Hurricane Seasons, Erosion, Rising Seas, Sinking Land Mass

[ZoomZoom]

There’s a few of us here seen pictures our family had of the 1927 flood. 2016 was a proverbial fart in a windstorm compared to that.

Rob needs to start building an ark, one day, history will repeat itself.

[Big Tyme]

There’s a few of us here seen pictures our family had of the 1927 flood. 2016 was a proverbial fart in a windstorm compared to that.

Rob needs to start building an ark, one day, history will repeat itself.

Funny you should mention 1927. That was the start of the Levees Only course for the USACE that got us into this mess.

[Big Tyme]

I mean…I just as soon post a link to API extolling the values of oil & gas as an energy source to counter that link.

Cool. I should have added the science behind the article but I know how some posters here feet about science.
https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-su...showall%3Dtrue

[Cajunrunner]

Cool. I should have added the science behind the article but I know how some posters here feet about science.
https://www.cell.com/cell-reports-su...showall%3Dtrue

Interesting read. I'm not sure all their conclusions can really be definite as truth, such as "Combined, wind and solar generation led to 1,200 to 1,600 fewer premature mortalities in 2022", but I'm admittedly also not not a science major. Maybe my ChemE undergrad daughter can understand some of the science of that report better with the molecules evaluated for damages estimates.

All that aside, even if all the conclusions of that report are to be taken as 100% gospel fact, such as:

"Total benefits were found to be large, compared with levelized costs, energy market value, long-term contract prices, and direct subsidies."

It will be financially and structurally impossible to "transition" away from all needs for hydrocarbons even by 2050, and to try to force such a transition would be irresponsible and have other negative effects for humans not just in the United States, but across the globe.

[CajunVic]

. . .

It will be financially and structurally impossible to "transition" away from all needs for hydrocarbons even by 2050, and to try to force such a transition would be irresponsible and have other negative effects for humans not just in the United States, but across the globe.

it is those receiving the financial remuneration which you speak of that push this stuff . . . they could not care less about anything other than getting that money . . . any negative effects are a knat on an elephants ass to them so long as they get the $$$$ . . .

[Big Tyme]

Interesting read. I'm not sure all their conclusions can really be definite as truth, such as "Combined, wind and solar generation led to 1,200 to 1,600 fewer premature mortalities in 2022", but I'm admittedly also not not a science major. Maybe my ChemE undergrad daughter can understand some of the science of that report better with the molecules evaluated for damages estimates.

All that aside, even if all the conclusions of that report are to be taken as 100% gospel fact, such as:

"Total benefits were found to be large, compared with levelized costs, energy market value, long-term contract prices, and direct subsidies."

It will be financially and structurally impossible to "transition" away from all needs for hydrocarbons even by 2050, and to try to force such a transition would be irresponsible and have other negative effects for humans not just in the United States, but across the globe.

I do not disagree that a 2050 timeframe may not be possible but like any chore, it helps to put a time frame around it to get the process started, otherwise we just keep kicking the can. Our govt, fed, state and local, is usually pretty good about kicking the can down the road.
For reading interest, check out the health effects of leaded gas exhaust.

[Duckster]

About 15 years ago we were studying site selection for a project in Houma/Terrebonne Parish. One of the things I noticed was there were long swaths of land blocked from development maybe 50'-100' wide or perhaps more right in the middle of some developed areas. Not recessed retention ponds like DOTD enforces. Just more places for surface water to be absorbed into the ground. My memory is fading on the particulars but maybe the local developers were required to jointly buy these grounds. When I think of the rapid development that's been taking place in Broussard/Youngsville seems like more open land should be left undeveloped so surface waters can 'rest' instead of being channeled into a flood situation. Raises cost of developments to account for more land being set aside, but smart people usually figure these things out when there is money to be made.

[jaxmc1023]

Rip Van Winkle Gardens was damn near destroyed last night..

Had a wedding out there and the groom said it was almost certainly a tornado.

[ZoomZoom]

Rip Van Winkle Gardens was damn near destroyed last night..

Had a wedding out there and the groom said it was almost certainly a tornado.

Maybe our local media can get out there and give a report. No worry about missing it, would be the lead story thru next weekend.

[jaxmc1023]

Currently the grounds are closed at the gate because there are downed power lines and trees ripped to shreds

https://www.facebook.com/10006485946...92285/?app=fbl