"Currently, oil shale extraction and processing require several barrels of water for each barrel of oil produced, though some of the water can be recycled." See http://ostseis.anl.gov/guide/oilshale/index.cfm I am not sure if Shell's new in-situ process requires as much water. -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 2:00 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Global Warming - The Main Issues

Don can answer this, a newspaper article said it currently takes 2 barrels of water for every barrel of oil from the shale deposits. Is this true?

Just a note on oil shale. It will take far too much energy just to

extract oil from shale. And even worse, it will use up precious water sources we cannot afford to use in the process.

Jon

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

You guys are all on the wrong track. Alchemy and the perpetual-motion-machine are the future of humanity's energy needs.

These are all “Chuckisms” that Chuck said would never make it on a UA thread. But in light of the huge interest in global worming conceder some of Chuck’s projects:   Sundial with glow-in-the-dark gnomon, so it can be used at night Turn that old outhouse into a personal observatory Solar-powered telescope drive Wind-powered telescope drive Bio-diesel-powered telescope drive Ice scraper for refractors Adding A Fireplace To Your Observatory   A couple of books he mentioned:   Float-tube Astronomy Winter Astronomy:  Long Underwear and Short Telescopes   And one prophecy he made about what it will be like in the days we didn’t listen to all the sooth slayers about global warming   "You shall wander the Pit 'n Pole for 40 days and 40 nights, and not know the stars, with only a plastic bottle of warm apple juice to slake your thirst"   Maverik 7:11   Jim --- On Mon, 3/9/09, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote: From: Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Global Warming - The Main Issues To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Date: Monday, March 9, 2009, 4:05 PM You guys are all on the wrong track. Alchemy and the perpetual-motion-machine are the future of humanity's energy needs. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

I generally use a neutral density filter but a nice adjustable polarizer does the trick as well ;-) Dave On Mar 9, 2009, at 5:53 PM, Patrick Wiggins wrote:

Trying to lighten the moon on UA,

patrick

See http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/ And a short summary of Roy Spencer's research http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-natural-or-manmade/

Don,

I looked at both you links thanks. I have not seen what they think the cause of the Middle Ages warming was. The graph did appear to be slanting upward, it will be interesting to see what happens in next five years. If it ticks up again it seems that will indicate gradual warming. Not using tree-ring data does seem valid but it does not contain much data of upper atmosphere vs lower atmospheric temperatures. Still the question remains what would have happened in middle ages if man was putting the gases in the air we are today. Would man have been adversely affected if our population numbers of today existed then. It seems premature to claim man can't effect it. IE: Increasing Greenhouse Gases unchecked for next 50 years. If extreme warming can occur period (with or without mans influence), shouldn't we a least plan for the future? Some of what Plan B calls for. I am interested in your opinion on Oil Shale. Can it be practical to produce a lot of Oil? or: Do the water demands dictate that it can be developed only on a very limited basis? Erik See

http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-background-articles/2000-years-of -global-temperatures/

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Don J. Colton Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:39 AM To: 'Utah Astronomy' Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Latest Global Temperature Data

See http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

And a short summary of Roy Spencer's research http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-natural-or-manmade/

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

Don,

I am not sure I agree with cap and trade, I do think encouraging people to use solar and wind in their home construction would not affect people who can't afford homes. I heard the proclamation by CORE their concerns should be addressed, I remember their objectivity had some room for question. Lower natural gas, electric, and gasoline demand might benefit the poor as well as increased supply (using alternatives could do both). In the near future, much more can be done to reduce demand. I was being on the conservative side of water use for oil shale. Some sources have said it is a high as 3-4 times the water per barrel of oil, still in the range of "several". I do agree it should be explored, but I do want the government to be careful what they allow. The Colorado River water is all ready being over alloted. Back to middle ages. Are we/you saying global temps were much higher then than today? What happened to the ice sheets? Did they melt to the same extent they are today? How did polar bears survive that? (accepting they were likely hunted less then) Thanks for the respectful replies, Erik Erik,

Water is a major problem with current techniques for oil shale production, but if in-situ methods can be used and much of the water recycled, than it may not be as much of a problem. I certainly would want any oil shale production to be done in the most environmentally friendly way possible. It is something that deserves careful and reasonable consideration since we have potential recoverable oil shale reserves in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming of over one trillion barrels - more than the total Middle East conventional reserves.

"Still the question remains what would have happened in middle ages if man was putting the gases in the air we are today. Would man have been adversely affected if our population numbers of today existed then."

I don't know. But I think we need an open and complete debate about the causes and mechanisms of climate change. In Monday's Wall Street Journal they interviewed many prominent people about global warming including Al Gore on one side and Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic on the other. Klaus, who was trained as an economist, stated: " As a person who spent almost 50 years of his life in a communist country, I know how crazy it is to introduce schemes like cap and trade and similar ideas, how devastating and damaging for the economy all those ideas really are." And "I am afraid that a serious debate about the issue (global warming) has not yet started. What we are witnessing are monologues, a conference of believers in (manmade) global warming. The debate has not yet started. Nevertheless, I'm afraid the politicians have already accepted the idea, understood that it's a good political project, and now things are moving in a way which I consider extremely dangerous. He then adds, " But I would like to make one thing clear, lets really differentiate the protection of the environment from the debate about global warming and decarbonizing the economy. I am not against the protection of the environment. I am against global-warming alarmism. Those are conceptually, structurally, two totally different issues."... "To win an argument you must have a potential place to argue, but I am afraid that does not exist anymore. And to speak of scientific consensus about global warming, it's not true. To speak about a very strong relationship between carbon dioxide and the temperature in the world, again, not true. And I am really frustrated, I must say."

The proposals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will hurt the poor the most as Roy Inniss, National Chairman, Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), has been proclaiming. Lower energy costs correlate with people getting out of poverty worldwide, while high energy cost force many into poverty and even starvation. The cap and trade proposals will substantially drive up energy prices worldwide. Let's have a real debate about the causes of climate change before spending trillions to fight a problem that may not exist.

Don

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:00 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Another Historical Temperature Graph

...

Don,

I looked at both you links thanks. I have not seen what they think the cause of the Middle Ages warming was. The graph did appear to be slanting upward, it will be interesting to see what happens in next five years. If it ticks up again it seems that will indicate gradual warming. Not using tree-ring data does seem valid but it does not contain much data of upper atmosphere vs lower atmospheric temperatures.

Still the question remains what would have happened in middle ages if man was putting the gases in the air we are today. Would man have been adversely affected if our population numbers of today existed then. It seems premature to claim man can't effect it. IE: Increasing Greenhouse Gases unchecked for next 50 years. If extreme warming can occur period (with or without mans influence), shouldn't we a least plan for the future? Some of what Plan B calls for.

I am interested in your opinion on Oil Shale. Can it be practical to produce a lot of Oil? or: Do the water demands dictate that it can be developed only on a very limited basis?

Erik

See

...

http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-background-articles/2000-years-of

...

-global-temperatures/

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Don J. Colton Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:39 AM To: 'Utah Astronomy' Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Latest Global Temperature Data

See http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

And a short summary of Roy Spencer's research http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-natural-or-manmade/

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

Polar Bear survival is not a good topic for this list, although I hear environmentalist pointing to them as likely lost in Global Warming, we will see. It is safe to say they are being stressed, extinction may not be a forgone conclusion, although...The Ice Sheets are important habitat for Polar Bears. Perhaps this is just an example of how more fragile are ecosystems are today than during the middle ages.

I visited a Viking Museum in Copenhagen, they were impressive. Perhaps the polar bears feed of the dead bodies they left in their wake. What was the level of the Oceans at the time? One of the things Al Gore (forgive me) says is that we should be in period of cooling rather than warming. IE: We have interrupted the natural cycle because we are not cooling substantially. Erik Erik,

"What happened to the ice sheets? Did they melt to the same extent they are today?

Yes, the ice sheets melted. It is my understanding that Greenland was more habitable during the Middle Ages than it is today so that would very likely be the case.

Greenland From Wikipedia , " At that time, the inner regions of the long fjords where the settlements were located were very different from today. Excavations show that there were considerable birch woods with birch trees up to 4 to 6 meters high in the area around the inner parts of the Tunuliarfik- and Aniaaq-fjords, the central area of the Eastern settlement, and the hills were grown with grass and willow brushes. This was due to the medieval climate optimum. The Norse soon changed the vegetation by cutting down the trees to use as building material and for heating and by extensive sheep and goat grazing during summer and winter. The climate in Greenland was much warmer during the first centuries of settlement but became increasingly colder in the 14th and 15th centuries with the approaching period of colder weather known as the Little Ice Age." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Greenland Also, see the temperature graph taken from deep ice cores in the middle of the article.

How did polar bears survive that?"

All of the current species obviously survived but some, unknown to us, species may have perished.

" The most telling impacts of climate change on polar bears have been noted in western Hudson Bay, where declines in their body condition, reproduction, and survival have resulted in a 22% reduction in subpopulation size between 1987 and 2004."

'The evidence for climate change affects on polar bears is not definitive. The definitive effects will come when subpopulations disappear. The status of the various subpopulations of polar bears varies widely: Some are in decline due to climate change effects, and others are not showing any indications of change. The effects of climate change can differ in space and time, but only two or three subpopulations are monitored adequately to be able to confirm long-term trends in abundance and thus provide some insight into what may befall the species over a broader area." See http://www.actionbioscience.org/environment/derocher.html

Don

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:17 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Another Historical Temperature Graph

...

Don,

I am not sure I agree with cap and trade, I do think encouraging people to use solar and wind in their home construction would not affect people who can't afford homes. I heard the proclamation by CORE their concerns should be addressed, I remember their objectivity had some room for question. Lower natural gas, electric, and gasoline demand might benefit the poor as well as increased supply (using alternatives could do both). In the near future, much more can be done to reduce demand.

I was being on the conservative side of water use for oil shale. Some sources have said it is a high as 3-4 times the water per barrel of oil, still in the range of "several". I do agree it should be explored, but I do want the government to be careful what they allow. The Colorado River water is all ready being over alloted.

Back to middle ages. Are we/you saying global temps were much higher then than today? What happened to the ice sheets? Did they melt to the same extent they are today? How did polar bears survive that? (accepting they were likely hunted less then)

Thanks for the respectful replies, Erik

Erik,

...

Water is a major problem with current techniques for oil shale production, but if in-situ methods can be used and much of the water recycled, than it may not be as much of a problem. I certainly would want any oil shale production to be done in the most environmentally friendly way possible. It is something that deserves careful and reasonable consideration since we have potential recoverable oil shale reserves in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming of over one trillion barrels - more than the total Middle East conventional reserves.

"Still the question remains what would have happened in middle ages if man was putting the gases in the air we are today. Would man have been adversely affected if our population numbers of today existed then."

I don't know. But I think we need an open and complete debate about the causes and mechanisms of climate change. In Monday's Wall Street Journal they interviewed many prominent people about global warming including Al Gore on one side and Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic on the other. Klaus, who was trained as an economist, stated: " As a person who spent almost 50 years of his life in a communist country, I know how crazy it is to introduce schemes like cap and trade and similar ideas, how devastating and damaging for the economy all those ideas really are." And "I am afraid that a serious debate about the issue (global warming) has not yet started. What we are witnessing are monologues, a conference of believers in (manmade) global warming. The debate has not yet started. Nevertheless, I'm afraid the politicians have already accepted the idea, understood that it's a good political project, and now things are moving in a way which I consider extremely dangerous. He then adds, " But I would like to make one thing clear, lets really differentiate the protection of the environment from the debate about global warming and decarbonizing the economy. I am not against the protection of the environment. I am against global-warming alarmism. Those are conceptually, structurally, two totally different issues."... "To win an argument you must have a potential place to argue, but I am afraid that does not exist anymore. And to speak of scientific consensus about global warming, it's not true. To speak about a very strong relationship between carbon dioxide and the temperature in the world, again, not true. And I am really frustrated, I must say."

The proposals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will hurt the poor the most as Roy Inniss, National Chairman, Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), has been proclaiming. Lower energy costs correlate with people getting out of poverty worldwide, while high energy cost force many into poverty and even starvation. The cap and trade proposals will substantially drive up energy prices worldwide. Let's have a real debate about the causes of climate change before spending trillions to fight a problem that may not exist.

Don

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:00 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Another Historical Temperature Graph

...

Don,

I looked at both you links thanks. I have not seen what they think the cause of the Middle Ages warming was. The graph did appear to be slanting upward, it will be interesting to see what happens in next five years. If it ticks up again it seems that will indicate gradual warming. Not using tree-ring data does seem valid but it does not contain much data of upper atmosphere vs lower atmospheric temperatures.

Still the question remains what would have happened in middle ages if man was putting the gases in the air we are today. Would man have been adversely affected if our population numbers of today existed then. It seems premature to claim man can't effect it. IE: Increasing Greenhouse Gases unchecked for next 50 years. If extreme warming can occur period (with or without mans influence), shouldn't we a least plan for the future? Some of what Plan B calls for.

I am interested in your opinion on Oil Shale. Can it be practical to produce a lot of Oil? or: Do the water demands dictate that it can be developed only on a very limited basis?

Erik

See

...

http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-background-articles/2000-years-of

...

...

-global-temperatures/

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Don J. Colton Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:39 AM To: 'Utah Astronomy' Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Latest Global Temperature Data

See http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

And a short summary of Roy Spencer's research http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-natural-or-manmade/

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

Don,

With ice melting, will not more cold water enter the currents? I have heard a theory that arctic ice melt would temporally lower some ocean temps but this will only be temporary. IE: massive flow of colder water could mean a snowier europe for a few years. There will always be oscillations in temps with the solar cycles and between winter and summer, but both highs and lows will be warmer. Is it not also true that oceans have much more stable temperatures? Denmark is more temperate than it should be for being so far north. The original graph he shows (that you provided indicated higher lows and higher highs, meaning rising baselines and therefore overall warming. It seems it depends on time frames. I doubt there will be unquestionable proof, for all, about Global Warming. When we get to that point we could be in real trouble. We can take steps to abate the trend now, I admit they could hurt some (decreased profits) but would benefit others. Did not the standards that came out of the 70's and 80's improve air and water quality? The mini ice age is a bit of misnomer right? In real ice ages, glaciation was present through most of North America. Right? Erik "One of the things Al Gore (forgive me) says is that we should be in

period of cooling rather than warming. IE: We have interrupted the natural cycle because we are not cooling substantially."

I am skeptical about being in a cooling cycle up until 2000, because of the relatively high level of solar activity and The concept of Pacific Decadal Oscillation. However, we may be entering into a cooling cycle.

See the PDO Index Chart at http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-background-articles/the-pacific-d ecadal-oscillation/

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 7:00 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Another Historical Temperature Graph

...

Polar Bear survival is not a good topic for this list, although I hear environmentalist pointing to them as likely lost in Global Warming, we will see. It is safe to say they are being stressed, extinction may not be a forgone conclusion, although...The Ice Sheets are important habitat for Polar Bears. Perhaps this is just an example of how more fragile are ecosystems are today than during the middle ages.

I visited a Viking Museum in Copenhagen, they were impressive. Perhaps the polar bears feed of the dead bodies they left in their wake.

What was the level of the Oceans at the time?

One of the things Al Gore (forgive me) says is that we should be in period of cooling rather than warming. IE: We have interrupted the natural cycle because we are not cooling substantially.

Erik

Erik,

...

"What happened to the ice sheets? Did they melt to the same extent they are today?

Yes, the ice sheets melted. It is my understanding that Greenland was more habitable during the Middle Ages than it is today so that would very likely be the case.

Greenland From Wikipedia , " At that time, the inner regions of the long fjords where the settlements were located were very different from today. Excavations show that there were considerable birch woods with birch trees up to 4 to 6 meters high in the area around the inner parts of the Tunuliarfik- and Aniaaq-fjords, the central area of the Eastern settlement, and the hills were grown with grass and willow brushes. This was due to the medieval climate optimum. The Norse soon changed the vegetation by cutting down the trees to use as building material and for heating and by extensive sheep and goat grazing during summer and winter. The climate in Greenland was much warmer during the first centuries of settlement but became increasingly colder in the 14th and 15th centuries with the approaching period of colder weather known as the Little Ice Age." See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Greenland Also, see the temperature graph taken from deep ice cores in the middle of the article.

How did polar bears survive that?"

All of the current species obviously survived but some, unknown to us, species may have perished.

" The most telling impacts of climate change on polar bears have been noted in western Hudson Bay, where declines in their body condition, reproduction, and survival have resulted in a 22% reduction in subpopulation size between 1987 and 2004."

'The evidence for climate change affects on polar bears is not definitive. The definitive effects will come when subpopulations disappear. The status of the various subpopulations of polar bears varies widely: Some are in decline due to climate change effects, and others are not showing any indications of change. The effects of climate change can differ in space and time, but only two or three subpopulations are monitored adequately to be able to confirm long-term trends in abundance and thus provide some insight into what may befall the species over a broader area." See http://www.actionbioscience.org/environment/derocher.html

Don

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:17 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Another Historical Temperature Graph

...

Don,

I am not sure I agree with cap and trade, I do think encouraging people to use solar and wind in their home construction would not affect people who can't afford homes. I heard the proclamation by CORE their concerns should be addressed, I remember their objectivity had some room for question. Lower natural gas, electric, and gasoline demand might benefit the poor as well as increased supply (using alternatives could do both). In the near future, much more can be done to reduce demand.

I was being on the conservative side of water use for oil shale. Some sources have said it is a high as 3-4 times the water per barrel of oil, still in the range of "several". I do agree it should be explored, but I do want the government to be careful what they allow. The Colorado River water is all ready being over alloted.

Back to middle ages. Are we/you saying global temps were much higher then than today? What happened to the ice sheets? Did they melt to the same extent they are today? How did polar bears survive that? (accepting they were likely hunted less then)

Thanks for the respectful replies, Erik

Erik,

...

Water is a major problem with current techniques for oil shale production, but if in-situ methods can be used and much of the water recycled, than it may not be as much of a problem. I certainly would want any oil shale production to be done in the most environmentally friendly way possible. It is something that deserves careful and reasonable consideration since we have potential recoverable oil shale reserves in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming of over one trillion barrels - more than the total Middle East conventional reserves.

"Still the question remains what would have happened in middle ages if man was putting the gases in the air we are today. Would man have been adversely affected if our population numbers of today existed then."

I don't know. But I think we need an open and complete debate about the causes and mechanisms of climate change. In Monday's Wall Street Journal they interviewed many prominent people about global warming including Al Gore on one side and Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic on the other. Klaus, who was trained as an economist, stated: " As a person who spent almost 50 years of his life in a communist country, I know how crazy it is to introduce schemes like cap and trade and similar ideas, how devastating and damaging for the economy all those ideas really are." And "I am afraid that a serious debate about the issue (global warming) has not yet started. What we are witnessing are monologues, a conference of believers in (manmade) global warming. The debate has not yet started. Nevertheless, I'm afraid the politicians have already accepted the idea, understood that it's a good political project, and now things are moving in a way which I consider extremely dangerous. He then adds, " But I would like to make one thing clear, lets really differentiate the protection of the environment from the debate about global warming and decarbonizing the economy. I am not against the protection of the environment. I am against global-warming alarmism. Those are conceptually, structurally, two totally different issues."... "To win an argument you must have a potential place to argue, but I am afraid that does not exist anymore. And to speak of scientific consensus about global warming, it's not true. To speak about a very strong relationship between carbon dioxide and the temperature in the world, again, not true. And I am really frustrated, I must say."

The proposals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will hurt the poor the most as Roy Inniss, National Chairman, Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), has been proclaiming. Lower energy costs correlate with people getting out of poverty worldwide, while high energy cost force many into poverty and even starvation. The cap and trade proposals will substantially drive up energy prices worldwide. Let's have a real debate about the causes of climate change before spending trillions to fight a problem that may not exist.

Don

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:00 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Another Historical Temperature Graph

...

Don,

I looked at both you links thanks. I have not seen what they think the cause of the Middle Ages warming was. The graph did appear to be slanting upward, it will be interesting to see what happens in next five years. If it ticks up again it seems that will indicate gradual warming. Not using tree-ring data does seem valid but it does not contain much data of upper atmosphere vs lower atmospheric temperatures.

Still the question remains what would have happened in middle ages if man was putting the gases in the air we are today. Would man have been adversely affected if our population numbers of today existed then. It seems premature to claim man can't effect it. IE: Increasing Greenhouse Gases unchecked for next 50 years. If extreme warming can occur period (with or without mans influence), shouldn't we a least plan for the future? Some of what Plan B calls for.

I am interested in your opinion on Oil Shale. Can it be practical to produce a lot of Oil? or: Do the water demands dictate that it can be developed only on a very limited basis?

Erik

See

...

http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-background-articles/2000-years-of

...

...

...

-global-temperatures/

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Don J. Colton Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:39 AM To: 'Utah Astronomy' Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Latest Global Temperature Data

See http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/

And a short summary of Roy Spencer's research http://www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-natural-or-manmade/

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

Not a T-bone Pickens fan, I am sure he thinks he can profit from it. Wind, Solar, Tidal can all be used to stop increasing of use of fossil fuel. I would keep turbines well away from migratory bird corridors. I do have fond memories of seeing huge flocks of geese and ducks along the Mississippi Fly Way in the fall. I think T-Bone's corridor is well west of the Missouri Fly Way, let him build it with his own money. We do need to devise ways to keep birds away.

His plan would benefit Gas Companies by creating high demand for natural gas at greater cost to the consumer (heating their homes).. T-Bone does not accept Global Warming though, although he does point out the other reasons why we should use renewable sources. Erik T. Boone Pickens, as mentioned, is heavily promoting large scale wind

farms in the Midwest. The biggest two problems that wind energy has is unreliability and the amount of area required.

Four nuclear reactors like those of Comanche Peak in Texas would use 4,000 acres to produce the same amount of energy as wind turbines occupying 456 square miles, six time the size of the metropolitan Washington, D.C. area. To produce as much energy as one modern coal fired power plant would require a wind farm the size of Los Angeles according to Scott Tinker, head of the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas. Wind turbines would have to be supplemented with natural gas turbines to cover downtime and low wind conditions.

T. Boone Pickens understands these realities but thinks that much of the Midwest cropland could be utilized for dual purpose crops and wind turbines. Many farmers who have agreed to wind turbines on their property complain about the noise and the unsightliness of the wind turbines. I personally think they look cool but I am not sure I would feel that way if they littered the landscape.

Are we willing to fill a large portion of the country with wind turbines or should aggressively star building nuclear power plants as France has?

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

It ain't the efficiency of nuclear that I'm worried about...it's that pesky spent fuel thing: From Wiki: As of 2007, the United States had accumulated more than 50,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel from nuclear reactors. Underground storage at Yucca Mountain in U.S. has been proposed as permanent storage. After 10,000 years of radioactive decay, according to United States Environmental Protection Agency standards, the spent nuclear fuel will no longer pose a threat to public health and safety. Thats only 400 generations give or take. What do they say? If they can't take a joke... Dave On Mar 11, 2009, at 7:09 PM, Patrick Wiggins wrote:

Still, until the efficiency of wind catches up with nuclear, I've no problem with nuclear.

Don,

Then why is Europe trying to ship theirs to us? Why don't they store theirs on site? Erik Dave,

The disposal is not a major problem if we allow reprocessing of spent fuel rods on site. What is left is low level radioactive materials that can be stored on site. The problem is the US is unwilling to allow the reprocessing of spent fuel rods because of terrorism concerns about the plutonium produced. See http://www.chemcases.com/nuclear/nc-13.htm With Obama closing the Yucca site reprocessing makes the most sense but the facilities must be carefully guarded.

Don

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Dave Bennett Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:30 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Wind Energy

It ain't the efficiency of nuclear that I'm worried about...it's that pesky spent fuel thing:

From Wiki: As of 2007, the United States had accumulated more than 50,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel from nuclear reactors. Underground storage at Yucca Mountain in U.S. has been proposed as permanent storage. After 10,000 years of radioactive decay, according to United States Environmental Protection Agency standards, the spent nuclear fuel will no longer pose a threat to public health and safety.

Thats only 400 generations give or take. What do they say? If they can't take a joke...

Dave

On Mar 11, 2009, at 7:09 PM, Patrick Wiggins wrote:

...

Still, until the efficiency of wind catches up with nuclear, I've no problem with nuclear.

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

Don,

I think of the problem we are having Iran. As I understand one of the "recycling" scenarios is the production of weapons grade material. Am I wrong, is that not where much of our weapons grade material come from right? It seems somewhat to get to the issue of proliferation as well. Are we going to tell other countries they cannot develop it? Enough said. Erik "Then why is Europe trying to ship theirs to us? Why don't they store

theirs on site?"

I think most of this is coming from Italy and is considered low and intermediate level waste. Low level waste is from such things as medical uses and can be handled safely with only minimal precautions. Intermediate is more dangerous and requires special handling. Some of this comes from Nuclear Reactors. Most countries do not reprocess like France does.

There are real concerns about reprocessing see http://www.carnegieendowment.org/events/?fa=eventDetail&id=1136&prog=zru

See "Why the French Like Nuclear energy" http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html Even with reprocessing there is still a necessity to stockpile or bury some waste. Since Obama is closing Yucca Mountain I am not sure what the U.S. will do.

One short term solution (50-100 years) is to greatly expand natural gas production and uses. It is much more environmentally friendly than coal, oil, ethanol and the only byproducts are water and CO2, but much less CO2 than the other fuels. There is no sulfur or other pollutants. If the U.S. would convert to natural gas vehicles we would dramatically reduce CO2 emissions (assuming that is really a problem). The U.S. has large reserves of natural gas - some off limits due to wilderness areas etc.

Hydrogen cars are also a possibility but the cheapest way to get hydrogen is from natural gas. Hydrogen from water through electrolysis is expensive and takes a lot of energy. If we had abundant nuclear power from fission or in the future from fusion this would be a good way to go.

There are tradeoffs to every kind of energy production except possibly fusion -- too bad Pons and Fleishmann were wrong.

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 9:26 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Wind Energy

...

Don,

Then why is Europe trying to ship theirs to us? Why don't they store theirs on site?

Erik

Dave,

...

The disposal is not a major problem if we allow reprocessing of spent fuel rods on site. What is left is low level radioactive materials that can be stored on site. The problem is the US is unwilling to allow the reprocessing of spent fuel rods because of terrorism concerns about the plutonium produced. See http://www.chemcases.com/nuclear/nc-13.htm With Obama closing the Yucca site reprocessing makes the most sense but the facilities must be carefully guarded.

Don

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Dave Bennett Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:30 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Wind Energy

It ain't the efficiency of nuclear that I'm worried about...it's that pesky spent fuel thing:

From Wiki: As of 2007, the United States had accumulated more than 50,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel from nuclear reactors. Underground storage at Yucca Mountain in U.S. has been proposed as permanent storage. After 10,000 years of radioactive decay, according to United States Environmental Protection Agency standards, the spent nuclear fuel will no longer pose a threat to public health and safety.

Thats only 400 generations give or take. What do they say? If they can't take a joke...

Dave

On Mar 11, 2009, at 7:09 PM, Patrick Wiggins wrote:

...

Still, until the efficiency of wind catches up with nuclear, I've no problem with nuclear.

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

Yes, the heart of the problem. As Nuclear energy use increases so does chance of Nuclear material falls into the wrong hands. I would also add low level waste does have health risks, to the population of Utah if store here.

You look at Pakistan and India and the world has not done a good job containing it. N Korea comes into mind. The power contained in the small size is the problem. Erik That is the problem with reprocessing and why the US hasn't followed

France. I think we can do it safely in the US but we don't want Iran doing it because of the fear they will use the plutonium for weapons.

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 3:21 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Wind Energy

...

Don,

I think of the problem we are having Iran. As I understand one of the "recycling" scenarios is the production of weapons grade material. Am I wrong, is that not where much of our weapons grade material come from right?

It seems somewhat to get to the issue of proliferation as well. Are we going to tell other countries they cannot develop it? Enough said.

Erik

"Then why is Europe trying to ship theirs to us? Why don't they store

...

theirs on site?"

I think most of this is coming from Italy and is considered low and intermediate level waste. Low level waste is from such things as medical uses and can be handled safely with only minimal precautions. Intermediate is more dangerous and requires special handling. Some of this comes from Nuclear Reactors. Most countries do not reprocess like France does.

There are real concerns about reprocessing see http://www.carnegieendowment.org/events/?fa=eventDetail&id=1136&prog=zru

See "Why the French Like Nuclear energy"

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/readings/french.html

...

Even with reprocessing there is still a necessity to stockpile or bury some waste. Since Obama is closing Yucca Mountain I am not sure what the U.S. will do.

One short term solution (50-100 years) is to greatly expand natural gas production and uses. It is much more environmentally friendly than coal, oil, ethanol and the only byproducts are water and CO2, but much less CO2 than the other fuels. There is no sulfur or other pollutants. If the U.S. would convert to natural gas vehicles we would dramatically reduce CO2 emissions (assuming that is really a problem). The U.S. has large reserves of natural gas - some off limits due to wilderness areas etc.

Hydrogen cars are also a possibility but the cheapest way to get hydrogen is from natural gas. Hydrogen from water through electrolysis is expensive and takes a lot of energy. If we had abundant nuclear power from fission or in the future from fusion this would be a good way to go.

There are tradeoffs to every kind of energy production except possibly fusion -- too bad Pons and Fleishmann were wrong.

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@TheBlueZone.net Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 9:26 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Wind Energy

...

Don,

Then why is Europe trying to ship theirs to us? Why don't they store theirs on site?

Erik

Dave,

...

The disposal is not a major problem if we allow reprocessing of spent fuel rods on site. What is left is low level radioactive materials that can be stored on site. The problem is the US is unwilling to allow the reprocessing of spent fuel rods because of terrorism concerns about the plutonium produced. See http://www.chemcases.com/nuclear/nc-13.htm With Obama closing the Yucca site reprocessing makes the most sense but the facilities must be carefully guarded.

Don

-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Dave Bennett Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:30 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Wind Energy

It ain't the efficiency of nuclear that I'm worried about...it's that pesky spent fuel thing:

From Wiki: As of 2007, the United States had accumulated more than 50,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel from nuclear reactors. Underground storage at Yucca Mountain in U.S. has been proposed as permanent storage. After 10,000 years of radioactive decay, according to United States Environmental Protection Agency standards, the spent nuclear fuel will no longer pose a threat to public health and safety.

Thats only 400 generations give or take. What do they say? If they can't take a joke...

Dave

On Mar 11, 2009, at 7:09 PM, Patrick Wiggins wrote:

...

Still, until the efficiency of wind catches up with nuclear, I've no problem with nuclear.

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com

_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://gallery.utahastronomy.com Visit the Wiki: http://www.utahastronomy.com