Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs intoclimate/energy scrap
in the register, all about alternative energy sums
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...arbon_free_uk/ |
#2
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs into climate/energy scrap
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT), misterroy
wrote: in the register, all about alternative energy sums http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...arbon_free_uk/ He obviously has no problem getting his funding. that's the rod that silences those who might speak out about this eco-madness, just as going with it is an automatic source of funding. £500,000 required to research the statistics of buttered toast falling the buttered side down. (With reference to it's impact on the environment and global warming) ) |
#3
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs into climate/energy scrap
In message
, misterroy writes in the register, all about alternative energy sums http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...arbon_free_uk/ Keep up at the back someone talking sense at last http://www.withouthotair.com/ -- geoff |
#4
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs into climate/energy scrap
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be
misterroy wrote this:- in the register, all about alternative energy sums http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...arbon_free_uk/ I haven't read the article. However, a comment on it in another place was that it started from the basis that our current energy intensity should continue. If that is true then he has missed the point completely and should look at Contraction and Convergence. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
#5
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs intoclimate/energy scrap
David Hansen wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be misterroy wrote this:- in the register, all about alternative energy sums http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...arbon_free_uk/ I haven't read the article. However, a comment on it in another place was that it started from the basis that our current energy intensity should continue. If that is true then he has missed the point completely and should look at Contraction and Convergence. You haven't done the numbers OR read the article. He points out that renewable energy means living at the population levels and at the energy lifestyles of mediaeval peasants. YOU can do it, but I am ****ed if I will. More irritatingly, it appears to be a total pliagiarism on everything I have been saying in this area for the last year or so on this and cam.misc newsgroups. I am flattered, but would have liked SOME acknoweldgement;-)..or is it that ultimately the facts speak for themselves and the answer is indeed plain to see to anyone who does the research and is actually able to do basic arithmetic. |
#6
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs into climate/energy scrap
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 03:32:27 +0100 someone who may be The Natural
Philosopher wrote this:- You haven't done the numbers OR read the article. You can read my mind and know whether I have personally done any numbers? Fascinating. The numbers have been done by a number of people, whether I have done them is neither here or there. I said that I had not read the article. He points out that renewable energy means living at the population levels and at the energy lifestyles of mediaeval peasants. If there are no improvements in energy efficiency. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
#7
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs intoclimate/energy scrap
On 22 Jun, 23:16, David Hansen
wrote: On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be misterroy wrote this:- in the register, all about alternative energy sums http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...arbon_free_uk/ I haven't read the article. However, a comment on it in another place was that it started from the basis that our current energy intensity should continue. If that is true Excellent. Mind reading. then he has missed the point completely Excellent. Personal abuse. and should look at Contraction and Convergence. Nice try. Ian |
#8
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs intoclimate/energy scrap
David Hansen wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 03:32:27 +0100 someone who may be The Natural Philosopher wrote this:- You haven't done the numbers OR read the article. You can read my mind and know whether I have personally done any numbers? Fascinating. It's not hard. There's not much in it. Just a couple of fixed ideas and a fixed agenda and your inability to count has repetaedly been demosntrated. The numbers have been done by a number of people, whether I have done them is neither here or there. I said that I had not read the article. He points out that renewable energy means living at the population levels and at the energy lifestyles of mediaeval peasants. If there are no improvements in energy efficiency. With all concievable gains in energy efficiency actually. |
#9
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs intoclimate/energy scrap
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 22 Jun, 23:16, David Hansen wrote: On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be misterroy wrote this:- in the register, all about alternative energy sums http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06...arbon_free_uk/ I haven't read the article. However, a comment on it in another place was that it started from the basis that our current energy intensity should continue. If that is true Excellent. Mind reading. then he has missed the point completely Excellent. Personal abuse. and should look at Contraction and Convergence. Nice try. Especially since contraction and convergence features in the article quite significantly. Giving It Capital Letters Doesn't Make It Work Any Better. BTW. Ian |
#10
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs into climate/energy scrap
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:30:22 +0100 someone who may be The Natural
Philosopher wrote this:- It's not hard. There's not much in it. Just a couple of fixed ideas and a fixed agenda and your inability to count has repetaedly been demosntrated. Such things have been asserted. The assertions have always been false. As always such personal attacks fail to cover the lack of arguments about the subject under discussion. One might even conclude that they are attempts at causing a diversion. I couldn't possible comment. You may have the last word. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
#11
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs into climate/energy scrap
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:32:13 +0100 someone who may be The Natural
Philosopher wrote this:- Especially since contraction and convergence features in the article quite significantly. Nice try. However, in the 13MB download from http://www.withouthotair.com, which is the book we are discussing, it is only mentioned once. That one mention is, "If we subscribe to the idea of ‘contraction and convergence’, which means that all countries aim eventually to have equal per-capita emissions, then Britain needs to get down from its current 11 or so tons of CO2 per year per person to roughly 1 ton per year per person by 2050. This is such a deep cut, I suggest the best way to think about it is ‘no more fossil fuels’." I haven't read it, but a quick skim has already raised some points. I wonder how those who have promoted this book will react to the following extract from it? "Mythconceptions "'There is no point in my switching off lights, TVs, and phone chargers during the winter. The 'wasted' energy they put out heats my home, so it’s not wasted.' "True for a few people, and only during the winter. False for most. If your house is being heated by electricity through ordinary bar fires or blower heaters then, yes, it’s much the same as heating the house with any electricity-wasting appliances. But if you are in this situation, you should change the way you heat your house. Electricity is high-grade energy, and heat is low-grade energy. It’s a waste to turn electricity into heat. Heaters called air-source heat pumps or ground-source heat pumps can deliver 3 or 4 units of heat for every unit of electricity consumed. They work like back-to-front refrigerators, pumping heat into your house from the outside air. For the rest, whose homes are heated by fossil fuels or biofuels, it’s a good idea to avoid using electrical gadgets as a heat source for your home – at least for as long as our electricity is mainly generated from fossil fuels. The point is, if you use electricity from an ordinary fossil power station, more than half of the energy from the fossil fuel goes sadly up the cooling tower. Of the energy that gets turned into electricity, about 8% is lost in the transmission system. If you burn the fossil fuel in your home, more of the energy goes directly into making hot air for you." -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
#12
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs intoclimate/energy scrap
David Hansen wrote:
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:32:13 +0100 someone who may be The Natural Philosopher wrote this:- Especially since contraction and convergence features in the article quite significantly. Nice try. However, in the 13MB download from http://www.withouthotair.com, which is the book we are discussing, it is only mentioned once. That one mention is, "If we subscribe to the idea of ‘contraction and convergence’, which means that all countries aim eventually to have equal per-capita emissions, then Britain needs to get down from its current 11 or so tons of CO2 per year per person to roughly 1 ton per year per person by 2050. This is such a deep cut, I suggest the best way to think about it is ‘no more fossil fuels’." I haven't read it, but a quick skim has already raised some points. I wonder how those who have promoted this book will react to the following extract from it? "Mythconceptions "'There is no point in my switching off lights, TVs, and phone chargers during the winter. The 'wasted' energy they put out heats my home, so it’s not wasted.' "True for a few people, and only during the winter. False for most. If your house is being heated by electricity through ordinary bar fires or blower heaters then, yes, it’s much the same as heating the house with any electricity-wasting appliances. But if you are in this situation, you should change the way you heat your house. Electricity is high-grade energy, and heat is low-grade energy. It’s a waste to turn electricity into heat. Heaters called air-source heat pumps or ground-source heat pumps can deliver 3 or 4 units of heat for every unit of electricity consumed. They work like back-to-front refrigerators, pumping heat into your house from the outside air. For the rest, whose homes are heated by fossil fuels or biofuels, it’s a good idea to avoid using electrical gadgets as a heat source for your home – at least for as long as our electricity is mainly generated from fossil fuels. The point is, if you use electricity from an ordinary fossil power station, more than half of the energy from the fossil fuel goes sadly up the cooling tower. Of the energy that gets turned into electricity, about 8% is lost in the transmission system. If you burn the fossil fuel in your home, more of the energy goes directly into making hot air for you." I have already pointed that out to the author: that if electric heating from non fossil is the least carbon way to heat, saving electricity that generates heat is less relevant. His points, that in fact heatpumps are even better, and that inadvertently gernerating heat which may *not* be where you want it, when you want it, is valid: we agree to differ on this. Its not a huge pont though. As he says. a lot of littles make a little. A complete switch to CFL bulbs probably saves far less than e.g. cutting out one bath a week or somesuch or just going to Tescos once a forthinght instead of twice a week. |
#13
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
saw this and thought...Heavyweight physics prof weighs intoclimate/energy scrap
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 03:32:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I am flattered, but would have liked SOME acknoweldgement;-)..or is it that ultimately the facts speak for themselves and the answer is indeed plain to see to anyone who does the research and is actually able to do basic arithmetic. Maybe a Cambridge Physics Prof is capable of thinking for himself and doing the research and maths without help from Natural Philosophers? Maybe he hasn't actually read your stuff? Maybe he hasn't even heard of you? Maybe you shouldn't be flattered? ;-) -- John Stumbles Xenophobia? Sounds a bit foreign to me. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Open Letter to Prof. Andrew George, University of DENVER, Dept ofPhysics, COLORADO, 80208 USA. | UK diy | |||
what's the diffirent between lightweight and heavyweight jointcompound??? | Home Repair | |||
Experience with Grizzly sliding router table and the MCLS HeavyWeight? | Woodworking | |||
Where do prof. repairers get parts? | Electronics Repair |