Unofficial Off Topic Thread

[sk47]

Hello; Every now and then a new to me aspect of the green energy disaster has some light shed about it. The linked article starts out with a farmer from NSW (New South Wales I am guessing) complaining as to how the interview he made with a news outfit was so edited that it did not convey his message. Then it get to something new to me which I have quoted below about BPA. Caught me eye as BPA is the chemical banned from water bottles for some time now.

There are other interesting bits in the story
Farmer Grant Piper slams ABC for 'hiding the truth' about wind turbines, claiming it selectively edited a 7.30 story (msn.com)
“'There's over a thousand turbines listed at the moment in the projects, each one of those is over 2,000 tonnes of concrete in its base, 600 tonnes of steel in the tower... plus I don’t know how many tonnes of carbon fibre and epoxy in the blades,' he said.

Mr Piper said the wind turbines will shed particles of Bisphenol A, the chemical used in the making of polycarbonate plastics for the wind turbine blades, also commonly referred to as BPA.

BPA is an endocrine disruptor and so that is going to erode over the life of those turbines and distribute fine BPA all over the country and into the waterways,' Mr Piper claimed.

'So what’s that going to do to the fertility and the health of livestock and the health of people ... but they don’t want to talk about [that].'

Whether wind turbines shed BPA particles that can harm fertility in people and animals remains a hot topic of debate among advocates and opponents of renewable power.

Mr Piper maintains that in the future BPA will be regarded in the same way as asbestos is now.

'The blades erode over time but the tips are going 300 or 400 miles an hour and they erode,' he told Daily Mail Australia.

'All that dust and particles, you couldn’t think of a better way to spread it over land”

Sponsored

 

[sk47]

Here's What the Inside of Your Engine Looks Like When It's Overfilled With Oil (msn.com)

 

[sk47]

Mom, 28, forced to sell her dream car after forking out $40,000 in INTEREST alone over three years - as America's auto debt spirals to $1.6 TRILLION (msn.com)

Hello; I have been hearing of plus $1,000 car payments for a while. This story is a new low for something. Did the dealer explain things and she went ahead anyway or did the dealer just plain take some sort of advantage?

 

[sk47]

North Carolina State Highway Patrol Debuts Fleet of 5.0-liter V8 Ford Mustang GT Pony Cars (msn.com)

 

[sk47]

CDC warns bird flu has 'pandemic potential' (msn.com)

Hello; For real or a hyped up crisis?

 

[HoosierDaddy]

German court rules robots must be given Sundays off

https://reason.com/2024/05/10/brickbat-robots-day-of-rest/

 

[sk47]

German court rules robots must be given Sundays off

https://reason.com/2024/05/10/brickbat-robots-day-of-rest/

Hello; From a human worker 's point of view this sort of makes sense. When robots can make burgers and fries then $20/hour min wages wont matter either.

 

[sk47]

Man shares 'staggering' statistics highlighting major issues with cars: 'An indictment of how far we [haven't come]' (msn.com)

Hello; This is a quick read. The main point is made with lots of blinders on. I do not have information to dispute the stats presented. The damage from cars may be just what is presented. Among other possible counter arguments might be something like cars are become necessary parts of modern life. Regardless of the problems associated with cars we cannot just do away with them.
If agriculture machinery, heavy transport trucks, Heavy commercial equipment and such are thrown in as part of cars they are vital and not just a convenience.

 

[sk47]

California Senate Passes Bill Requiring Passive Speed Limiters (msn.com)

Hello; Hope the warning chimes are pleasant.

 

[sk47]

Motor Oil Age Doesn’t Matter as Much as Mileage: Study (msn.com)
Hello; had to read this carefully Find the title both true and slightly misleading. Seems the story was about a bottle of oil over ten years old. Seems the bottle of oil had sat around half empty for years .
The oil was tested and found to be within specs. For reasons i could not previously justify this is what I have thought to be true for many years. I have loaded up on oil when I find it on sale. I also sometimes have that oil around for years before i use it.

I think oil was tested with low miles from vehicles and i confess some skepticism that mileage is more important than age in a running motor. I change the oil once a year even with very low miles. I try to run a vehicle at least once a week for 15 miles but often fall short of 3000 miles in a year. Low mileage I have long thought leaves combustion byproducts sitting around in the oil for days. Weeks or months in some cases. My once a week minimum for 15 or more miles is to heat up oil enough to drive off some volatiles. Even better is a longer drive from time to time.

Additives are in oil and one such is meant to trap combustion byproducts. Likely less now with Fuel injection than with older carbs, some fuel can get into the oil. Also, some water condensation during sitting. Seems to me best to change out the oil at least once a year.
Had a customer back when i was doing work on the side. Had a 1972 Porsche 911 T. I did some work on it and got it running. I changed the oil and filter at the same time. has a dry sump so took a lot of oil. Had to go get it running again a few years later. Among other things ask about the oil change. He did not want it changed as he had only put around 900 miles on it in nearly three years. To me a false economy. Sure, nine or ten quarts of good oil cost and 900 miles are not a lot, but once a year regardless.

For those who store a car for the winter a fresh oil change the day of seems the way to go.

 

[sk47]

It’s Crunchtime for a New Generation of Climate Startups (msn.com)

Hello; However fanciful they may be, I get there is a feel-good aspect to being involved in a save the planet agenda. Should the treads of the steps to the goal also prove to be sound there could be a book ends sort of satisfaction at the end.
Of course there often are pesky reality checks to endure. The notion of revising millennia old ways of doing things so they fit the agendas and as well doing so in a hurry might have stumbling blocks. I speak of cement. Used back in Roman times.

The article seems to imply changing the world can be hard. Might burn up a lot of money. Might have a lot of failures. Two parts of the tale stand out to me. Both related. Building on a swampy/boggy area and the presence of an endangered species. They stand out because by definition folks out to save the planet ought to be environmentalists. Swamps being one of the vital habitats we are and have been losing to industrialization for some time maybe ought to have been on their radar.

Do I need to comment on the presence of an endangered species with regard to environmentalism. I almost began to suspect the startup got in a hurry so as to get a chunk of the monies on the table. Almost but not quite.

My questions will be does the new type of cement hold up and will it be cheaper?

 

[sk47]

Despite climate-change hysterics, weather disasters have decreased (msn.com)



“…study has confirmed what climate realists have been highlighting for some time: Natural and climate-related disasters have been declining rather than increasing during the 21st century.”

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Do I need to comment on the presence of an endangered species with regard to environmentalism.

No.

Besides, we wouldn't exist if other species hadn't unselfishly perished.

 

[sk47]

No.

Besides, we wouldn't exist if other species hadn't unselfishly perished.

Hello; A different and interesting way to look at it.

 

[sk47]

Study finds natural climate variability impacts Arctic and global warming (msn.com)

“When comparing model simulations of Earth's recent warming to real-world observations, differences can arise from several factors, including model errors in the simulated response to increased greenhouse gases and natural fluctuations within the climate system.”

"The cause of observed cooling over the tropical eastern Pacific and Southern Ocean in the last few decades is a hotly debated topic in climate science. This study provides compelling evidence that the natural variability could be largely responsible for the observed cooling over these regions," said Qiang Fu, a professor and co-author of the publication from UW.”

“The team concluded that although more research is needed to fully attribute the causes of modeled-versus-observed differences in the pattern of global surface air temperature change, the identified pattern of internal variability and its similarity to features imprinted on the observational record suggests that natural climate variability did indeed reduce global warming and enhance Arctic warming over 1980–2022.”



Hello my comments; I and a few others have from time to time posted about how computer generated climate models on which much of the global warming agendas are based do not match real world observations. This study appears to offer a way to explain these differences away. I am not ready to accept the premise just yet.

Back a century or few the science of the time was sure the earth was the center of the universe. That the sun and planets orbited around Earth was the accepted thing. There was a problem with observed movements of two planets. Mercury & Venus. When carefully observed they appeared to move backward for a time then suddenly speed ahead. This was observed by many of the time and not a mistake. In fact, it still happens to earth based observers.

The scientists made models similar to those you might see in classrooms of the solar system today. They had a problem. How to make a model which demonstrated how Mercury and Venus went backward while orbiting the earth. Well at least one was made and was still around maybe 25 years ago. Has a name I forget. I saw a video of the thing. Made of metal and loaded with complicated arrangements to show the effect. I can only guess if the makers were truly satisfied, but it stuck and helped keep the dogma of the time alive. A fellow named Burke had one in a film series decades ago.

I cannot say these climate models today are basically flawed as that earth centered planet model was. I tend to think some of todays modern climate model makers believe they are working from basic facts just as the earth centered scientists did many years ago. Of course, we now understand the earth is not the center of everything even in the solar system. Put the sun at the center and a solar system model works out just fine.

I suspect whatever basic flaws, if any, exist in our understanding of natural climate change is as drastic as flaw as the earth centered model idea was. So I still question these climate models.



Enough from me.

Sponsored