Climate in the 21st Century

Will Humankind see the 22nd Century?

  • Not a fucking chance

    Votes: 43 29.1%
  • Maybe. if we get our act together

    Votes: 36 24.3%
  • Yes, we will survive

    Votes: 69 46.6%

  • Total voters
    148

Mephisto666

Well-Known Member
It is the extreme weather events that will push the change to the point of economic sanctions for noncompliance and even war, doing shit about climate change will no longer be optional for countries.
I'm Irish, a race who are noted for they're seeming affinity to finding something miserable to fixate on/write/sing about and climate change makes me very sad now, which makes me serene knowing that we all are fucked.
The way I see the world in general is admittedly bleak, because of growing up and still existing in a very violent place made me pessimistic about the future and that violence is growing more intense, not even remaining static.
My thought at that moment after reading you post was that everyone ganging up on that offender, would at best starve them into submission, or more likely be the impetus for a military action. either one taking a pretty long time to have any effect.
So, thinking I know a little bit about human nature after being around on Earth for forever it seems to me, I just don't see economic sanctions working fast enough to stave off our annihilation on Earth from the effects of climate change.
I guess war would have to be the answer to that quandary, which is the usual response in cases like this one.
But I don't think either one is a viable option really, is it?
 

Mephisto666

Well-Known Member
Yep.
That 50 to 100 years isn't long in our 300,000 years?
Sure, but i think ive already won the bet by looking at the previous line.
But how many mass extinctions have occurred over that time?
It seems that we're heading in the right direction to be another one.
The scientists who have been sounding alarms for the last 40 years tell us that we simply don't have 100 years to have any effect on climate, more like 30 at the max before we go off the cliff and I just don't see any reason to doubt them,
 

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
But how many mass extinctions have occurred over that time?
It seems that we're heading in the right direction to be another one.
The scientists who have been sounding alarms for the last 40 years tell us that we simply don't have 100 years to have any effect on climate, more like 30 at the max before we go off the cliff and I just don't see any reason to doubt them,
Lots.
Yes it does. Sooner or later humans will have to be drastically reduced in numbers. But the earth will go on and id suggest that humans will survive. Probably in smaller numbers and maybe only thrive in isolated places. For the Earth thats not a bad thing.
I'm not doubting them. In fact my island is trying to show the world how to adapt now. Not in 5 years time but now. We are Carbon negative. Ask your politicians and industry why your island isn't?
 
Last edited:

Mephisto666

Well-Known Member
you just joined here and yet all your posts are politics. wonder what drawer you came from?
I don't understand your asking me what drawer I came from, but I assume by the tone that it is an insult and that sentiment is shared by more than a few here in this thread. .
As far as why I am mostly here on this thread, it is because the topic is interesting to me and I like to read the comments and sometimes respond to ones that I would like to discuss further,
And I actually spent some time in Newbies last night and even tried to help one lost soul that appreciated my help and actually gave me a thumbs up, which was nice and my 1st.
So, seeing that I'm apparently an annoyance here and I really don't want to be that or be insulted, I will leave this thread to all of you, and you can all be relieved and sleep well again.
Enjoy
 

sunni

Administrator
Staff member
I don't understand your asking me what drawer I came from, but I assume by the tone that it is an insult and that sentiment is shared by more than a few here in this thread. .
As far as why I am mostly here on this thread, it is because the topic is interesting to me and I like to read the comments and sometimes respond to ones that I would like to discuss further,
And I actually spent some time in Newbies last night and even tried to help one lost soul that appreciated my help and actually gave me a thumbs up, which was nice and my 1st.
So, seeing that I'm apparently an annoyance here and I really don't want to be that or be insulted, I will leave this thread to all of you, and you can all be relieved and sleep well again.
Enjoy
it is very unlikely for someone to come in here and use politics on their first go 9/10 times it has been a sock which means a secondary user, which we dont allow.

it is not a insult.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
These simple cheap batteries are great for providing days of base load power but don't react well to spikes in demand, however they have started using supercapacitors with them to dramatically increase peaking performance. Other kinds of batteries can react to peak demands too and these systems can greatly increase the efficiency of even a standard grid and could store days' worth of renewable power too.

 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Concurrent condition, more like. A thriving socialist society does not happen after liberal democracy, but during/within it.
If you don't have a liberal democracy as a foundation and capitalism as a technological wellspring, you won't have the necessary conditions for socialism to arise. If the economy is for the benefit of all the people, they have to vote for it first and a large majority has to agree with the new economic system, even if it is only incrementally implemented over time. Naturally there will be resistance to this in a liberal democratic society, the rich have rights too. Money which buys power all too often and the ability to shape public opinion, in some cases, it lies to, and brain washes enough morons.

If there were no political corruption or con artists exploiting peoples character flaws against them and media moguls manipulating them, then America would be a lot more left than it is. The fact is the brown people might get some too and it's better for most white Americans to starve before they let that happen. It's like a bad divorce from an asshole, they would rather burn the house down than give it to their wife and kids.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
If you don't have a liberal democracy as a foundation and capitalism as a technological wellspring, you won't have the necessary conditions for socialism to arise. If the economy is for the benefit of all the people, they have to vote for it first and a large majority has to agree with the new economic system, even if it is only incrementally implemented over time. Naturally there will be resistance to this in a liberal democratic society, the rich have rights too. Money which buys power all too often and the ability to shape public opinion, in some cases, it lies to, and brain washes enough morons.

If there were no political corruption or con artists exploiting peoples character flaws against them and media moguls manipulating them, then America would be a lot more left than it is. The fact is the brown people might get some too and it's better for most white Americans to starve before they let that happen. It's like a bad divorce from an asshole, they would rather burn the house down than give it to their wife and kids.
Precondition suggests socialism displacing liberal democracy. That’s what I’m saying is not correct; it’s the defunct idea of history as dialectic.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Precondition suggests socialism displacing liberal democracy. That’s what I’m saying is not correct; it’s the defunct idea of history as dialectic.
It does not replace it, but the economic system will evolve into it when machines do most of the work. Liberal democracy and the rule of law form the foundation for a more just society and that is what we are really talking about. Who else is gonna tax the billionaires and rebalance the economy if not the voting public, politicians are often corrupted by money and if they don't lie, cheat and use culture war to distract from the main issues, they would be quickly addressed. Liberal means they have a free press to tell them the truth, but that too is being abused by money and for profit as well as to spread social division. Gridlock is the only way they can survive these days and just two democratic senators are causing most of the gridlock and preventing solutions to basic problems, even if things can get through Kevin's corrupt house.

We are talking about two different things a liberal democracy is a political system and socialism is an economic system that does not work very well in its pure form and capitalism tends to corrupt government in any form. A basic fact of psychology is that people will work 3 to 5 times harder to hold onto what they have, than to make any gains, so taxing the rich is hard.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Get the efficiency up to 20% and the cell life up to 20 years then we will be talking! I can see meter wide rolls of this stuff with a self-adhesive backing being sold, unroll it and cut it along the marked lines. It would even be useful for powering some lightweight solar cars or at least supplementing their range and roll out solar panels for camping and emergency use. Recent breakthroughs in the longevity of these kinds of solar panels with simple additives could make it happen.

 

printer

Well-Known Member
Get the efficiency up to 20% and the cell life up to 20 years then we will be talking! I can see meter wide rolls of this stuff with a self-adhesive backing being sold, unroll it and cut it along the marked lines. It would even be useful for powering some lightweight solar cars or at least supplementing their range and roll out solar panels for camping and emergency use. Recent breakthroughs in the longevity of these kinds of solar panels with simple additives could make it happen.

"The big problem has been that a lot of these crystals aren't especially stable and will break down into raw materials over time. And that time can be as little as weeks to months for some of the more promising materials. There has been some progress in extending their lifespan, but we're still not at the point where it makes sense to manufacture perovskite panels.

The big problem is that the devices are horrifically short-lived. Even the most stable device made by the first group had dropped to 80 percent of its original efficiency after just 66 hours of exposure to sunlight. The second was somewhat better, managing to reach 347 hours before dropping below 80 percent. Assuming 12 hours of sunlight a day, however, that translates to less than a month of use, which is terrible."

"Despite its great potential, perovskite solar cell technology is still in the early stages of commercialization compared with other mature solar technologies as there are a number of concerns remaining.

One problem is their overall cost (for several reasons, mainly since currently the most common electrode material in perovskite solar cells is gold), and another is that cheaper perovskite solar cells have a short lifespan. Perovskite PVs also deteriorate rapidly in the presence of moisture and the decay products attack metal electrodes. Heavy encapsulation to protect perovskite can add to the cell cost and weight. Scaling up is another issue - reported high efficiency ratings have been achieved using small cells, which is great for lab testing, but too small to be used in an actual solar panel.

A major issue is toxicity - a substance called PbI is one of the breakdown products of perovskite. This is known to be toxic and there are concerns that it may be carcinogenic (although this is still an unproven point). Also, many perovskite cells use lead, a massive pollutant. Researchers are constantly seeking substitutions, and have already made working cells using tin instead. (with efficiency at only 6%, but improvements will surely follow)."
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
"The big problem has been that a lot of these crystals aren't especially stable and will break down into raw materials over time. And that time can be as little as weeks to months for some of the more promising materials. There has been some progress in extending their lifespan, but we're still not at the point where it makes sense to manufacture perovskite panels.

The big problem is that the devices are horrifically short-lived. Even the most stable device made by the first group had dropped to 80 percent of its original efficiency after just 66 hours of exposure to sunlight. The second was somewhat better, managing to reach 347 hours before dropping below 80 percent. Assuming 12 hours of sunlight a day, however, that translates to less than a month of use, which is terrible."

"Despite its great potential, perovskite solar cell technology is still in the early stages of commercialization compared with other mature solar technologies as there are a number of concerns remaining.

One problem is their overall cost (for several reasons, mainly since currently the most common electrode material in perovskite solar cells is gold), and another is that cheaper perovskite solar cells have a short lifespan. Perovskite PVs also deteriorate rapidly in the presence of moisture and the decay products attack metal electrodes. Heavy encapsulation to protect perovskite can add to the cell cost and weight. Scaling up is another issue - reported high efficiency ratings have been achieved using small cells, which is great for lab testing, but too small to be used in an actual solar panel.

A major issue is toxicity - a substance called PbI is one of the breakdown products of perovskite. This is known to be toxic and there are concerns that it may be carcinogenic (although this is still an unproven point). Also, many perovskite cells use lead, a massive pollutant. Researchers are constantly seeking substitutions, and have already made working cells using tin instead. (with efficiency at only 6%, but improvements will surely follow)."
There have been some recent breakthroughs in longevity and other aspects of these cells, and it is starting to show in the commercial interest being generated. A lot of this work can go from the lab to the fab pretty quick and great strides have been made recently in cell longevity. This is just a small sampling of ongoing research and much of it is close to where the rubber meets the road. Companies are starting to invest in this based on recent research and breakthroughs.

I haven't mentioned the prospects of Tandem cells with perovskite as a top blue absorbing layer and silicon absorbing the red end of the spectrum, efficiencies in that realm are approaching 30%.

For instance, gold issues


Lead issues



Manufacturing processes




Radical polymeric p-doping and grain modulation for stable, efficient perovskite solar modules
 

Lucky Luke

Well-Known Member
During July, sea surface temperatures across much of the Mediterranean Sea were as much as 3 degrees Celsius higher than normal, with pockets up to 5.5C above average along the coasts of Italy, Greece and North Africa.

 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Perovskite solar cells have traditionally had several issues the main one being short life spans and the other the lead content, both of these issues have been overcome and there have been other commercially applicable innovations that are quickly changing the prospects of perovskites.

 
Top