myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Big Oil and citizenship
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 59, 60, 61 ... 79, 80, 81  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17742
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2016 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's raining here, so I poked around a bit to see what had happened to the story, posted here, that Russian scientists had warned that we are about to face a long period of cooling. You can still find the story on the denier site watts up with that, here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/29/russian-scientists-say-period-of-global-cooling-ahead-due-to-changes-in-the-sun/

My initial question was whether or not their work had finally been published, and what peer reviews had noted. It is always a little suspicious when some breaking story--like the oceans aren't acidic--is pumped up on conservative media. The scientist in question is Yuri Nagovitsyn, and according to some sources he had the 250-500 year cycle starting in 2030 or 2040, when I will almost certain be dead.

Nagovovitsyn published a flurry of papers at the end of 2014. Apparently they didn't put climate science on its ear, as the conservative blog-o-sphere has not chosen to cover them. The one related to the original newspaper article seems to have this abstract:

Yu. A. Nagovitsyn

ABSTRACT: Prolonged variations in the duration of the Schwabe-Wolf (∼11 years) and Suess (∼200 years) cycles have been analyzed using different experimental data. It was shown that the duration of the Schwabe-Wolf cycle on a 2000-year time scale varied monotonically (on average, increasing) and cyclically (with a period of several hundred years); periods of 10.4, 11.0, and 11.4 years predominate on the occurrence frequency histogram. The Suess cycle duration was 200–290 years during the Holocene and tended to increase in the past. This was accompanied by cyclic variations with a period of 2300–2500 years corresponding to the Hallstatt cycle. Arguments for the assumption that the Suess cycle duration decreased by a factor of more than 1.5 over the past half billion years are presented. This may indicate that the solar rotation characteristics and convection zone parameters varied on long time scales during the Sun’s evolution on the main sequence.
Full-text · Article · Nov 2014 · Geomagnetism and Aeronomy

I'm not able to find any direct peer review of the article, but I did stumble across what may be an interesting skeptic site, http://notrickszone.com/250-skeptic-papers-from-2015/#sthash.ko2VwekT.dpbs

There is a very active debate about the role of differences in solar activity and what affect that might have on past and future temperatures. But the driver in climate change since 1750 appears to be greenhouse gases, the increase in solar radiative forcing since 1750 is about 1/20 of that of heat-trapping gases.

So while Nagovitsyn's thesis is definitely not in the crackpot range, there is nothing compelling that I have seen that changes the relative influence of the solar radiation theories to be at all comparable to the heat-trapping theories.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GURGLETROUSERS



Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 2643

PostPosted: Thu Mar 10, 2016 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm pleased you admit that the 'Nagovitsyn Thesis' is not in the crackpot range. Of course he may be mistaken just as the IPCC consensus has not infrequently been wrong in some of their predictions, but that Nagovitsyn thesis (announced through the Academy spokesman) was what originally 'lit up my day' so to speak, when I stumbled upon it in the sceptical press. (Who else would have gleefully published it!)

Neither of us will live to see its 30 year ahead start play out, but should anybody be surprised that the 'settled science consensus' would huff and puff a bit at such a 'slap in their face.'

It may just turn out to be a damp squib, (the odds are in favour of the consensus being right) but some of us just really hope ......
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17742
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm,Rockefeller Family fund to divest in Exxon--because they are morally reprehensible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17742
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Fri Apr 08, 2016 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here they go again. Corporate citizenship and responsibility at work. Have we seen this kind of arrogance associated with the oil industry here?

Quote:
Ex-Occidental CEO, Wife Trafficked Domestic Workers: Suit
Ray Irani, the former chairman of Occidental Petroleum Corporation, and his philanthropist wife imposed brutal work hours on three live-in housekeepers from the Philippines at their Bel Air mansion, trafficking two of the women via Qatar, a Tuesday suit in California state court alleges.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17742
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2016 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Citizens at work:

Quote:
Fifteen years after blackouts swept the state, a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission judge has found that a division of Shell Oil engaged in fraud and market manipulation during California’s energy crisis, with company traders joking on tape about burning the evidence if they were ever caught.


I will leave it to NW to defend the indefensible--fraud by yet another oil company. If corporations be citizens, some of these should be in jail, needing to watch their back when the go to take a shower. Good buddies of mrgybe?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 12:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well mac if you really insist, only because you think that "big oil" is nothing but pure evil.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Half the weight of a normal motor and 107 miles to the gallon: Oil giant Shell claims Project M concept is the car of the future
>Vehicle gas been penned by former McLaren F1 designer, Gordon Murray
>Car weighs just 550kg and is made from recycled carbon fibre
>Tiny 660cc engine mounted at the back can return 107mpg at 45mph

By Rob Hull For Thisismoney.co.uk

Published: 07:19 EST, 23 April 2016 | Updated: 07:24 EST, 23 April 2016

Shell reckons it has designed the car of the future - but the jury is out whether British motorists will agree. The Project M, dubbed an 'energy efficient concept car', was revealed on Friday.

Made up of a three-seat city-car design and a 660cc powerplant that can achieve a claimed 107mpg, it's based on an F1-derived platform that's already well tested.

The space-age shape is the brain child of former McLaren F1 designer Gordon Murray.

In fact, very little from the outside of the Shell Project M differs to that of Murray's 2010 original, called the T25.

With a one-plus-two seat layout (one at the front and two at the back), it's a reasonably comfortable city vehicle for three, even though it has a road footprint no more than a quarter that of a Ford Mondeo.

And don't assume because it's tiny it's unsafe; the T27, an updated version of the T25 with an electric motor, passed Euro NCAP's high-speed crash tests in 2011.

The 'iStream' design, now in its third guise as part of the Shell partnership, is now more fuel efficient thanks to a bespoke engine lubricant.

Tipping the scales at 550kg, it's half as heavy as a conventional city car and 80kg lighter than the original T25 - that's around the same as removing the weight of an adult male.

The featherweight is even green, made from recycled carbon-fibre composite body panels and a tubular frame while additional steps have been taken to improve the aerodynamics of the iStream silhouette.

The 600cc petrol engine has also been updated with less friction for greater efficiency, helped by a new formula of lubricant - this is where Shell comes in.

The prototype 'Helix' Ultra low viscosity oil works with a bespoke transmission fluid to deliver a 5 per cent economy improvement on its own, the oil colossus claims.

This, added to the slimmed-down weight and better aeordynamics provides a 107mpg return when travelling at a steady speed of 45mph.

Mark Gainsborough, executive vice-president of Shell’s global lubricants businesses which backed the project said, 'This is a significant automobile engineering milestone.

'I’m very proud of what Shell’s scientists and their partners at Geo Technology and Gordon Murray Design have achieved.

'Insights gained from this project could be transformational in terms of how we address energy use in the road transport sector. Energy use and climate change are major issues for society.

'This project shows that if we use the best of today’s technology, including cutting edge lubricants science, we could potentially have a major impact on energy use and reduce CO2 emissions.'

But despite Gainsborough's words of excitement, don't expect to see a Project M on the road anytime soon.

Dr. Andrew Hepher from Shell said the vehicle will be used to showcase the technology and features it uses rather than being put into production.

'Our car may be small, but it’s packed with potential,' he added.

'We want to accelerate the conversation about how we make road vehicles more energy efficient and less carbon-intensive.

'In the coming weeks and months, we look forward to sharing our research insights from this project with engine designers, car manufacturers, academics and other experts across the automotive sector.'


Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-3555146/Oil-giant-Shell-claims-Project-M-concept-car-future.html#ixzz46fpJSMEy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17742
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No comment on Shell's fraud in California eh NW. But now you're stoked about their high mileage vehicle? Such vehicles have been around since 1959--see the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=II1_Vg8dP64

or just read the reports.

http://www.treehugger.com/cars/souped-down-1959-opel-t-1-gets-37659-mpg.html

No curiosity as to who funded Shell's research, or why a company that makes more money the more gas they sell has ignored the technology since 1959?

But to bust your bubble that only corporations can make exciting things happen, I've been saving this one:
Quote:
US government agency says it has attained the “holy grail” of energy – the next-generation system of battery storage, that has has been hotly pursued by the likes of Bill Gates and Elon Musk.

Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (Arpa-E) – a branch of the Department of Energy – says it achieved its breakthrough technology in seven years.

Ellen Williams, Arpa-E’s director, said: “I think we have reached some holy grails in batteries – just in the sense of demonstrating that we can create a totally new approach to battery technology, make it work, make it commercially viable, and get it out there to let it do its thing,”

If that’s the case, Arpa-E has come out ahead of Gates and Musk in the multi-billion-dollar race to build the next generation battery for power companies and home storage.


From liquid air to supercapacitors, energy storage is finally poised for a breakthrough
Read more
Arpa-E was founded in 2009 under Barack Obama’s economic recovery plan to fund early stage research into the generation and storage of energy.

Such projects, or so-called moonshots, were widely seen as too risky for regular investors, but – if they succeed – could potentially be game-changing.

Many of the projects fostered by the agency were already in sight of getting funding, Williams said. Several have now secured private sector follow-on funding. Others are being taken up by the State Department or the Pentagon, she said.

But the biggest breakthrough is in the area of energy storage. “I think that’s one area where we have delivered big time,” Williams told the Guardian.


http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/03/us-agency-says-has-beaten-elon-musk-gates-to-holy-grail-battery-storage

I hope you enjoyed paying for the Shell fraud that you tried to divert attention from.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

God, how I love making you work. But you asked.
You take your distain for "big oil" as a real job, so that you can say that you helped save the Earth. Bravo....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 9:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac said:
Quote:
No curiosity as to who funded Shell's research, or why a company that makes more money the more gas they sell has ignored the technology since 1959?


The Opel was an entry in a contest sponsored by Shell. I guess the real question should be: Why didn't the car manufacturers take the lead in developing the technology? I can see why shell wasn't a huge supporter of high mileage cars at the time, but put the blame where it belongs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17742
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Techno--no matter how much you and NW dodge, Shell appears to have committed fraud during California's energy crisis, and Volkswagen committed fraud with their software for diesel's. People are either honest or they are not, and systematic behavior like that reflect a culture of dishonesty within a corporation--as does Exxon's systematic misrepresentation of climate research.

That doesn't mean that all corporations, or all areas within corporation, are dishonest. Modern advances in agriculture have dramatically reduced hunger in the country, a good thing. But when you turn decisions over to the sales force, you get fast food and sweetened beverage advertising that is contributing to an epidemic of obesity.

As to why the car companies didn't market highly efficient cars? Asked and answered multiple times--because there were higher profits with bigger cars. Bigger profits with cars they called trucks, to take advantage of lower emission standards. The same thing happened to the housing construction business--the big housing firms in California concentrated on higher end, buy-up housing because profits were greater. They didn't worry that they were producing fewer units than people were asking for--that kept the market tight and prices high.

Oh my god, you mean the market is not perfect?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 59, 60, 61 ... 79, 80, 81  Next
Page 60 of 81

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group