Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)


Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.

Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!

powered by Surfing Waves

Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.

    Biff/alex, everyone is a little gullible sometimes. If Tony is telling porkys then its my turn! :shamed:

    Its seems Biff that you are correct about the position and depth of the greenland ice sheet, allthough this is just a very small part of the whole global warming debate.

    Tony, I am surprised that you would post such flawed information.
    • CommentAuthorfuncrusher
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2007
    The trajectory and causes of past climate are, to put it mildly, uncertain. Astronomical and volcanic events plus continental drift are just some of the factors. We do however know for certain that NE America and Greenland were comparatively mild about 1000 years ago, becuase Vikings were settled farmers in Greenland for about 300 years before being forced out by the Little Ice Age. That encroachment of ice, which like the Little Ice Age peaked maybe 1850, did not lead to great falls in universal sea levels - though I do not dismiss the entirely speculative thought that it might have contributed to the retreat of the sea from a few Roman and medieval ports in Britain.

    It therefore seems unlikely that a diminution of ice cover will cause catastrophic flooding. As Tony pointed out, the most vulnerable areas are floating ice and their melting will have no net effect on sea level.

    On the other hand, the continual deposition of snow on antartic land MUST cause sea levels to diminish, as this snow must be sourced from water vapour by evaporation elsewhere on the planet. There is no obvious benefit to mankind from this process - it may conceivably contribute to droughts if unchecked. Perhaps it would be no bad thing if Antartica was stabilised at its current snow-capture.
    I think I'm correct in saying that the polar regions are warming more rapidly than the planet as a whole. Just something to bear in mind when talking about global warming of 2-6 degrees, i.e. polar warming is going to be in a higher range than that.

    I'm more concerned about what will happen in regions nearer the equator where a lot of people live and a lot of food is grown. It won't take much warming to start turning these areas into deserts, it is happening already in parts of Africa and China. That will mean a lot of desperate people on the move. Is anyone planning for this?
    • CommentAuthorbiffvernon
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2007
    The trouble with funcrusher is that, like tony, he is just completely wrong.

    Explain! Mike pips.

    No, just read this piece in yesterdays Toronto Star:
    which disusses this paper by Jim Hansen et al published a couple of months ago in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society:

    And as for all that stuff about Vikings in Greenland, Medieval Warmings and Little Ice Ages, it's all been refuted ad nauseam over at RealClimate. Have a delve in their archive:
    • CommentAuthorfuncrusher
    • CommentTimeJul 15th 2007
    Priestly castes with powers to predict tribal catastrophe in the absence of tribal sacrifices have been a permanent feature of human existence since at least the commencement of permanent human settlements and the consequent social organisation. Beware of hysterical reactions to the latest of these ie global warming.

    Nothing I stated as fact is incorrect.

    Scientists in every field strive to collect data to support theories. The data is usually correct; most of the theories turn out to be wrong - but that only becomes apparent with passage of time. If that were not so, all the secrets of the universe would long have been discovered.

    Incidentally, if we are rushing to this early doom, we better go nuclear pdq. Even the nutters reckon the nuclear waste is a 10,000 year time-bomb - so lets enjoy the next 10,000 years!.
    • CommentAuthorbiffvernon
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2007 edited
    Posted By: funcrusher
    Nothing I stated as fact is incorrect.

    I'd take issue with ten or eleven of the 'facts' in your previous post, but life's too short :)
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2007 edited
    Posted By: funcrusherNothing I stated as fact is incorrect.

    Is that a quote from Conrad Black?
    • CommentAuthorLizM
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2007
    Are we forgetting that water expands when it is heated up?
    Understand your passion for the whole subject but would appreciate a little more tolerance on what after all were my views based on real observations rather than rhetoric or second hand articles borrowed from others.

    I am trying to contribute and include to the debunking not scurrilously creating more.
    Couldn't resist in reminding you of some of our other discussions which may of been approaching the correct conclusions 3:0 to me so far but saying that respect all of your views and will certainly never say they are r***ish.

    If my observations were "rubbish" perhaps you can explain why all of the worlds major cities have their own micro climate. I am sure you know that London has consistently recorded above average temperatures when compared to its surroundings. Again going back to real observations and measurements it is never colder in the city than outside in my experience. I attribute this to the thermal mass and wasted heat energy as I originally stated and not CO2.
    Yes eventually it dissperses to space but then so should all the other heat gains.
    What with all this natural untapped energy flying around perhaps there is no doom and gloom rather more concerted efforts to capture it usefully.
    "hot" from the kitchen comes .....a fresh water ice cube floats higher in saline water so less displacement (and sea rise) but less saline water freezes quicker.
    • CommentAuthorbiffvernon
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2007
    Paul, I mean no personal offence to you, but in terms of physics and climate science what you have posted is, er, just complete rubbish. Of course urban area have their own microclimates. It's known as the Heat Island Effect, and is taken into account by climate models.
    Sorry but I don't have time to explain all the details but if you are genuinely interested in the topic you will read this second hand borrowed piece:
    where Gavin Schmidt, one of the world's leading climate modellers working at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, explains the topic very clearly. It's fairly up to date, published 2nd July 2007, so perhaps not too second hand.
    respect as usual.
    Thanks for the link.
    Have read it all.
    Trouble is these articles don't contribute to the solutions and transformation process as effectively as on the ground experience.

    It is obvious that heat losses in the urban environment (UK) are enormous I mean when did you last see the snow settle and stay on a house or building roof in the UK compared with say Sweden or Canada. The UHI term does also acknowledge its wasted heat as the culprit.
    I was just observing our that in fact micro climates created around our cities has been a much more effective way of implementing cleaner greener ways of living than by the current continuous estimates and models and rhetoric and millions of words relating to worthy but remote places.
    The smog of the fifties for example.
    Still suggest that the current much "cleaner" wastes of invisible hot gases, particulates, emfs and heat are problems with more local (and tangible) implications.
    Bear with me ...
    Perhaps just by seeing what we have hidden we could get the transformation and benefits out more directly.
    It would only need a municipal booth / kiosk containing some basic kit to look at our cities to see all this "hot" waste.
    I am not speaking as a desk jockey full of science but as a cave man who directly interacts and observes the forces of both nature and technology.
    Back to the cave painting and grunting for me....
    good luck to you all
Add your comments

    Username Password
  • Format comments as
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   

© Green Building Press