signal.

Most of their solutions are:

Depopulate,
Restrict,
Tax,
Alarm,
Further pollute.

Concrete is responsible for 12% of global man-made CO2 emissions, hempcrete is carbon neutral, more energy efficient in it's life-cycle, a broad ranging renewable resource, completely recyclable. Have you ever heard an alarmist suggest we switch? No, because then they wouldn't be an alarmist.

Well, I denounce AGW and yet propose solutions towards pollution. Hempcrete doesn't off-gas, requires no infrastructure and reduces activities that cause pollution.

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

Hempcrete can be used to build structures of the same size as timber structures. Its not an alternative to reinforced concrete. Its uses more CO2 than timber.

But by all means propose it as a solution. Or alternatively, let Engineers do their job seeing as they've trained to be able to do it.

[_sabotage_]

Basaltic rebar can be used in reinforced concrete and half the amount required as it does not corrode.

Geopolymers which are carbon neutral and waterproof.

Rammed earth using mostly onsite materials.

Effective use of passive solar, passive hvac, passive ac.

But then again who am I discussing ideas with? Those who are intent there are none and this is how the world will max out.

Want to know how the Egyptians built the pyramids? With focus. The people proclaiming the problem have their focus on a carbon tax.

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

Basaltic rebar can be used in reinforced concrete and half the amount required as it does not corrode.

Yes, but there is a lot of research still to do. The beauty of steel reinforcement is that it has very similar thermal properties to concrete which makes it the perfect composite combination. You do not lose half the steel through corrosion. If you have non-corroding reinforcement then you can reduce your concrete cover from 50+mm to 20+mm. This is not that great a saving as you still require the same cross section of tensile reinforcement.

Geopolymers which are carbon neutral and waterproof.

Already use fibre in some circumstances. Only really lend themselves to precast construction as the fibres are exceedingly difficult to add to the mix on site. Ball together and leave weak spots in the final product.

Rammed earth using mostly onsite materials.

Great suggestion in some circumstances. High labour usage, which as you may guess is not economic. Needs to be mechanised.

Effective use of passive solar, passive hvac, passive ac.

Yup, one of the best things that can be done. CO2 use of a building during its life is far greater than the construction CO2.

But then again who am I discussing ides with? Those who are intent there are none and this is how the world will max out.

Someone who is in a position to make these changes.

Want to know how the Egyptians built the pyramids? With focus. The people proclaiming the problem have their focus on a carbon tax.

They built their pyramids by walking on the corpses of those they saw as lesser. Its the same way all great engineering feats have been achieved in the past. People forget that.

[_sabotage_]

Half the amount of concrete required since half is being used to slow the process of corrosion, as you yourself wrote, from 50mm to 20mm. It will also extend the life of the concrete used in.

Exactly, there are many situations where pre-cast is preferred. Instead of encouraging the proliferation of useful materials you are a little shit.

You are ignorant of history, there kitty cat.

[Metsfanmax]

Lol oh, ok. Thanks.

Yep, that is pretty much the correct response.

[Neoteny]

Lol oh, ok. Thanks.

Yep, that is pretty much the correct response.

From the references of an IPCC report:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/?t ... nging+cock, 2013

[Metsfanmax]

Lol oh, ok. Thanks.

Yep, that is pretty much the correct response.

From the references of an IPCC report:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/?t ... nging+cock, 2013

Well...

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

Half the amount of concrete required since half is being used to slow the process of corrosion, as you yourself wrote, from 50mm to 20mm. It will also extend the life of the concrete used in.

Exactly, there are many situations where pre-cast is preferred. Instead of encouraging the proliferation of useful materials you are a little shit.

You are ignorant of history, there kitty cat.

On a 500mm thick construction, 60mm is saved. I agree that is exactly half the concrete saved! Minimal concrete is used to prevent corrosion, if that was the aim there are coatings which do a much better job.

The situations where precast are preferable are based on economics. Precast requires much less labour than in-situ construction and is thus preferable in western countries where labour is high cost.

You are discussing something you dont actually understand with someone who does. I agree one of us is ignorant.

[_sabotage_]

Wing

Yes, I was bringing up solutions and you are trying to shit on them. You actually understand f*ck all. People using basalt rebar says it eliminates concrete requirements by half, as they are making actual things out of it.

Geopolymers are not just about about western countries where labour costs are high, they are waterproof. The marina's made by Romans stand till this day.

As for hemp, you don't seem to understand much, and if you did you might be a bit more enthusiastic.

Thinks for all your solutions, was great hearing about them. Go eat a dick.

As for Mets, invites up, point to any study that proves any of the key hypotheses of AGW. You can only do it in a bottle. I did your mom in a bottle, thought it failed, then you slimed out and we know it did.

[Metsfanmax]

As for Mets, invites up, point to any study that proves any of the key hypotheses of AGW

You're not going to get useful answers if you ask poor questions like that. The widespread scientific knowledge that global warming is occurring and is human-caused is the result of a substantial amount of literature over the last several decades. No one study "proves" anything about it, because no one study ever proves any major scientific claim.

[Neoteny]

What a maroon.

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

People using basalt rebar says it eliminates concrete requirements by half, as they are making actual things out of it.

YOU know nothing about what you are talking about. You are quoting other people who are exaggerating for effect.

No I cannot get excited about Hempcrete, the future replacement of the humble clay brick. I have no desire to build houses.

Geopolymers are only waterproof if there is minimal load resistance requirements, otherwise additional reinforcement is needed.

My solutions; increased flexibility in planning to increase the lifespan of construction, more insulation to reduce life carbon, bolted connections to allow for disassemble and reuse, weathered steel over normal steel to eliminate maintenance, good detailing.

There is no single material which is going to save the world, a change of culture in design can.

[Neoteny]

YOU know nothing about what you are talking about. You are quoting other people who are exaggerating for effect.

The entire GW "debate" in a nutshell.

[_sabotage_]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TsFwsyn97U

[Ignoreme]

I think it's safe to assume we can all agree that fresh air to breath and clean water to drink is a GOOD thing.

as far as safe assumptions go, that's about a 2/10. this is humanity we're talking about, remember.

Ok. Well said!

[_sabotage_]

Mets,

Put up or shut up, POS. You've had 11 pages as well as hundreds prior. Where is your evidence? None, shut up.

[_sabotage_]

I know one solution is not going to save the world, but I don't hear you or any of the climate changist suggesting any, promoting any, calling for regulation to improve the chances of any getting to market. I don't see people working on solutions being supported by the scientific community.

Instead, when some helpful materials are brought up, you sound like my wife, nitpicking.

I'm not going to write a fucking book. If you don't think hemp is going to be useful to you, you are just a dumbass. Hempcrete might not be, but it's one of the simplest ways to provide a market for hemp, and folks then have access to material for development. What it can make can be useful to you, a plastic dick. Enjoy.

[Metsfanmax]

Mets,

Put up or shut up, POS. You've had 11 pages as well as hundreds prior. Where is your evidence? None, shut up.

There is no personal "evidence." This isn't like Biblical revelation, where our personal beliefs on the matter come from on high and are shown to only us. The evidence is out there in the scientific literature, in the pages of journals like Nature and Science and in reviews like the IPCC report. If you have a specific scientific question with a specific answer, then we can start talking about individual studies that attempt to provide that answer. But there is no individual study that "proves" AGW because there is no individual study that sets out to prove it.

[Neoteny]

Mets,

Put up or shut up, POS. You've had 11 pages as well as hundreds prior. Where is your evidence? None, shut up.

https://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/report/citations/

[Neoteny]

Your turn.