Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On 4/16/2023 7:16 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2023 12:11, Frank wrote:
On 4/16/2023 12:57 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 14:00:03 +1000, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Since coal can be made into gasoline, can
natural gas be made into gasoline as well?
You can make any hydrocarbon into any
other hydrocarbon, but whether it makes
sense to do that is a separate issue.
That would also be my answer.
Google \'catalytic cracking\'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_catalytic_cracking
That\'s how they break up heavy oils into lighter fractions.
Going the reverse direction is not used so much.
But still, is used...
http://www.setlab.com/resources/refining/polymerization/
Syn gas from coal might be a better precursor.
On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 8:37:50?AM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 11:58:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 16/04/2023 01:40, Ed P wrote:
The current global average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 421
ppm as of May 2022. This is an increase of 50% since the start of the
Industrial Revolution, up from 280 ppm during the 10,000 years prior to
the mid-18th century. The increase is due to human activity.
And you know this because? That period also coincides with the end of
the little ice age, and we know that mildly warming oceans outgass lots
of CO2 until the organic life catches up with it
CO2 levels have flailed violently over past millions of years, with no
humans around.
Flails remove grain from grasses; CO2 levels have varied, as the Earth
has aged. Those \'ages\', in geological time, are not so short as the
timescale on which human interference has operated on greenhouse gas levels.
Spin doesn\'t save us from dire consequences; real action is required
according to our best information, and real costs of coasting along
without a plan are much greater than the costs of regulating our
atmospheric additive habits.
Get real.
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 21:41:14 +1000, Frank <\"frank \"@frank.net> wrote:
On 4/16/2023 7:16 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2023 12:11, Frank wrote:
On 4/16/2023 12:57 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 14:00:03 +1000, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Since coal can be made into gasoline, can natural gas be made into
gasoline as well?
You can make any hydrocarbon into any other hydrocarbon, but whether
it makes sense to do that is a separate issue.
That would also be my answer.
Google \'catalytic cracking\'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_catalytic_cracking That\'s how
they break up heavy oils into lighter fractions.
Going the reverse direction is not used so much.
But still, is used...
http://www.setlab.com/resources/refining/polymerization/
Syn gas from coal might be a better precursor.
That\'s essentially what fracking is, with the coal left in the ground.
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 16:52:39 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> writes:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 13:00:43 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 11:58:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 16/04/2023 01:40, Ed P wrote:
The current global average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 421
ppm as of May 2022. This is an increase of 50% since the start of the
Industrial Revolution, up from 280 ppm during the 10,000 years prior to
the mid-18th century. The increase is due to human activity.
And you know this because? That period also coincides with the end of
the little ice age, and we know that mildly warming oceans outgass lots
of CO2 until the organic life catches up with it
The last part is key. Organic life uses what\'s there. Things auto-level. Climate change won\'t kill us. Wasting money on stopping it will.
Plants will adapt to using more CO2 to grow faster. Farmers and ag
colleges will breed them to do that.
Up to a very small point, consider:
1) There aren\'t enough plants to absorb excess CO2 at the rate
required to match the current (or future) excess emissions.
2) As mentioned, plants need CO2 to live, but give them too much
and the vital nutrients they produce, become depleted. These
include iron, zinc, and vitamin C.
3) Overall, FACE experiments show decreases in whole plant water
use of 5-20% under elevated CO2. This in turn can have consequences
for the hydrological cycle of entire ecosystems, with soil moisture
levels and runoff both increasing under elevated CO2 (Leakey et al. 2009).
[ed. increasing the potential for flooding, landslides, et alia]
4) Crop concentrations of nutritionally important minerals including
calcium, magnesium and phosphorus may also be decreased under
elevated CO2 (Loladze 2002; Taub & Wang 2008)
5) With elevated CO2, protein concentrations in grains of wheat,
rice and barley, and in potato tubers decreased by 10 to 15 percent
in one study.
https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/effects-of-rising-atmospheric-concentrations-of-carbon-13254108/
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2022/01/27/how-climate-change-will-affect-plants/
100% downside. Sounds improbable to me.
But more CO2 is going to happen. China and India and Africa will see
to that. They aren\'t going to stay poor for our convenience.
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 08:37:34 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 11:58:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 16/04/2023 01:40, Ed P wrote:
The current global average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is
421 ppm as of May 2022. This is an increase of 50% since the start of
the Industrial Revolution, up from 280 ppm during the 10,000 years
prior to the mid-18th century. The increase is due to human activity.
And you know this because? That period also coincides with the end of
the little ice age, and we know that mildly warming oceans outgass lots
of CO2 until the organic life catches up with it
CO2 levels have flailed violently over past millions of years, with no
humans around.
Further, CO2 levels aren\'t well correlated with the projected mean global
temperature when you\'re talking million year periods.
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 17:39:31 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 8:37:50?AM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 11:58:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 16/04/2023 01:40, Ed P wrote:
Get real.
You get real. China and Africa and India want power and they are going to get it, mostly from coal, a lot of that Australian coal.
On 4/16/23 11:42, rbowman wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 08:37:34 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 11:58:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 16/04/2023 01:40, Ed P wrote:
No. The published EPA highway MPG is 35. I typically get a little better
than that, with 41 mpg recorded as the highest.
On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 11:11:27 +1000, Rod Speed wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 21:41:14 +1000, Frank <\"frank \"@frank.net> wrote:
On 4/16/2023 7:16 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2023 12:11, Frank wrote:
On 4/16/2023 12:57 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 14:00:03 +1000, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Since coal can be made into gasoline, can natural gas be made into
gasoline as well?
You can make any hydrocarbon into any other hydrocarbon, but whether
it makes sense to do that is a separate issue.
That would also be my answer.
Google \'catalytic cracking\'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_catalytic_cracking That\'s how
they break up heavy oils into lighter fractions.
Going the reverse direction is not used so much.
But still, is used...
http://www.setlab.com/resources/refining/polymerization/
Syn gas from coal might be a better precursor.
That\'s essentially what fracking is, with the coal left in the ground.
Depends on what is meant by syngas. Coal gas is a mixture of hydrogen and
carbon monoxide, making it a favorite of suicides.
They had to find
something else when the switchover to natural gas occurred. Natural gas
from fracking is mostly methane.
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 17:39:31 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Spin doesn\'t save us from dire consequences; real action is required
according to our best information, and real costs of coasting along
without a plan are much greater than the costs of regulating our
atmospheric additive habits.
Get real.
You get real. China and Africa and India want power and they are going
to get it, mostly from coal, a lot of that Australian coal. Your
driving your Tesla won\'t change the temperature one nanokelvin.
On 4/16/23 11:42, rbowman wrote:
Further, CO2 levels aren\'t well correlated with the projected mean global
temperature when you\'re talking million year periods.
And somehow, the opposite of the propaganda narrative
of the Alarmists, the Earth did not become Venus.
On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 11:46:09 +1000, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Tue, 18 Apr 2023 11:11:27 +1000, Rod Speed wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 21:41:14 +1000, Frank <\"frank \"@frank.net> wrote:
On 4/16/2023 7:16 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 16/04/2023 12:11, Frank wrote:
On 4/16/2023 12:57 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 14:00:03 +1000, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Since coal can be made into gasoline, can natural gas be made into
gasoline as well?
You can make any hydrocarbon into any other hydrocarbon, but whether
it makes sense to do that is a separate issue.
That would also be my answer.
 Google \'catalytic cracking\'.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_catalytic_cracking That\'s how
 they break up heavy oils into lighter fractions.
Going the reverse direction is not used so much.
 But still, is used...
 http://www.setlab.com/resources/refining/polymerization/
Syn gas from coal might be a better precursor.
That\'s essentially what fracking is, with the coal left in the ground.
Depends on what is meant by syngas. Coal gas is a mixture of hydrogen and
carbon monoxide, making it a favorite of suicides.
Coal gas is never called syngas.
They had to find
something else when the switchover to natural gas occurred. Natural gas
from fracking is mostly methane.
On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 6:23:51?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 17:39:31 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Spin doesn\'t save us from dire consequences; real action is required
according to our best information, and real costs of coasting along
without a plan are much greater than the costs of regulating our
atmospheric additive habits.
Get real.
You get real. China and Africa and India want power and they are going
to get it, mostly from coal, a lot of that Australian coal. Your
driving your Tesla won\'t change the temperature one nanokelvin.
China has terrible air pollution.
India has the same.
Both have no plan to continue with coal indefinitely, and both are
well aware of the downsides of burning.
China\'s final ratification of the Paris accord was 3 September 2016,
and India\'s was 2 October 2016.
https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-d&chapter=27&clang=_en
Africa... isn\'t a nation, it\'s a continent, so it isn\'t gonna be as easy to
show that the Larkin blather is wrong on all counts. It\'s clearly not right
on all counts, though.
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 23:24:07 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 6:23:51?PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 17:39:31 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Spin doesn\'t save us from dire consequences; real action is required
according to our best information, and real costs of coasting along
without a plan are much greater than the costs of regulating our
atmospheric additive habits.
Get real.
You get real. China and Africa and India want power and they are going
to get it, mostly from coal, a lot of that Australian coal. Your
driving your Tesla won\'t change the temperature one nanokelvin.
China has terrible air pollution.
India has the same.
Both have no plan to continue with coal indefinitely, and both are
well aware of the downsides of burning.
Propaganda. China is building two new coal power plants a week.
China\'s final ratification of the Paris accord was 3 September 2016,
and India\'s was 2 October 2016.
https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-d&chapter=27&clang=_en
Signing treaties is cheap.
Africa... isn\'t a nation, it\'s a continent, so it isn\'t gonna be as easy to
show that the Larkin blather is wrong on all counts. It\'s clearly not right
on all counts, though.
Coal is the major energy source in Africa. Look it up.
Africa has the world\'s lowest per-capita energy use, and that makes
people poor. Fortunately Africa has a lot of natural gas resources,
which China apparently does not. Or more likely, China has a lot of NG
that hasn\'t been discovered or exploited yet.
On 17/04/2023 17:02, rbowman wrote:
No. The published EPA highway MPG is 35. I typically get a little
better than that, with 41 mpg recorded as the highest.
https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/toyota/yaris-2011