Climate Change/Mass Extinction Megathread

[The Larch]

But it is mystifying the other southern desert states can't match it in solar at least.

Contrary to what might seem logical, a desert environment is not necessarily great for solar energy. It is great from a pure production potential pow, but AFAIK it's a nightmare for maintenance and it'd require a lot of transmission to get the energy produced to where it can be consumed.

[The Larch]

It reminds me of all the protests against putting up wind turbines off the coast of Massachusetts, by fucking environmentalist groups. I know we talked about that way back in the distant past of Languish and I remember reflecting how frustrating those kinds of groups are. They always oppose the next step to protect the environment because it is not perfect. And look at Massachusetts now: not a watt of wind power.

What's the situation of offshore windfarms over there? Here in Spain we've just announced the planning for coastal area uses that allows for it (required by the EU and overdue for a couple of years already) and our fishermen are already thowing a fit a good 5-10 years before a single windmill is installed at sea.

[The Larch]

If we think of New Mexico, hot and sunny, surely it is routine to have solar panels on your roof to power your aircon...this would be very green and also profitable 

Nowadays having solar panels at homes should be mandatory basically everywhere, if only for water heating purposes. Power generation is nowadays also an option almost everywhere, and it's a very attractive proposition for industries that can take advantage of large premises.

I notice that California has a lot of solar, maybe for that reason.

IIRC, California has long favoured large solar power plants in the southern parts of the state since that technology became viable and was a pioneer on it at the time. Many of the world's largest solar plants are or used to be located there.

[The Larch]

It's obvious why say Maine can't copy Texas.
But it is mystifying the other southern desert states can't match it in solar at least.

I would like to see a per capita version of the list. Texas has 30m people and New Mexico just over 2m; so NM is doing better than Texas per capita. On that basis Iowa(3m) and Oklahoma(4m) look very good.

I found this on wiki. It's just for wind power and with 2017 data, but it's better than anything.

[Josquius]

Related. A cool thing I was shown last night. Mapping energy sources with good easy to read data

https://app.electricitymaps.com/map

[Syt]

 

[Admiral Yi]

How well do their customers sleep?

[Oexmelin]

I always forget how easy it is to live off the grid.

[The Larch]

Amsterdam Schiphol Airport proposes a ban on private jets

High flyers hoping to hop to the Netherlands in a private jet might be forced to rethink their travel plans, as Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport is proposing a private jet ban.

The notoriously busy airport has suggested a series of measures to reduce its air traffic and create a "quieter, cleaner and better" system, according to a Schiphol airport statement.

Under new proposals the airport hopes will come into effect "no later than 2025-26," private jets will "no longer be welcome" at Schiphol. There will also be no aircraft landing between midnight and 5 a.m. local time or taking off between midnight and 6 a.m. local time. Plans for a new runway have also been scrapped.

Schiphol says it's targeting private jets because they cause "a disproportionate amount of noise nuisance and CO2 emissions per passenger." Private jets produce up to 14 times more planet-warming pollution than commercial planes, and 50 times more than trains, according to European clean transport organization, Transport & Environment.

When these small, swanky aircraft depart from Schiphol, 30% to 50% of them are heading to vacation hot spots like Ibiza in Spain, Cannes in France or Innsbruck in Austria, according to Schiphol. The airport argues there are plenty of airplanes flying from Amsterdam to those destinations, and suggests private passengers should go commercial instead.

"Sufficient scheduled services are available to the most popular destinations flown to by private jets," says Schiphol Airport in a statement, adding that small police and ambulance aircraft will be permitted to take off and land as they do currently under the new system.

Cutting emissions and reducing noise
Last month, the Dutch government announced plans to restrict international aircraft departures in a quest to cut the country's carbon emissions.

The Dutch government's "Preliminary Scheme Schiphol," published in January, proposed slashing flight numbers from 500,000 to 460,000 between winter 2023-2024 and summer 2024.

Airlines including Dutch flagship carrier KLM, as well as Delta and EasyJet, pushed back on this proposed flight cap, launching a legal challenge against the Dutch government.

The airport's recent statement suggests limiting nighttime air traffic would mean 10,000 fewer night flights each year, and therefore could help get Schiphol to its target.

Cutting down on overnight landings and departures should also reduce noise pollution for local residents, with airport data suggesting the number of local residents experiencing severe sleep disturbance will fall by approximately 54%.

It's not uncommon for even the busiest airports to implement nighttime curfews – take London Heathrow Airport, for example, which restricts overnight operations.

"Around 80% of the night flights at Heathrow are between 04:30 - 06:00 with an average of 16 aircraft arriving each day between these hours under normal pre-Covid conditions," reads Heathrow's website, which adds that flights are never scheduled to depart between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m.

Frankfurt Airport and Zurich Airport are among the other travel hubs with limitations on overnight air traffic.

Concerns about noise are also reflected in Amsterdam's proposed "stricter approach regarding noisier aircraft," with Schiphol suggesting it will gradually tighten "existing standards for aircraft that are allowed to take off from and land at Schiphol."

The airport also pledged to put aside 10 million euros a year for an "environmental fund for the local area," in a bid to be a friendlier neighbor to its surrounding residents.

In these new measures, Schiphol also promises to safeguard cargo flights, reserving 2.5% of the available takeoff and landing slots for cargo.

"However, cargo flights will have to adhere to new, tighter rules for noisier aircraft and the new night closure will also apply to cargo," reads the airport's statement.

Ruud Sondag, the CEO of the Royal Schiphol Group, which manages Amsterdam's airport, says the Schiphol proposals demonstrate that "we mean business."

"We have thought about growth but too little about its impact for too long," he said in a statement. "We need to be sustainable for our employees, the local environment and the world. I realise that our choices may have significant implications for the aviation industry, but they are necessary."

Many of the currently scheduled Schiphol night flights are operated by KLM or its subsidiary Transavia. In response to Schiphol suggestions, KLM said in a statement that the airline was "astonished," and planned to put forward alternative proposals later this year.

[Valmy]

How well do their customers sleep?

The number of kind of shitty things you are probably unwittingly participating in as a consumer is incredibly long if you really look into it. Likewise if you have a 401K or something that is investing in companies that are doing shenanigans. It is just something that exists if you live in the modern world and don't go live in a cave or something.

[Razgovory]

How well do their customers sleep?

I take pills for insomnia.

[Admiral Yi]

The number of kind of shitty things you are probably unwittingly participating in as a consumer is incredibly long if you really look into it. Likewise if you have a 401K or something that is investing in companies that are doing shenanigans. It is just something that exists if you live in the modern world and don't go live in a cave or something.

No one unwittingly drives their car or heats their house or anything else that emits carbon.

[HVC]

They also don't lobby states and countries to hobble renewable energy for the sake of profit. I get what you're saying, but it's not as comparable as you imply it to be.

[Valmy]

The number of kind of shitty things you are probably unwittingly participating in as a consumer is incredibly long if you really look into it. Likewise if you have a 401K or something that is investing in companies that are doing shenanigans. It is just something that exists if you live in the modern world and don't go live in a cave or something.

No one unwittingly drives their car or heats their house or anything else that emits carbon.

Again sure I can put on a hair shirt and go live in a cave. But that will make no difference at all because the problems are entirely created by the systems that run our modern world. They need to be changed at the level of the problem not by my the individual going to live in a cave.

If a million people go live in caves the amount of carbon being emitted in the world will barely change. If a key system that currently emits carbon is engineered and designed to not do that then suddenly a huge change is made.

So no I don't think people not putting on hairshirts and living in caves is the problem. That is just stupid IMO, and distracts from the actual solutions. It is just a tool to distract with virtue signaling and nonsense.

[Jacob]

How well do their customers sleep?

Personally I vote for representatives who are working to change the systemic incentives around pollution and global warming.

I suspect the customers voting for the GOP in Texas and Florida (f. ex.) sleep by telling themselves that global warming is a hoax and liberal tears are delicious.