Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #321  
Old 12.10.2007, 07:52
BeastOfBodmin's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 875
Groaned at 3 Times in 2 Posts
Thanked 352 Times in 230 Posts
BeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
A video of Governator Schwarzenegger talking before the UN assembly:

(Requires Real Player)
http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/ondeman...6&end=00:44:07

...not sure whether England has met it's Kyoto targets yet though
UK is nowhere near. Based on the DoE's own figures, the trend has been flat for a while, even slightly upwards.
Reply With Quote
  #322  
Old 12.10.2007, 13:17
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Al Gore and the IPCC win the nobel peace prize.

I think he truly deserves it.

Link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7041082.stm
Reply With Quote
  #323  
Old 12.10.2007, 13:24
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Al Gore and the IPCC win the nobel peace prize.

I think he truly deserves it.

Link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7041082.stm
I'm sure he'll get the most votes, but probably still lose
Reply With Quote
  #324  
Old 12.10.2007, 13:26
Natasha's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Anton am Arlberg, Austria
Posts: 2,736
Groaned at 61 Times in 57 Posts
Thanked 3,248 Times in 1,167 Posts
Natasha has a reputation beyond reputeNatasha has a reputation beyond reputeNatasha has a reputation beyond reputeNatasha has a reputation beyond reputeNatasha has a reputation beyond reputeNatasha has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
facetious
I love that word
Reply With Quote
  #325  
Old 24.10.2007, 08:09
Colonelboris's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southampton, UK
Posts: 1,137
Groaned at 17 Times in 17 Posts
Thanked 1,273 Times in 671 Posts
Colonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Looks like my post on the Moon and fusion isn't so wibble as it sounded:
Global Warming - what's behind it?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7059356.stm

So we now have the ESA, NASA, China, Japan and India all looking at the Moon very seriously.
Reply With Quote
  #326  
Old 24.10.2007, 21:10
Lou's Avatar
Lou Lou is offline
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Zurich
Posts: 3,778
Groaned at 9 Times in 9 Posts
Thanked 3,227 Times in 1,474 Posts
Lou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

I've never really bought into man made global warming, yes the climate is changing but I can't really see how we could do it (I do still think we should take all the measures to prevent it because I don't like the idea of the polution etc). Anyway to get to the point on the BBC this morning was a scientist who was talking about the possibilities of extinction with the rises in temperature that are forcast by climatoligists, he then goes on to say this is because they can see the evidence from previous "greenhouse" periods in the fossil record. Now forgive me if I am wrong but there are no human fossils so we couldn't have been there to create these other greenhouse periods. The corresponding article on the web can be found here.
__________________
“Photography is a way of feeling, of touching, of loving. What you have caught on film is captured forever… It remembers little things, long after you have forgotten everything.”
– Aaron Siskind
Reply With Quote
  #327  
Old 24.10.2007, 21:28
BeastOfBodmin's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 875
Groaned at 3 Times in 2 Posts
Thanked 352 Times in 230 Posts
BeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Looks like my post on the Moon and fusion isn't so wibble as it sounded:
(Ignoring the fact that fusion has been thirty years away from commercial realisation for about fifty years.) You do realise that you have to do DT fusion because of the capture cross-section of these nuclei vs DD fusion, right?

So where do we get the tritium from? With a λ of 13 years there ain't much of the stuff floating around. In a fusion-powered future, how shall we produce enough feedstock to keep the A/C blowing, the computers whirring and the TV on stand by?
Reply With Quote
  #328  
Old 24.10.2007, 22:05
BeastOfBodmin's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 875
Groaned at 3 Times in 2 Posts
Thanked 352 Times in 230 Posts
BeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
I've never really bought into man made global warming,
Did you ever, in the face of evidence about man-made climate change, maintain that climate was not changing at all, or has the above always been your position?

Quote:
View Post
yes the climate is changing but I can't really see how we could do it
You may be right, "but I can't really see how" is hardly an argument. If you want to have a debate you have to talk about evidence, not hearsay. So where is your evidence that you "can't really see how"?

Despite the fact that most of the users who have contributed to this thread have got their "intellectual feedstock" from the media (who, as a profession, are not known for their lack of bias or ability to understand facts), this climate change malarkey is not about politics, it concerns reality. Therefore it concerns hard data. These data are available and increasing in size and precision. We should discuss the interpretation of these data in as dispassionate and objective a way as we can.

Quote:
View Post
... he then goes on to say this is because they can see the evidence from previous "greenhouse" periods in the fossil record. Now forgive me if I am wrong but there are no human fossils so we couldn't have been there to create these other greenhouse periods. The corresponding article on the web can be found here.
Did the scientist actually say that there have to be people to have a "greenhouse period"? I'd welcome a link to the article.

Notwithstanding, believe it or not, planet Earth got along fine without any kind of life for around the first billion years of its existence, and for 3.5 billion years or so after that without humans. Why should a '"greenhouse" period' have to involve people?

From "Climate change and trace gases",
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A (2007) 365, 1925–1954

"Global warming of at least 6°C at the Palaeocene–Eocene thermal maximum, ca 55 Myr BP, involved catastrophic carbon release to the atmosphere and mass extinctions (Bowen et al. 2006), one of at least several such large rapid warmings in Earth’s history."

The full reference alluded to above: Bowen, G. J. et al. 2006 Eocene hyperthermal event offers insight into greenhouse warming. EOS
Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 87, 165–169.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank BeastOfBodmin for this useful post:
  #329  
Old 24.10.2007, 22:28
Colonelboris's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southampton, UK
Posts: 1,137
Groaned at 17 Times in 17 Posts
Thanked 1,273 Times in 671 Posts
Colonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Well, assuming that the technology gets going, the limiting factor is the amount of tritium we have. As it stands, it's not a lot here and it's bloody hard work to get the stuff out of water as there's almost no concentration of it at all. But that doesn't matter as it's not how we get it anyway. Tritium is produced in nuclear reactors and even given the half-life, the decay product (Helium-3) is easily converted back to tritium again.
Now when I said about mining tritium, that's what you get in the end, but it's actually helium-3 that's there and that's easily converted into tritium. 3He is a fusion product that escapes from the sun in large amounts in solar wind. As it would travel as an ionised nucleus, it is deflected from the earth by the magnetic field we have, so the concentration here is very low. However, the moon picks up a lot of the stuff and is (comparatively) rich in it. Given the cost of producing tritum conventially, it makes economical sense to mine the stuff on the moon and send it back here. The technology's not much of a problem for getting us there and setting up, so the limiting factors would be feasibility of the reactor and the initial costs of setting up. If it means huge amounts of cheap power and a probable ending of the reliance on oil, then many governments would be interested. Politically, what would it be worth to the US to be able to wash its hands of the Middle East and its oil? If you have enough cheap energy, you can split water on an industrial scale and power everything on hydrogen instead.
__________________
New book out now: European Bird Names: A Translation Guide.
www.tonykeenebirds,co,uk - photos, paintings and drawings of Swiss, Australian, NZ and British birds
Reply With Quote
  #330  
Old 24.10.2007, 22:41
Lou's Avatar
Lou Lou is offline
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Zurich
Posts: 3,778
Groaned at 9 Times in 9 Posts
Thanked 3,227 Times in 1,474 Posts
Lou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond reputeLou has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Did you ever, in the face of evidence about man-made climate change, maintain that climate was not changing at all, or has the above always been your position?
If you read my post again you will see that I did say the climate is changing, I'm just not convinced about the cause despite having read quite a lot on the subject and no I'm not a scientist.


Quote:
View Post
You may be right, "but I can't really see how" is hardly an argument. If you want to have a debate you have to talk about evidence, not hearsay. So where is your evidence that you "can't really see how"?
Who was arguing? I was trying to contribute something relevant that I saw on TV today to get other peoples opinion of it as I'm still searching for the truth so to speak. Like I said I'm not a scientist let alone a climatologist so I'm not really in a position to argue on the subject anyway or would you rather every lay person who does not understand the issue wade in with their personal theory on the suibject? I prefer to read, listen and then see what I can make of it. I'd rather understand something to the best of my ability before I go shouting my mouth off.


Quote:
View Post
Despite the fact that most of the users who have contributed to this thread have got their "intellectual feedstock" from the media (who, as a profession, are not known for their lack of bias or ability to understand facts), this climate change malarkey is not about politics, it concerns reality. Therefore it concerns hard data. These data are available and increasing in size and precision. We should discuss the interpretation of these data in as dispassionate and objective a way as we can.
I disagree with this not being a political issue but that would be another topic. But the rest I agree with.


Quote:
View Post
Did the scientist actually say that there have to be people to have a "greenhouse period"? I'd welcome a link to the article.
My point was that the Earth has warmed & cooled many times without human intervention so that is enough to make me a sceptic that the current period of warming is man made. Link was already provided.

Quote:
View Post
Notwithstanding, believe it or not, planet Earth got along fine without any kind of life for around the first billion years of its existence, and for 3.5 billion years or so after that without humans. Why should a '"greenhouse" period' have to involve people?
Yes the Earth has been around for a long time and it will be around for a long time after the last human has left the building. We can't kill the planet, we could make it uninhabitable for us and lots of other life forms but the Earth will go on.
__________________
“Photography is a way of feeling, of touching, of loving. What you have caught on film is captured forever… It remembers little things, long after you have forgotten everything.”
– Aaron Siskind
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Lou for this useful post:
  #331  
Old 24.10.2007, 23:08
BeastOfBodmin's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 875
Groaned at 3 Times in 2 Posts
Thanked 352 Times in 230 Posts
BeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Well, assuming that the technology gets going, the limiting factor is the amount of tritium we have.
Sensing my mood, have you decide to troll me?

Quote:
View Post
As it stands, it's not a lot here and it's bloody hard work to get the stuff out of water as there's almost no concentration of it at all. But that doesn't matter as it's not how we get it anyway. Tritium is produced in nuclear reactors and even given the half-life, the decay product (Helium-3) is easily converted back to tritium again.
Easily converted? Define "easily". Sounds like a lot of energy input to get that damn proton to capture an electron and become a neutron. How efficient does this particular Philosopher's Stone have to be to get the right kind of EREOI? Do you have any pointers to any candidates for doing this, or are we still in "Space, 1999" territory?

Quote:
View Post
3He is a fusion product that escapes from the sun in large amounts in solar wind. As it would travel as an ionised nucleus, it is deflected from the earth by the magnetic field we have, so the concentration here is very low. However, the moon picks up a lot of the stuff and is (comparatively) rich in it.
Intriguing. I thought you were going to suggest an exotic nuclear reaction. But in any case, numbers please. Estimated flux density (moles per second per unit area on the Moon, for example). Quote the peer-reviewed data please. This flux will be a limiting factor, no?

Quote:
View Post
Given the cost of producing tritum conventially, it makes economical sense to mine the stuff on the moon and send it back here. The technology's not much of a problem for getting us there and setting up, so the limiting factors would be feasibility of the reactor and the initial costs of setting up.
I still need those flux data

Quote:
View Post
If it means huge amounts of cheap power
The lying bastards originally sold "nucular" power as being "too cheap to meter". Beware salesmen in white coats.

Quote:
View Post
and a probable ending of the reliance on oil, then many governments would be interested.
Our reliance on oil is already ending. Because it's running out. The record for global daily production was over a year ago. For every three barrels we use, we discover one more. So the faster we use what's left, the sooner the energy free ride will be over. So how quickly do we want to kick the habit?

Quote:
View Post
Politically, what would it be worth to the US to be able to wash its hands of the Middle East and its oil?
Politics? I watched Gulf War II as it was sold and launched by those USA and British traitors called Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Blair, Brown and Straw. The insanity of it, even though they probably already knew about imminent Peak Oil, makes me wonder just what they were up to, and for whom they were doing it.

Quote:
View Post
If you have enough cheap energy, you can split water on an industrial scale and power everything on hydrogen instead.
We could also, given enough "cheap energy" and lunar regolith area, generate cheese inside linear accelerators and use that to run cheese to oil plants, pumping the stuff down a heated pipeline (because it's cold in space) to mobile, equatorial terminals on the equator on large rails. But you have yet to demonstrate where this cheap energy will come from.
Reply With Quote
  #332  
Old 24.10.2007, 23:42
BeastOfBodmin's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 875
Groaned at 3 Times in 2 Posts
Thanked 352 Times in 230 Posts
BeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond reputeBeastOfBodmin has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
If you read my post again you will see that I did say the climate is changing, I'm just not convinced about the cause despite having read quite a lot on the subject and no I'm not a scientist.
I read your post again and it said the same thing it did when I read it the first time. My question was, and still stands, if you would care to answer it:

"Did you ever, in the face of evidence about man-made climate change, maintain that climate was not changing at all, or has the above always been your position?"

"The above" being "I've never really bought into man made global warming". I'm interested to know how your opinion has changed over time (if at all).

Quote:
View Post
Who was arguing? I was trying to contribute something relevant that I saw on TV today to get other peoples opinion of it as I'm still searching for the truth so to speak. Like I said I'm not a scientist let alone a climatologist so I'm not really in a position to argue on the subject anyway or would you rather every lay person who does not understand the issue wade in with their personal theory on the suibject?
As it happens, I would like to see any contribution by any person, no matter how lay. But I'd like to see some kind of supporting argument or evidence. Anyone who approaches such a debate with an open mind can learn from participating.

Quote:
View Post
I disagree with this not being a political issue but that would be another topic. But the rest I agree with.
Touché. In a strict sense, any conversation is political. And, barring disaster, a political solution is required to AGW. What I meant by political was in the professional sense of lying politicians, and lying vested interests as mediated to Joe Blow in the street via the technically illiterate media. As opposed to discussing data and facts.

Quote:
View Post
My point was that the Earth has warmed & cooled many times without human intervention so that is enough to make me a sceptic that the current period of warming is man made. Link was already provided.
You wrote:

"Now forgive me if I am wrong but there are no human fossils so we couldn't have been there to create these other greenhouse periods."

Which, with the earlier statement that you could not see how humans might cause a "greenhouse period", I took to mean you were being sceptical that the changes had happened in the first place.

My bad. Sorry

Quote:
View Post
Yes the Earth has been around for a long time and it will be around for a long time after the last human has left the building. We can't kill the planet, we could make it uninhabitable for us and lots of other life forms but the Earth will go on.
I couldn't agree more.
Reply With Quote
  #333  
Old 25.10.2007, 11:10
Colonelboris's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southampton, UK
Posts: 1,137
Groaned at 17 Times in 17 Posts
Thanked 1,273 Times in 671 Posts
Colonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

OK beast, I'll use my lunchbreak to get you some data. Fine if i had made it up myself, but a lot of this stuff is easily obtained by googling for the articles.
Reply With Quote
  #334  
Old 25.10.2007, 12:17
Colonelboris's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southampton, UK
Posts: 1,137
Groaned at 17 Times in 17 Posts
Thanked 1,273 Times in 671 Posts
Colonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

B****er - have to play with the reaction over lunch. Wiil waste time that would have been spent with family this evening instead, but here's an article to go on for the minute (not peer reviewed, but shows I didn't just make it up myself).
http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...56.html?page=4
Reply With Quote
  #335  
Old 25.10.2007, 21:31
Colonelboris's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southampton, UK
Posts: 1,137
Groaned at 17 Times in 17 Posts
Thanked 1,273 Times in 671 Posts
Colonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

o Article on 3He abundance on the moon:
J.R. Johnson et al., Geophys. Res. Lett., 1999, 26, 385-388.

Here's an AGU article on the Johnson paper if you don't have access:
Article

o 3He conversion to tritium:
D. Steiner et al., Lunar Helium-3 and Fusion Power, 1988, 65-81, (NASA, Lawrence Research Centre) - Abstract only, I'm afraid.

BIBTEX entry if you don't have access to the article:
BIBTEX

Very difficult to find rates of deposition of 3He on the moon, but there is also a lot of talk of tritium production by fission of 6Li by slow neutrons or the more abundant 7Li by fast neutrons, but this would need higher energy neutrons and be inherently more dangerous in case of accidents at a plant. Slow neutrons can be made by spallation, which does not require a nuclear reactor.

Now, your hypothesis of cheese creation in an accelerator is intriguing, but inherently inefficient as you would have to synthesise the compounds that make cheese, requiring hydrogen, which would give more energy if you just burnt it. However, this article might interest you:

o Cheese content of the moon:
I. Sanders, Ian's Lunar Pages

Which means that vast amounts of energy would be wated in the artificial synthesis when we could just mine the stuff. However, your heated pipeline and railed recieving stations certainly have merit if this can be proved.
__________________
New book out now: European Bird Names: A Translation Guide.
www.tonykeenebirds,co,uk - photos, paintings and drawings of Swiss, Australian, NZ and British birds
Reply With Quote
  #336  
Old 25.10.2007, 23:41
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 296
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanked 22 Times in 17 Posts
Verena Scherer has made some interesting contributions
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
B****er - have to play with the reaction over lunch. Wiil waste time that would have been spent with family this evening instead, but here's an article to go on for the minute (not peer reviewed, but shows I didn't just make it up myself).
http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...56.html?page=4
This is terrible, it reminds me of Eddie Izzard's sketch " Do you have a flag?" I'm a sucker for nuclear physics language, but don't steal the moon! Think about the birds migrating at night.
Reply With Quote
  #337  
Old 26.10.2007, 00:03
Colonelboris's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southampton, UK
Posts: 1,137
Groaned at 17 Times in 17 Posts
Thanked 1,273 Times in 671 Posts
Colonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
This is terrible, it reminds me of Eddie Izzard's sketch " Do you have a flag?" I'm a sucker for nuclear physics language, but don't steal the moon! Think about the birds migrating at night.
It's ok - it'll still be there. If the Johnson paper is correct, then the surface area that needs ploughing up will be so small you wouldn't be able to see it from Earth unless you were coughing up a lot for a really decent telescope. And they can always pack the mined 'soil' back again. It's not like they're destroying an ecosystem...
Reply With Quote
  #338  
Old 26.10.2007, 00:17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 296
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanked 22 Times in 17 Posts
Verena Scherer has made some interesting contributions
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
It's ok - it'll still be there. If the Johnson paper is correct, then the surface area that needs ploughing up will be so small you wouldn't be able to see it from Earth unless you were coughing up a lot for a really decent telescope. And they can always pack the mined 'soil' back again. It's not like they're destroying an ecosystem...
Just 'cos they got the money to go there don't mean it belong to them. They'll have to pack it back real nice otherwise it won't smile down on us.
Reply With Quote
  #339  
Old 26.10.2007, 08:03
Colonelboris's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southampton, UK
Posts: 1,137
Groaned at 17 Times in 17 Posts
Thanked 1,273 Times in 671 Posts
Colonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond reputeColonelboris has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

I'm too lazy a man to find the article again, but there was one mentioning that it would be more profitable to mine the 'dark side' (it's only dark for half the time...) as it should have a marginally higher 3He content. also means they could really bugger up the surface and we wouldn't see a thing...
There are other reasons for going there. The moon is very rich in titanium, iron and aluminium. using electrolysis (which you have to use for aluminium ore) to separate the metal from its oxide means that you release oxygen, which can then be used as an atmosphere for any mining operation up there.
one of the other main reasons many space agencies are thinking of setting up there is that with the raw materials available, you can build craft there for visiting Mars. The advantage to building them there is the much lower gravity on the moon, which means a lot less energy needed to escape the moon than the earth, which means you can loft much heavier and bigger ships. A mars mission would require several years worth of supplies, so would be bloody heavy. You couldn't launch it from earth in on go - you'd have to assemble it in orbit, which means a lot of costly launches from earth.
__________________
New book out now: European Bird Names: A Translation Guide.
www.tonykeenebirds,co,uk - photos, paintings and drawings of Swiss, Australian, NZ and British birds
Reply With Quote
  #340  
Old 05.11.2007, 05:07
AnAustralian's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,207
Groaned at 6 Times in 4 Posts
Thanked 560 Times in 318 Posts
AnAustralian is considered knowledgeableAnAustralian is considered knowledgeableAnAustralian is considered knowledgeable
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank AnAustralian for this useful post:
Reply

Tags
climate change, climategate, co2, global warming




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:49.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0