Sub-station

Over 10 years of solar lighting manufacturing experience.                                                                                                                                                                                                   Tel:+86 20 28186153 ext 0    E-mail:rebacca@litelsolar.com

stormy weather - solar energy traffic lights

by:Litel Technology     2019-08-17
stormy weather  -  solar energy traffic lights
Hurricane Mitch, Oakland, California
The fire in 1991 and the Chicago heat wave in 1995 are just a few environmental disasters that have taken their lives and created for terrible news reports in the past 10 years.
These weather disasters seem to happen a lot, but they always cause nagging questions: "Is this normal if you ask a climate scientist ? " He will say no.
For at least the past decade, for supporters of the greenhouse effect theory, the deadly performance of extreme weather events has been dazzling ---
This is what happens when you put the heat on Mother Nature.
Bob Rice, a reporter for The Washington Post, external Magazine and GQ, believes the situation will only get worse.
His new book, The Coming Storm: extreme weather and our terrible future, looks at the scientific and political conflicts that have been raging since signs of a greenhouse effect in late 1980.
Rice also lists how it feels to live in these harsh conditions; in heart-
He tells about the personal experience of the most notorious disaster in the past 15 years. -
A picnic in Nashville was ravaged by a tornado, a series of storms causing billions of dollars in losses in Europe, and the drought in Sudan actually caused hunger riots and could lead to flooding across the island nation.
What's more subtle is that the more insidious effects threaten us too, and Reiss takes this home.
Most people may be lucky to not have a Midwest tornado in the August hurricane or a vacation in Karolina.
However, Rice wrote, "Maybe when you're 60
Five, you have a heart attack on a hot night and you will never think of it at three in the morning. m.
If the climate does not change, the temperature will not be so hot.
Rice told Sharon from his home in New York.
Extreme weather means more terrible hurricanes, tornadoes and fires than we usually see.
But when doing research 12 or 13 years ago, we can count on how that condition will affect our daily lives, and I met Jim Hansen, who was before Congress in 1988.
I walked with him to the window and glanced at Broadway in New York and said, "If the greenhouse effect you're talking about is true," Will there be any difference there in 20 years ? " He looked for a while and was quiet and didn't say anything for a few seconds.
Then he said, "Well, there will be more traffic.
"Of course, I don't think he heard the question correctly.
Then he explained: "The West Side Highway [
Extend along the Hudson River
Underwater.
Because of the strong wind, there will be tape on the window across the street.
The same bird won't be there.
Trees in the middle will change.
Then he said, "there will be more police cars . "
"Why" Well, you know what happens when the temperature rises.
"So far, in the past 10 years, we have the hottest 10 years on record.
Didn't he also say that there would be a "water only as required" sign on the window of the restaurant?
"Extreme weather increases under the greenhouse effect.
Depending on where you are in the hydrological cycle, you will get more of what you can easily get.
There may be drought in New York, the drought may become more severe, and there will be a sign in the restaurant that "only water should be provided on request.
"He said it will happen in 20 or 30 years.
Please remember we in 1989 1988 the this dialogue.
Yes, he still believes everything.
I talked to him a few months ago and he said he wouldn't change anything he said at the time.
Most scientists who believe in the greenhouse effect say, should we expect to see more environmental disasters in the next 25 to 50 years? I don't think it's a question of the future, it's a question of the present.
This is an increasingly serious problem.
If you talk to Tom Carr, head of national climateData]
Center, he said that there are no weather events that are not affected by the greenhouse effect.
If you look at the terrible weather events that have occurred in recent years, such as Hurricane Mitch, you have to ask: At what point will the additional rain exceed the critical threshold and become 100-
When will the annual flood be 100-
The flood became 500-
There are surprises in this year's flood, and all the surprises are bad.
For example, you will see a category 5 hurricane instead of a Category 4 hurricane.
What's the difference between the last 15 years and the 90 s, the hottest decade on record.
The Post-90 s science is more concerned about why.
Scientists around the world are working together on a large scale. -
Those who are not sure if there is a huge greenhouse effect or if humans have contributed to it or if it will get worse ---
I study this from hundreds of different angles.
This problem has changed from an academic issue to an unprecedented international political issue, because in the end, if it proves to be as serious as I think, it will affect national sovereignty.
Prediction becomes even more terrible.
In a passage, the president of the Republic of Maldives tried to explain that the actual existence of his country was threatened.
What kind of danger are they in now? This is the first country on earth to disappear completely as a country.
The case scenario is correct.
For them, the greenhouse effect is not theoretical.
When will the Maldives be so low-
Say the storm will keep them underwater.
This is not a problem with the Ocean rising 1 ml per year, and at some point in the future, the Maldives will be underwater.
Instead, they will be underwater one day.
This happened in 1987.
After the president woke up, the capital was flooded with only one square mile.
There is no storm.
But there is 1 feet water in the capital and airport.
Coral washes back and forth during the escape.
It's not like in Carolina where you load your car and drive away.
There is no place to go in the Maldives.
Did they plan for this, which could be a split-minded attitude, similar to that of the United States in the nuclear era.
On the one hand, you live a normal life, plan your future, and on the other hand, you build a bomb shelter.
Their school is getting better and better.
They are dredging the port and they are still talking about moving people from one island to another in case the island is flooded at some point.
What about doomsday predictions like the Coast falling into the ocean? Is there any other place in danger like the Maldives?
Coastal areas are vulnerable to more storms and storms, including the East Coast of the United States. S.
And the Bay Area.
Island countries are the most feared.
They always urge to minimize emissions.
We will also see what kind of strange environmental disasters, all of which are strange.
When I write this book, I face a moral question: What is the responsible way to ask a question first, and you have to look into it to see if it is a problem.
You have to look at the science I do, talk to the scientists I do, and then you have to come to the conclusion.
At the end of the book, as a way of checking, I had lunch with Tom Carr, head of the National Climate Center.
He is a skeptic.
But he was a believer when we had lunch.
I looked at every weather event I was involved in on a case-by-case basis ---
Hurricanes, fires and tornadoes-
Every time, he confirmed my suspicion that the greenhouse effect affected all of these factors.
My favorite paragraph. -
I'm talking sick. -
It's about the Oakland fire of 1991.
A few minutes later, a bush fire turned into a fire that engulfed 3,000 houses.
What makes this fire different from other fires in the past, you can choose any of several fires.
I could have used the New Mexico fire in 2000.
I happened to use the Oakland fire.
Because the wind and heat are unusual, the fire gets worse.
I suspect that most farmers think the greenhouse effect has anything to do with the fire.
Although, of course, the fire hazard is worse when the weather is getting hotter and drier and when you have unusual winds ---
These three are the effects of the greenhouse effect.
There has always been hot and dry windy weather, but we are talking about how to break through a key threshold.
El Nino happens every few years.
Is this a different one recently? Under the greenhouse effect, any name you can name becomes more extreme because there is more heat, whether it's El Nino or melting glaciers, or absorbing more heat in the ocean, or how big a tornado is, or what a storm in a Hurricane looks like, or how much rain it does.
Heat is the fuel for climate change.
Tropical diseases, of course, have also surged.
They show up in places we have never seen before.
Especially in parts of South America and Africa.
These diseases are moving towards the mountains as the species of mosquitoes change as the weather heats up.
Mosquitoes can climb up.
In the deadly heat wave in Chicago in 1995, people without air conditioning became victims.
The old man died without realizing how hot they were.
They have never seen such a bad heat wave.
What really fits the greenhouse theory is that the temperature does not drop at night.
When extreme heat is involved, the night temperature is affected more than the day temperature.
And the storm that swept Europe in 1990. -
At that time, the strong wind blew enough to knock off the roof of a school in Cornwall. -
The storm is also "different ".
Of course, these storms also have a big impact on the oil company BP.
They acknowledge that the greenhouse effect exists, which is a big deal.
If you ask people who used to run Amoco how they decided to acknowledge the greenhouse effect, one of the things he raised was the terrible storms in Europe and the UK.
Is there any other oil company that recognizes the greenhouse effect?
Other companies have acknowledged that.
Yes, but many companies, not oil companies: Toyota, Lockheed, Metage, 3 m, Weyerhauser.
I think it's interesting that Swiss Re is doing its own research on the greenhouse effect.
Yes, they panicked.
At both Beijing and the climate conference, more and more people are seeing delegates from insurance companies urging countries to take action as they see losses soaring.
Especially in the past 15 years, the losses related to the weather have been enormous and unprecedented.
Those guys are anxious to know if it will get worse.
The companies jumped up and said they would consider taking responsibility, but the U. S.
The government is still largely hesitant.
Tim Wells and Al Gore are great politicians.
In the past three governments, the same fundamental dynamics have affected the White House's approach to climate change.
The Environmental Protection Agency has always believed that the White House should do more about it, and the Treasury always thinks less about it.
Both the Democratic and Republican governments, the Treasury Department is concerned that actions to ease the greenhouse effect will seriously hurt the economy.
The Environmental Protection Agency always says no, we have to do it anyway, and it will even benefit the economy ---
This is my point.
You notice with great care the cost of all these damages.
How much damage did the weather damage after 90 s cause to the United States? Is there any number? Weather damage has a variety of direct and indirect effects.
Rebuilding the road--
You can quantify it.
People infected with West Nile virus-
It's a little difficult.
Sending troops to areas of the world that are unstable due to environmental problems will further aggravate the situation.
Would you like to know if your home insurance rate has gone up if you live in Florida or Carolina? You want to know if your insurance has been canceled a lot anywhere there.
Do you think the public will become more angry if the government does not act on global warming? Some financial analysts said that when global warming is proven, the public will be very angry and they will seek legal penalties for oil or coal companies like they do for tobacco companies.
They are always angry when people are fooled, so if they start thinking like this then they will do something.
It is also shocking that there have been many such disasters in the United States. S.
The government did not seem to respond enough to the loss.
They needed $12 billion in the Missouri flood in 1993, and the federal government gave them $6 billion.
George W. Are we thinking about this step by step?
Bush believes global warming does not exist.
He said so in a debate with Gore.
He is not sure if there is a greenhouse effect.
This is the derivative point of federal policy.
If you look at the new energy policy, it benefits coal-fired power plants and suggests relaxing some of the old Clean Air bills.
Look at the way Republicans refuse to change fuel requirements for SUVs.
Do you think Clinton did what he could do when his plan went off track? There are two views on this.
One is that the government gives in to the Treasury and the other is that the Clinton administration will never be able to get anything through Congress.
Even the Kyoto Protocol negotiated by the Clinton administration has never been submitted to the Senate for approval.
They voted 95 but they did not approve.
In many ways, the hands of the Clinton administration are tied.
But in some ways they are not aggressive in using the White House as a forum to educate Americans.
Clinton talked a lot with Gore, but I think they might be more positive.
Do you blame oil and coal companies for affecting our politicians?
What we are really talking about is the energy habits of Americans.
You and I and most of the people we know use more energy than we should.
We turn on the lights, we turn on the computer, we have a bigger car.
We are the gluttons of energy and energy. The movie "A. I.
"Start showing New York underwater and talk about the greenhouse effect and what happened in the past.
The film starts in the future.
But if you look at the energy habits of people in movies, you will find that they have not learned anything.
Supporting research and development of alternative energy sources is a huge problem.
The American people are unlikelyS.
It will be very much cut, but what the government should do is come up with a space plan --
Scale projects for new energy sources.
BP has a solar project.
They want all the solar panels in the United States in 2001. S.
As a way to prove how effective it is, BP radio.
I'm not sure if they're still going as planned as I haven't seen these yet, but that's their hope.
The reason they do this is that if you install a solar system in your house, it will be very expensive.
One way to reduce expenses is if you produce it in large quantities.
BP is trying to jumpstart that.
The problem is that you end up phasing out fossil fuels, which is why you reduce the greenhouse effect.
Interestingly, no matter who has developed the solar project, it will be our future billionaire country.
Yes, Americans are the biggest users of energy. Didn't a U. S.
The senator expressed surprise at the head of the Tata Institute in India, who learned how little energy is used by ordinary Indians compared to ordinary Americans, saying, "How do you manage it ", "Headline News" in India"-
How much wood can you put on your head--
It's a legal term.
They don't talk about kilowatt hours.
But in the next 50 years, India and China will become major energy consumers.
There seems to be two questions at this point: is the Earth warming, and does humans cause it? Everyone thinks the answer to the first question is yes or is there still scientists and skeptics-
Except for lawyers from the coal company. -
Who would say it would certainly not happen.
This is the nature of scientists.
They disagreed with the day before the launch of the lunar rocket and the day before the first nuclear explosion and the day before the first heart transplant.
The problem is that politicians on one side use this disagreement as an excuse and do nothing.
Since there will never be a complete agreement, we will probably stick to it forever.
Scientists believe that the role of the cloud will ease climate warming.
Those who say we are still in the ice age.
Those who believe that natural climate change is the cause of the weather, not the cause of the human race.
Those who believe that even if humans are involved in it, the effect is so insignificant compared to nature that the whole thing is ridiculous.
But these models do show that the Earth has changed faster than ever since the industrial era.
I don't know, to what extent we are too late, and we have put forward changes on Earth that we cannot reverse.
When did you reach the key threshold and see, these are terrible problems that have not been addressed, and these are terrible problems that we have not even insured.
If we want to reverse the greenhouse effect, if there is an out-of-control greenhouse effect, how much emissions do we have to cut globally, which is about 70%.
What we want to do is stop it while we develop alternative energy.
Carbon is increasing in the atmosphere, China's auto industry is booming, Asia's world population is booming, and developing countries want the same things as the United States ---
They also want air conditioning and cars.
Every artifact you can think of helps to produce a greenhouse effect.
If you buy a pair of shoes, it comes from a factory.
Factories need energy.
You ordered water at the restaurant.
It comes out of the produced faucet, which consumes energy.
This conversation on the phoneSalon. Com uses energy.
My computer is on. Look, I'm on the light. It's true.
I'm going to turn it off.
Custom message
Chat Online 编辑模式下无法使用
Chat Online inputting...