Tidal heights changes caused by 18.61 years cycle of lunar 'wobbles'

[webcraft]

No, that's not what I said. But you probably knew that.

I am afraid it is very difficult to guess what you are trying to say.

The fact of the matter is, there are no deleterious environmental consequences of a switch to renewable energy.

- W

 

[lustyd]

Lol, yes, climate change isn't real. It's a bit late for that point of view I'm afraid. The world has moved on, and the smart people are now questioning things rather than just pretending it'll all be OK. It won't.
If you didn't know what I was saying, why did you reply and quote my post before talking about a completely different thing? Seems like you could have just made your own point if you had one since you've confirmed your lack of understanding of my post.

 

[webcraft]

Lol, yes, climate change isn't real. It's a bit late for that point of view I'm afraid. The world has moved on, and the smart people are now questioning things rather than just pretending it'll all be OK. It won't.
If you didn't know what I was saying, why did you reply and quote my post before talking about a completely different thing? Seems like you could have just made your own point if you had one since you've confirmed your lack of understanding of my post.

Your replies make no sense.

- W

 

[Chiara’s slave]

You’re right, Lusty, things won’t be ok. But now you’ve come out and said it, you believe climate change isn’t real, we can at least not bother to argue. We can talk about boats, and get along fine.

 

[lustyd]

I didn't say that, so can only assume you're trying to start an argument for some reason.

 

[Chiara’s slave]

Lol yes, climate change isn’t real. You said it, it’s there, and now quoted too. You’re denying your climate denial. This is getting silly.

 

[lustyd]

So it's not just science you struggle with, literacy is a problem too?

 

[Chiara’s slave]

I think it’s clear to see who wants to argue. And who appears to be on the margins of sanity.

 

[johnalison]

I am afraid it is very difficult to guess what you are trying to say.

The fact of the matter is, there are no deleterious environmental consequences of a switch to renewable energy.

- W

That is true is scientific terms but may or may not be in economic/environmental ones. Money spent on renewable energy has to come from somewhere and if the costs are too high, it might be better for the environment if the same money were spent on energy-saving measures for example, or if invested in new technology such as nuclear energy or, ha ha, fusion energy. My feeling is that we need to invest in all forms of environmental relief, but the balance needs to be worked out.

 

[TSB240]

And I thought this thread was about tidal changes.

I find it unusual that I am anchored a few hundred yards off the Ty Coch Inn and will only have a very short row ashore for lunch at low tide.
Todays low tide is extraordinary being only 1.23M lower than HW.

If this is due to GW bring it on....

Mindfully that all those planned new tidal generators for our area would be at a virtual standstill most of today.

 

[Chiara’s slave]

For better or worse, the current, or any other tides have nothing to do with climate change, or environmental issues or policies. Just a quick wobble from the moon.

 

[Beneteau381]

Since ‘wind’ is simply a slightly co ordinated movement of air molecules, as a sailor you know how chaotic is is, flaws, gusts, direction changes etc, it’s not a question that has a definitive answer. The only certainty is entropy. It finishes up as heat, whatever it does in the interim. If we capture it as electricity, that doesn't change, nor does it get any greater. Eventually it will be heat. In your light bulbs, in the wiring, both local and distribution, in your old Mum's fan heater, whatever. It can be delayed, but not prevented. If we don’t capture it, guess what? It finishes up as heat, by friction with itself and the ground. You can convert thatvheat into whatever you like, with varying degrees of efficiency, and it will find it’s way back to being heat, somehow, somewhere.

As I said, there is none so blind as those that don’t want to see. What is the effect of us pulling energy out of the wind and especially on those down wind of us? Simple eh? Is it effecting wind patterns world wide? The beat of a butterflies wings in Japan etc. Again a simple question worthy of discussion instead of simply doing “it’s my way or the highway”

 

[johnalison]

As I said, there is none so blind as those that don’t want to see. What is the effect of us pulling energy out of the wind and especially on those down wind of us? Simple eh? Is it effecting wind patterns world wide? The beat of a butterflies wings in Japan etc. Again a simple question worthy of discussion instead of simply doing “it’s my way or the highway”

Yes, I agree, and of course it depends on the scale of the operation. On a related subject, I read an article about the effect of forestation/deforestation on wind patterns and climate in America. It was some years ago and I don't remember the details but I think the conclusion was that there had been a measurable effect, or maybe that there was a significant effect calculated from the current tree cover.

 

[Beneteau381]

Yes, I agree, and of course it depends on the scale of the operation. On a related subject, I read an article about the effect of forestation/deforestation on wind patterns and climate in America. It was some years ago and I don't remember the details but I think the conclusion was that there had been a measurable effect, or maybe that there was a significant effect calculated from the current tree cover.

I mean if we take it a step further, the start of a hurricane in the east atlantic, a seemingly innocuous low starts forming and then develops in to something mind boggling, if we want to see terrawatts of energy being concentrated then that is the place to look. If a hurricane can start from a tiny little "thing" randomly formed then the question I am asking and inviting discussion of, is simply, what is the effect of us pulling terrawatts of energy out of the wind downstream or globally of us. Nothing contentious yet some on here use the word "boxxxxs" for daring to ask simple questions and invite civilised discussion.

 

[Beneteau381]

Yes, I agree, and of course it depends on the scale of the operation. On a related subject, I read an article about the effect of forestation/deforestation on wind patterns and climate in America. It was some years ago and I don't remember the details but I think the conclusion was that there had been a measurable effect, or maybe that there was a significant effect calculated from the current tree cover.

I worked in Africa and the Middle East for many years. Angola whereI was showed the effects of mankind using the local bush as an energy source and science says that is how our deserts start. Take out the bush as ground cover and stuff starts to happen.
Equally valid isto question what the effects of us taking energy out of wind are?

 

[SaltyC]

I mean if we take it a step further, the start of a hurricane in the east atlantic, a seemingly innocuous low starts forming and then develops in to something mind boggling, if we want to see terrawatts of energy being concentrated then that is the place to look. If a hurricane can start from a tiny little "thing" randomly formed then the question I am asking and inviting discussion of, is simply, what is the effect of us pulling terrawatts of energy out of the wind downstream or globally of us. Nothing contentious yet some on here use the word "boxxxxs" for daring to ask simple questions and invite civilised discussion.

So, if we place wind farms in the SE Carribean?? at the start of the formation of the Hurricane we will take all the energy out of the system and no Hurricane??

A Win Win I have now retereated to my Nuclear Bunker!

 

[lustyd]

Yes, if you worked at it you probably could take all the energy from a hurricane and prevent it. Yes, that would mean no hurricane. Then you'd need to study the consequences of doing so to determine whether no hurricane is worse than hurricane in the long term. That's the point of understanding this stuff, sometimes you can solve a short term problem and end up killing millions.
Thomas Midgley Jr is a great case study of this if you're interested. He invented CFCs and leaded petrol, both considered miracles at the time and later found to have been the most dangerous actions of the 20th century.

 

[Beneteau381]

Yes, if you worked at it you probably could take all the energy from a hurricane and prevent it. Yes, that would mean no hurricane. Then you'd need to study the consequences of doing so to determine whether no hurricane is worse than hurricane in the long term. That's the point of understanding this stuff, sometimes you can solve a short term problem and end up killing millions.
Thomas Midgley Jr is a great case study of this if you're interested. He invented CFCs and leaded petrol, both considered miracles at the time and later found to have been the most dangerous actions of the 20th century.

And I think that is where we are both coming from, get the info then make informed decisions with the knowledge. I just asked a simple question amd herewe are now.

 

[Bilgediver]

If it's cyclical and been happening for the past few billion years I expect that the mangroves will cope. The headline is a bit alarmist. However, I've seen pontoons perilously close to the top of their retaining poles. There really would be a bit of a kerfuffle if the pontoons broke loose en masse.

Oh they have on occasion and quite a sight drifting away with attached boats all in perfect formation. Might find pictures on Google. I believe it was a combination of high tides and river flooding.

 

[Beneteau381]

Oh they have on occasion and quite a sight drifting away with attached boats all in perfect formation. Might find pictures on Google. I believe it was a combination of high tides and river flooding.

La Rochelle?