-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Environmental impact of our hobby
- Thread starter don'ttrustauthority
- Start date
- Status
About 230 million years ago, during the Carnian age, it rained for two million years, without pause, all over the then single Earth continent (Pangea). This is known as the Carnian pluvial, which had great effects on the earth's climate.
Last edited:
Everything's political. *sigh*
For instance, as soon as one points out the fact that China/Asia is overwhelmingly responsible for plastic trash in the oceans, it gets political. Even though it's a fact, plain and simple.
In 2010, 8.8 million metric tons of mismanaged plastic waste came from China with an estimated 3.53 million metric tons of it ending up in the ocean. A total of 3.2 million metric tons of mismanaged plastic waste came from Indonesia and it is estimated that 1.29 million metric tons became plastic marine debris. The United States is also guilty of polluting oceans with plastic, but at a much lower level than China. Annually, 0.11 million metric tons of waterborne plastic garbage comes from the United States.
The Countries Polluting The Oceans The Most
If you're looking for a dispassionate, data driven response to facts (which you openly dispute) look to actuaries. They're unanimous in "opinion".
https://grist.org/climate/insurance...climate-change-by-shifting-risk-to-taxpayers/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212094715300347
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2019
- Messages
- 3,843
- Likes
- 3,790
I have a K&N on my sports cr - only b/c there is no paper filter made to fit it. It is not a 1950s style oil bath filter, but has a spray coating of oil on the filter media. I know b/c I sprayed it myself. This is the one I mentioned re letting in more grit.
If you know of an improved oil coated filter. I'd like to know about it.
So the thesis for AGW is that CO2 drives climate due toi a positive feedback with H2O which provides the primary greenhouse effect (90-95%). Hopefully we can agree that the Laws of Physics haven't changed over time. That being the case if >400ppm of CO2 will cause a runaway greenhouse effect on out climate why didn't that happen over the past 500 million yers when CO2 levels were levels of magnitude greater?
Were thew laws of Physics different 165 Million years ago that they are now?
Tee temperatures are now are among the coldest for the past 65 million years.
Greenland ice cores indicate temperatures 2C warmer that present temps.
Attachments
![Lappi_Greenland_ice_core_10000yrs[1].jpg](/forum/data/attachments/121/121150-9f5a28035e351ab9408c4c573c3dc142.jpg)
Contemporaneous sources say that we have equal or more extreme climate previously.
It is certainly true that climate events can have more financial impact because things are more expensive and they is more construction, infrastructure, and people people than in the past. This says nothing about the climate. Sorry.
Destination: Moon
Senior Member
Yes the laws of physics are the same. No, your understanding of the feedback isn't due to the physics you postulate. It's hard discussing this with people who try so hard, not to understand.
The self perpetuating forces now relate to the thawing of huge reservoirs of methane and CO2 producing organic matter that is locked below ice or permafrost. I could go on but that is sufficient to put you on the path to understanding of you so choose
- Joined
- May 18, 2020
- Messages
- 1,285
- Likes
- 2,942
All irrelevant. What matters is a comparison of the last 5,000 years and the next few hundred. About 5,000 years ago we became a sedentary population operating a fixed-location agricultural system with legislated water rights. Our entire civilization depends on that. Will the coming climate permit a continuation, or not? That's the only relevant question.
As to the topic: surely it depends on what else we would be doing every evening. I suspect the audio hobby is relatively benign.
Driving a Tesla 50 miles;
345wH/mile (somebody's measured average) = 17.5kwH
Listening to my non-green big-rig stereo and/or watching a movie:
Assume 500W consumption - 35 hours = 17.5kwH. (very high head-banging level)
So, staying home instead of driving around is 35 times more efficient even with my decidedly non-efficient gear.
I can cut that about 80% by listening to the little JBLs instead, which I mostly do these days.
Last edited:
Does that include running the A/C to keep the house temperature down during the Floridian summer?
I considered adding Solar Panels to the house, but at the time, it was quite expensive, non-liquid, and with a long economic break-even, so I bought shares in the local electric Utility instead. The dividends from Utility shares offsets most of the total electric bill, and now they are building Solar Farms for me so I don't have to.
PS: A capital gain on the same shares when TECO sold out to Emera a few years ago more covered the cost of all the gear I've ever bought.
Go figure.
MakeMineVinyl
Major Contributor
It is so funny that it started from @RayDunzl espousing the environmental virtue of listening to non-green big-rig stereo or watching movies over cruising in a Tesla, and then devolved into environmentalism being evil. LOL.
MakeMineVinyl
Major Contributor
Its not evil and I certainly did not imply that. I simply ask that a sense of proportion be kept in mind. There are things we do every day which are extremely bad for the environment, even if we don't directly intend to do so. My drive to work is far more harmful (even with my electric vehicle) than listening to music when I get home at night. 1 microsecond of operation of a coal fired power plant is far more harmful than anything I could do in a day. The solution to that is more green energy, not less music listening.
Electric Usage (kwH / days), HVAC portion (estimated) stacked on Base usage (estimated) for the last five years.
You can note three July 4 vacations, the rest of the time we were here.
When the 17 year old AC dies, we'll get to see if there's an improvement in that area.
The best thing I can think of to reduce the environmental impact of humans would be to reduce the number of humans.
When I heard of the "One Child" policy for China long ago, I calculated that it would still take about 60 years from that point for their population to peak and begin declining.
A tough problem.
Everything seems to be predicated on "growth".
You can note three July 4 vacations, the rest of the time we were here.
When the 17 year old AC dies, we'll get to see if there's an improvement in that area.
The best thing I can think of to reduce the environmental impact of humans would be to reduce the number of humans.
When I heard of the "One Child" policy for China long ago, I calculated that it would still take about 60 years from that point for their population to peak and begin declining.
A tough problem.
Everything seems to be predicated on "growth".
As for "work", I used to travel a lot and install/test/turnover Telecom/Datacom gear.
Now, I sit at home a relieve others of their cash when they guessed wrong and I guessed right. Of course, the opposite condition applies at times.
Price at the red "S" = $500. It might just make it there in a few minutes.
Orange line was yesterday's "closing" price.
Red solid lines, my "analysis" of the situation. Red dotted lines $100 increments (20 points on the chart, roughly $20 on the Dow Average).
Green dotted line was Buy price, at about 11:45.
It continued going south for a while after an immediate bump that I should have taken (not the best entry), but turned up as hoped.
Now, I sit at home a relieve others of their cash when they guessed wrong and I guessed right. Of course, the opposite condition applies at times.
Price at the red "S" = $500. It might just make it there in a few minutes.
Orange line was yesterday's "closing" price.
Red solid lines, my "analysis" of the situation. Red dotted lines $100 increments (20 points on the chart, roughly $20 on the Dow Average).
Green dotted line was Buy price, at about 11:45.
It continued going south for a while after an immediate bump that I should have taken (not the best entry), but turned up as hoped.
Last edited:
Boom... Done... Naptime...
Last edited:
I have no disagreement with you. I just hope your line of reasoning also extend to that we shouldn't stop going out and have some fun rides in our favorite vehicles.
All I was questioning is that is the energy consumption comparison between driving a Tesla and listening to a spacing heating stereo rig fair.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
