One perspective.
Interesting to note that in 1912 people were talking about CO2 and climate change. CC isn't a modern thing.
One perspective.
True, and that is an example of facts having a half life.Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑20 Aug 2022, 11:38people were talking about man-made climate cooling
particularly when Greenland ice cores then cores globally showed that sudden 'ice ages' had often been triggered
the climate 'experts' wrote papers on this
it was featured in our school's new (1960s) geography books
yes maybe 1% of the 'experts' were warmists
archaeologists know now and knew then that substantial natural climate change is frequent
almost 50 years ago .....
environmentalism and conservationism and geopolitics spawned today's greenism (under the an 'energy crisis' banner)
'global cooling' was a prime topic
Ehm, yes, and there were good reasons for that back then. At that point the cooling effect of aerosols was more noticable than the warming effect of CO2 - something that has changed over the years. You know, sometimes knowledge advances and we figure out that what we thought was likely then was actually never an imminent danger. That doesn't mean the same applies to other theories - that people were wrong on global cooling says nothing about the reality of global warming. It's like saying something like "in the past, people thought the sun revolved around the earth. maybe 1% of the 'experts' were 'sun centralists'." (and implying that, hence, we should not take sun-centralism too serious).Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑20 Aug 2022, 11:38people were talking about man-made climate cooling
particularly when Greenland ice cores then cores globally showed that sudden 'ice ages' had often been triggered
the climate 'experts' wrote papers on this
it was featured in our school's new (1960s) geography books
yes maybe 1% of the 'experts' were warmists
archaeologists know now and knew then that substantial natural climate change is frequent
almost 50 years ago .....
environmentalism and conservationism and geopolitics spawned today's greenism (under the an 'energy crisis' banner)
and 'global cooling' was a prime topic
Further to the subject of synthesising materials rather than mining etcjohnny comelately wrote: ↑15 Aug 2022, 01:54For example, re biochemical engineering:
Bridgestone Americas (Bridgestone) has developed an all-new race tire with a sidewall made with natural rubber derived from the guayule desert shrub
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/0 ... ayule.html
Stora Enso and Northvolt partner to develop anode material from wood
27 July 2022
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2022/0 ... aenso.html
Other problems are that the carbon cost estimate of a given finished good is inaccurate due to supply chain variables, and the synthesized cost can only be applied as an arbitrary tax figure, wherein the collected funds go to government and not to the manufacturers of the goods who will end up playing shell games with the tax codes i.e. it's simply another revenue grab by our bloated bureaus who then get to stamp a product with their special stamp which constituents will be convinced to believe has an intrinsic value correlated to some transcendent nigh non-temporal goal.Greg Locock wrote: ↑21 Aug 2022, 01:24As it turns out the EU is proposing a sort of carbon based import duty which would work roughly as I proposed above, except of course being the EU it will not be transparent.