• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Hurricane Dorian thread

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Zstream said:
Yes, I’m quite aware of that. I don’t mind shifting focus to the US for production. I’m willing to pay more for goods if it’s manufactured here. The point being is that people on this forum and in real life are easily manipulated because of ignorance or just stupidity. Again, debate the facts and I’m fine, but don’t bring up the EPA and how your engine is getting better m/g without knowing the process that they just undergo to measure.

You know how your engine turns off now at “idle”? That adds into your m/g statement. Yet, you put blinders on the fact, that putting the engine in an off state and sharply turning the engine on and increasing the RPM adds more pollution than leaving the damn engine on (strictly speaking about common city traffic and not bumper to bumper).
Click to expand...


Manufacturing is not coming back to America, even if it does it would be for high value automated production.

USA and Canada are extremely wasteful. It is time to curb that.
 
Zstream said:
Yes, I’m quite aware of that. I don’t mind shifting focus to the US for production. I’m willing to pay more for goods if it’s manufactured here. The point being is that people on this forum and in real life are easily manipulated because of ignorance or just stupidity. Again, debate the facts and I’m fine, but don’t bring up the EPA and how your engine is getting better m/g without knowing the process that they just undergo to measure.

You know how your engine turns off now at “idle”? That adds into your m/g statement. Yet, you put blinders on the fact, that putting the engine in an off state and sharply turning the engine on and increasing the RPM adds more pollution than leaving the damn engine on (strictly speaking about common city traffic and not bumper to bumper).
Click to expand...

The total quantity of fuel burned is still less & CO2 emissions lower. Few cars actually use the engine off at idle system.
 
BUTCH1 said:
No, I'm not "guilty" of driving one of those shrimp-boats on wheels, transporting a family can be accomplished with a station-wagon or mini-van. I drive a mid-sized car that gets 22/31 and roughly 1/2 of my trips are done on an electric bike. Hopefully, future regulations will outlaw land-bargaining es permanently.
Click to expand...
To keep the off topic chatter down I’ll spoiler these replies:
@BUTCH1

Um by we, I meant my family and I. Not you.

Having just recently taken a trip out west and rented a mini-van let me just say I was thoroughly unimpressed. The highway mileage was no better than our suburban and it almost overheated in Death Valley.

Our other cars are an 11 year old mid-sized sedan that gets 22-33 and a lightweight 2 door manual that gets 30+ on the highway.

There are virtually no station wagons in the US market so they really aren’t an option. An electric bike is not an option for us.

The point isn’t to ban SUVs to ban them. There are legitimate reasons to own a vehicle with those capabilities. The point is to regulate them so their impact is lessened or eliminated.

I wished a hybrid or fully electric version existed. Which is why I want efficiency standards to continue to be ratcheted up.

There’s no technical reason a vehicle, even an SUV, must create greenhouse gasses.

@Zstream
Interesting stream of consciousness there bud. The only part I’ll choose to address is the mpg.

Our early 00’s Suburban was 14-18mpg but really returned around 13.5mpg. The best it did was 19mpg on the highway.

Our 15 Suburban which added 2 more gears, cylinder deactivation so it can cruise as a 4 cylinder, and had aerodynamic tweaks done was supposed to be 17-21mpg. We’ve been averaging 18.8mpg.

The trip computer will save the best 50 miles mileage. Our best so far has been 26.7

So 18.8 vs 13.5 is about 39%
26.7 vs 19 is about 41%.

While the EPA estimates are only about 16-20% better the newer truck is much easier to beat those estimates while the previous one it was almost impossible.

Your mileage may vary though. 😉

@uclaLabrat
@Jaskalas
@TheVrolok
:flushed:
 
Greenman said:
.12% energy increase from .025% atmospheric composition change. That's a big delta from a tiny change.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right as these things aren't linear and we're still talking minute changes that will vastly increase as concentrations of relevant gasses edge up. These changes redefine the equilibrium at a higher energy state which creates a positive feedback releasing more methane from permafrost and more.

Climate is extremely finely tuned and data sets show human caused warming starting hundreds of years ago, before the Industrial Revolution if you are interested.

This is also why there are no precise and wholly accurate models, something deniers complain about constantly as they have an agenda to ignore the facts or are so ignorant of the science that they fall for Fox and their ilk.

Pardon me if I explain something you know but "chaotic" systems are those where a little change in input results in effects that are impossible in principle to predict however there is a probabilistic range and trend that results.

Bottom line is that things will continue to heat, the damaging effects increase by some exponential amount that create unanticipated adverse results.

Climate is a system for which there is a central tendency and up to a point removing our influence MAY cause the system to go back to its quasi-equilibrium point. But that point may be passed with the melting of permafrost as an example. Eventually the increased energy results to a new higher central tendency and where will that be? No one can know, but if it happens then we may have a 5,10 or 30C shift, maybe far far higher than that and our ass is fried.

Listening to idiots who are more worried about the politics or mere money may be our Great Filter we fail.

That's the science and if that sounds alarming, that's not Al Gore who is responsible but what we collectively do leading to these consequences.
 
Paratus said:
To keep the off topic chatter down I’ll spoiler these replies:
@BUTCH1

Um by we, I meant my family and I. Not you.

Having just recently taken a trip out west and rented a mini-van let me just say I was thoroughly unimpressed. The highway mileage was no better than our suburban and it almost overheated in Death Valley.

Our other cars are an 11 year old mid-sized sedan that gets 22-33 and a lightweight 2 door manual that gets 30+ on the highway.

There are virtually no station wagons in the US market so they really aren’t an option. An electric bike is not an option for us.

The point isn’t to ban SUVs to ban them. There are legitimate reasons to own a vehicle with those capabilities. The point is to regulate them so their impact is lessened or eliminated.

I wished a hybrid or fully electric version existed. Which is why I want efficiency standards to continue to be ratcheted up.

There’s no technical reason a vehicle, even an SUV, must create greenhouse gasses.

@Zstream
Interesting stream of consciousness there bud. The only part I’ll choose to address is the mpg.

Our early 00’s Suburban was 14-18mpg but really returned around 13.5mpg. The best it did was 19mpg on the highway.

Our 15 Suburban which added 2 more gears, cylinder deactivation so it can cruise as a 4 cylinder, and had aerodynamic tweaks done was supposed to be 17-21mpg. We’ve been averaging 18.8mpg.

The trip computer will save the best 50 miles mileage. Our best so far has been 26.7

So 18.8 vs 13.5 is about 39%
26.7 vs 19 is about 41%.

While the EPA estimates are only about 16-20% better the newer truck is much easier to beat those estimates while the previous one it was almost impossible.

Your mileage may vary though. 😉

@uclaLabrat
@Jaskalas
@TheVrolok
:flushed:
Click to expand...

Lol.. again the facts just zoom by you.
 
The central pressure has dropped down to 922 mb's. The lower it goes the better organized the structure is. When it drops below 900 mb's you know it will be a record breaking storm.
 
Paratus said:
To keep the off topic chatter down I’ll spoiler these replies:
@BUTCH1

Um by we, I meant my family and I. Not you.

Having just recently taken a trip out west and rented a mini-van let me just say I was thoroughly unimpressed. The highway mileage was no better than our suburban and it almost overheated in Death Valley.

Our other cars are an 11 year old mid-sized sedan that gets 22-33 and a lightweight 2 door manual that gets 30+ on the highway.

There are virtually no station wagons in the US market so they really aren’t an option. An electric bike is not an option for us.

The point isn’t to ban SUVs to ban them. There are legitimate reasons to own a vehicle with those capabilities. The point is to regulate them so their impact is lessened or eliminated.

I wished a hybrid or fully electric version existed. Which is why I want efficiency standards to continue to be ratcheted up.

There’s no technical reason a vehicle, even an SUV, must create greenhouse gasses.

@Zstream
Interesting stream of consciousness there bud. The only part I’ll choose to address is the mpg.

Our early 00’s Suburban was 14-18mpg but really returned around 13.5mpg. The best it did was 19mpg on the highway.

Our 15 Suburban which added 2 more gears, cylinder deactivation so it can cruise as a 4 cylinder, and had aerodynamic tweaks done was supposed to be 17-21mpg. We’ve been averaging 18.8mpg.

The trip computer will save the best 50 miles mileage. Our best so far has been 26.7

So 18.8 vs 13.5 is about 39%
26.7 vs 19 is about 41%.

While the EPA estimates are only about 16-20% better the newer truck is much easier to beat those estimates while the previous one it was almost impossible.

Your mileage may vary though. 😉

@uclaLabrat
@Jaskalas
@TheVrolok
:flushed:
Click to expand...
Here's the thing, they can only do so much regarding improving MPG, if you offer people a $45K SUV with a gutless 6 cylinder as it's power plant you will sell few of them. An electric SUV?, they will be expensive as hell due to the size of battery you will need to run it, who would want to fork over $60K on a SUV that needs to be recharged?. Not how we roll in 'merica.
 
Puffnstuff said:
NHC now shows central pressure at 913 mb's.
Click to expand...
Yea, I just saw the 11:00 updates, people on the east cost of FL, (like me) blew a sigh of relief when the track shifted to the east yesterday, but now several models still show a possible landfall with it striping up the coast. County managers are holding off on evacuation orders because they never go smoothly and some folks have older parents living with them that don't travel easily. There are ton's of homes built in the '60's, '70's, (like mine), '80's that although most are of cinder block construction will fail in this type of horrific storm. As an example of how forcasting a slow, gigantic storm is, hurricane Irma was supposed to go around the Keys and go up the west side wound up going right up the gut, people evacuated from Tampa to Orlando and wound up right in the path.
 
snoopy7548 said:
"All I'm saying is, let's just try it once and see what happens. Okay?"
Click to expand...
LOL, this monster would chew up a nuclear explosion and spit it out like you or I would a cherry pit, if it were to have any chance, (and that's highly doubtful) it would have to be done in the early formation, either way would spew fallout everywhere.
 
snoopy7548 said:
"All I'm saying is, let's just try it once and see what happens. Okay?"
Click to expand...
Quick thinking staffers distract him with a freshly made cheeseburger narrowly averting disaster. 😛 I was looking at the storm on my accuweather app and it said that the storm had sustained winds of 212 mph with gusts to 258 mph. 😱
 

Attachments

  • WIN_20190901_14_07_34_Pro.jpg
    WIN_20190901_14_07_34_Pro.jpg
    201.6 KB · Views: 18
BUTCH1 said:
He's only been in office 2 years so I doubt his dumb-fuck anti green actions have had enough time to add substantially to the problem of us burning fossil fuels for the last 174 years. the major factor is countries like India ans China have come a long way (in standard of living sense) in the last 30 years, better living standards means bigger carbon footprint.
Click to expand...

He's part of the proudly anti-science GOP. Every single proud member of the GOP is equally responsible for the ever-increasing strength of these storms, and for every climactic disaster going forward. That's just how it is for as long as they continue to deny cold hard facts that are hitting them like a sledgehammer in their collective mouth-breathing faces.
 
BUTCH1 said:
Yea, I know, it has not been long enough though for his dip-shit policies to have a big impact yet, hopefully he gets booted out in 2020 and we can go back to normal.
Click to expand...
Not "normal." We need to again have a starting position of acknowledging that we have a huge problem in front of us and that we need to apply ourselves intensively, diligently, and without wavering in finding ways to combat it effectively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top