Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.
Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
 Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.




Fundamentals: A deafening silence on GBF about this...

Bottom of Page

1 to 30 of 31

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. >
    • CommentAuthorJoiner
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    • CommentAuthorowlman
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Feasable or not, on balance the technology has to be tried. Renewables can't satisfy all the needs, nuclear seems taboo, changing attitudes is like pi--ing into the wind, and increasing worldwide prosperity just pushes up demand. If global warming is for real and its major cause is mankind's activities, there can only be one conclusion; we're sleepwalking into extinction, it wont be the first time a species has dissapeared, it happens all the time, we're nothing special.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Caught the end of it last night, Woman's Hour is on at moment :wink:
    • CommentAuthorJoiner
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    What?! The threat of domination by women is more important than climate change???!!!
    • CommentAuthorJoiner
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Or, if you're a woman...

    What?! Getting tips on dominating men is more important than climate change???!!!

    (Phew.)
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Right, listened to it, nothing really new. The bit at the beginning about if it is there we will burn it is so true.
    As I was driving back from the seaside yesterday I wondered about all the stored carbon in the fields and hedgerows and thought that if we compressed it all down and dumped it in the deep ocean then that could help. Shall let others work out how much can be stored as I get confused with plants.

    I am sure Woman's Hour has a tip or two on CC and how it is all men's fault!
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    On that sad level, whose fault is Population Explosion?
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Any ideas on how green builders can capture their own emissions? Apart from planting trees as they don't really sequester it for long enough.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Not mine, no kids :bigsmile:
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    <blockquote><cite>Posted By: SteamyTea</cite> As I was driving back from the seaside yesterday I wondered about all the stored carbon in the fields and hedgerows and thought that if we compressed it all down and dumped it in the deep ocean then that could help. </blockquote>

    That would take land and energy to compress and transport. It's easier to grow plants in the sea and then sink them. This is exactly the idea behind seeding the oceans with iron...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    A recent edition of NS looked at other ways to stop sea levels rising. Including making the oceans deeper by dredging or digging holes in the land to put the excess water in. Desperate times call for all ideas to be considered.
    • CommentAuthorJTGreen
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010 edited
     
    Posted By: SteamyTeaNot mine, no kids


    Well, as the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement would say "Vasectomy prevents abortion". Well done on your far-sightedness and committment never to reproduce. Now, if only we could figure out a way to bring your CO2 emissions somewhere close to that of someone in Kerala....
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010 edited
     
    If we had a hosepipe long enough to reach up beyond stationary orbit height, then centrifugal force would syphon the water out into space. And generate hydroelectric power in the process. Discuss.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Posted By: fostertomDiscuss

    Would need to know the Reynolds Number of the pipe.
    Were you just listening to Stanley Baxter moving Loch Lomond by any chance :bigsmile:
  15.  
    *cough* escape velocity *cough* - the centripetal force of the earth's rotation is way less than this, only about 0.05 m/s2 (which one can observe already by traversing from the equator to either of the poles). To get water to escape from the earth, it has to have an acceleration greater than the gravitational force of about 9.8m/s2 - this is why rockets use such a huge amount of energy to get satellites into orbit etc.

    http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/A/accgrav.html

    Paul in Montreal.
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    I'm out of my depth on this but do remember idea to shift goods to a beyond-stationary-orbit space station by means of a rather high-rise lift. As the lift car rises, it needs to be pulled by suspension cable from above, but once beyond stationary orbit altitude, it's accelerating outward and is pulling up by susp cable the next lift car below. Same goes for the lift shaft structure - it's effectively suspended from above. The limitation is to find materials that can withstand such fantastic tensile stress, but no energy is needed to lift the goods. And the goods can be loaded into a space ship that never has to enter or escape from earth gravity.
    • CommentAuthorJoiner
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Ha ha ha. Ask a silly question!

    And there was cynical old me thinking it was a case of a bunch of scientists saying things that some people considered too negative to be worth addressing. I suppose taking the piss out of something is one way of marginalising it.

    And hearing on the programme that "recent" research had established that the costs of CCS were likely to be 300% greater than forecast, silly me thought that was news. Ear too far from the ground, obviously.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Posted By: fostertombeyond-stationary-orbit space station


    Think was was a story by Arthur C Clarke, The Fountains of Paradise.
    Just bought a second hand copy of Jerry Pournelle's, A Step Further Out. read it in '79, and after a very quick skim though it still holds true in a lot of places.

    Not much new under the sun.
    • CommentAuthorJoiner
    • CommentTimeOct 1st 2010
     
    Well, whilst the conclusion of the programme was that there was room for hope for CCS as at least part of a possible solution, the realisation that the 85% reduction to reach the hoped for max of +2 degrees by 2050 was a whistle in the wind, and that Greenpeace's expectation (granted without CCS - so what do they know?) was for an achievement of just 50% (= +3 degrees), I personally worry that too much time and far too much expense is being targeted on ideals, rather than investing in things (tried and tested technology like nuclear) that will buy the world the time to develop practicable environmental strategies.

    Ah well.
    • CommentAuthorBrightgreen
    • CommentTimeOct 2nd 2010 edited
     
    Yeah, I listened to the prog too, Joiner. Reminded me that it's probably not a good idea to invest in lowland properties as SLR will be built into governmental planning henceforward. Quietly, sure, but well we cant really afford serious climate protection, can we? Without cheap electricity how could we compete in the great global marketplace? Did someone say something about an age of Stupidity?

    Seeding, by the way, will like as not not work for a number of reasons, but essentially because the algae rot and the carbon is released again. None ever reaches the deep sea bed, so at best the carbon just reaches the deeper water flows on their way back to the sea surface. As for dredging, my goodness that is desperate if marginally poetic. Like using a thimble to empty an outside swimming pool in a rainy region.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeOct 3rd 2010
     
    Posted By: BrightgreenWithout cheap electricity how could we compete in the great global marketplace?

    We have already done this is the UK but changing from a manufacturing economy to a service economy. Still room for improvement and better division of labour but as a nation surely this is heading in the right direction. Does not help the global problem mind.


    Posted By: Joinertime to develop practicable environmental strategies.

    I agree, use the resources that we have at our disposal (carefully chosen word) to build a better future. The practicalities of who should do the most is the interesting bit for the social scientists. Should it be at a personal level, national level or a global level. I can reduce my CO2 emissions but that will not even register at the regional level (possibly at the street level, the thimble to empty a swimming pool).

    Posted By: Joinermax of +2 degrees by 2050


    Posted By: Joiner50% (= +3 degrees)

    This is, in isolation, not a problem as migration can 'sort the problem' as some places will become more habitable/farmable.
    As an 'island race' we have a social problem with migration 'what is mine is mine, what is yours is ours', we don't mind using others resources but hate to share ours.

    Posted By: Joiner300% greater than forecast

    Pournelle's Law, 'things will take longer and cost more', funny how he has cropped up twice in a thread.
    • CommentAuthorJoiner
    • CommentTimeOct 3rd 2010
     
    LOL, ST.

    Does anyone know the symbol for wishful-thinking?

    If there isn't one, may I suggest the question mark?

    Its insertion in the formulae used as the basis for future energy policies might make them more realistic. Well, perhaps not realistic. Meaningful might be a better word. Or perhaps 'cautious'. Or maybe...
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeOct 3rd 2010
     
    Could you this "¿" or TB (short for Talking Bollocks)
    • CommentAuthorJoiner
    • CommentTimeOct 3rd 2010
     
    Nah, looks too much like a QWERTY smiley.
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeOct 3rd 2010
     
    Posted By: SteamyTea
    Posted By: Joiner50% (= +3 degrees)

    This is, in isolation, not a problem as migration can 'sort the problem' as some places will become more habitable/farmable.


    Is it 3 degrees total or 3 degrees every 100 years?
    • CommentAuthorowlman
    • CommentTimeOct 3rd 2010
     
    I guess it's the arithmetic mean. With some places more, some less. How it's arrived at ......???
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeOct 3rd 2010
     
    It is the the anomalies rise above the 1960-90 global mean trend and for this century. And must be stressed that it is only a model based on current knowledge and assumptions.
  28.  
    So far the models have been wrong anyway
    • CommentAuthorrhamdu
    • CommentTimeOct 3rd 2010
     
    There is a nice piece in New Scientist which suggests that burying CO2 in the ground is rather unambitious, and we should be looking for ways to recycle it.

    For example there is a new kind of cement made from magnesium silicate which generates less CO2 when it is manufactured, and can actually absorb some CO2 when it is used. Currently the cement industry generates 5% of world CO2 emissions - more than aviation.

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727791.100-emission-control-turning-carbon-trash-into-treasure.html
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeOct 3rd 2010
     
    Latest news is that in the past a 2C warming appears to have caused a 6-9 meter sea level rise...

    http://www.middevonstar.co.uk/news/8427034.Exeter_scientists_publish_climate_change_warning/

1 to 30 of 31

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. >
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press