Environmental News

Flight path was a direct line from CJC to SCL. I had a left side window seat, and an excellent view of Aconcagua to the east, though most of the PV fields were well before we had traveled that far south.

WA residential PV incentives tapped out long ago, thanks to very high interest and adoption greatly exceeding local program limits. The first program became oversubscribed, with payments pro-rated, not long after I joined, and expired four years ago. A second state program is still paying out for a few more years, but hit its enrollment cap and closed almost immediately after opening. It did stay open longer than a Taylor Swift concert ticket sale, but not by much.

But the family farm is not in WA, and 100-400 acres doesn't fit into any 10kW-max residential program. And mentioned lease rates are clearly too good to be realistic, no one is really going to pay more in annual rent than full purchase price, without some very major catches.

Lots of second-growth forest on the family plot too, but nothing in FIA.

(FWIW, the farm does include one of these grid points: FDSN: TA: USArray Transportable Array
It would have been nice to have adopted our station to keep it operating in place, but that adoption program started after ours was pulled up and moved to its next assignment.)

There is a lot of ag-poor land east of our Cascades that might be suitable. Various places with center-pivot irrigation also could put PV in the uncovered corners, especially those piled high with cleared rocks. Better corners could be packed less dense with PV, allowing plenty of sunlight to filter down for good pollinator habitats, as assists for the adjacent crops.

Though I still have a preference towards putting PV over existing roofs and impervious surfaces, to minimize loss of flora habitat.

 

Had to go read it just to find out what 'injectable' meant.

What they're calling a syringe, I'm not sure I wouldn't just call a hand pump.

 

Sure, but you can call it something that doesn't make the reader go "I wonder what an injectable filter is? Where would I be injecting it?".

 

"Worst of it".....
Aptly put.

At the beginning of the 19th century, the number of 1 billion people was exceeded for the first time in history.
That means that Einstein was.......'one in a billion.'
So was Gandhi....Sir Tansley....and others.

Human capital.
If our 'super-power' is adaptability, then you're going to need a billionaire or two...AND some paupers.

 

If it's like any lab I've worked in, there is a nice supply of them laying around. Though 1.5L ones appear to be used for industrial purposes, like sucking oil out of a differential, and not have the standard port for needles.

Injectable is a bit odd, but membrane disc filters that work with syringes are a common lab tool. They are called syringe, aspiration, or injection filters. I use 0.2 micron ones to sterilize temperature sensitive solutions.

They advancement with the hydrogel is in the reusability. A paper or polymer membrane one quickly clogs.

 

So I don't usually watch StarTalk (Neil deGrasse Tyson YouTube channel) but one of his latest videos described how 2023 broke NASA's climate prediction model as the hottest year ever recorded, by a record margin of 0.15ºC (0.27ºF - 2016 was the previous record holder BTW). It appears, because of how we got so good at getting rid of pollution, we are 100% the cause of it along with the Solar Maximum. It's a good video of how NASA Goddard Institute, as illustrated by their climatologist, Gavin Schmidt, tracked the temperature increase and how they have to fix their model for future temperature increases. It doesn't bode well for the immediate future.

 

segue into - is 10 years out still a viable bet when tracking future predictions?
I track the 10 day weather forecast along with the home energy usage.
Some 10 day forecasts are spot on, others change multiple times per 10 days, per couple of days, multiple times per day.
Is there a point?
Not that I'd have the slightest clue, oh hell anyways, will quantum computers lead to more intelligent humans or less intelligent humans. Or will it be pretty much the same intelligence with a new toy to play with.

 

How do those 10-day forecast compare to how well they can predict whether a week six months out will average warmer or cooler, wetter or drier, than this week? What is the likelihood of snow here that week compared to this week?

 

Isn't the 6 month - 1 year forecast still the framers almanac area of expertise?
Weekly forecasts are and have been pretty ubiquitous for a long time, I've never noticed many monthly forecasts ( but I don't track NOAA conditions, either ). Yearly are unheard of for me, and I wouldn't want to have to try running the numbers for them on accuracy percentage(s) for the year.
Our utility offers a (daily average temperature for the month ) calculation for the billing month and the previous years corresponding month and I've never seen that calculation be more than 1° F different from a year prior same month,+ or - ...
Yearly hurricane forecasting is still pretty difficult to get spot on. And the only forecast - weather wise - that even dare going out more than a year, that I've seen - are climate change predictors, and many of the those are starting to change now. I've already seen 3 or 4 different models changing for the - not so good outlook - with climate change, water quality, Atlantic s north to south oceanic river as well as glacial melt rates. And glacial melt rates have been being recalculated for several years already.
Now. meteorologists are starting to hit that the northern Arctic is seeing the fastest rate of warming on the planet.

Than there's Nostradamus. A good read for those that like to make predictions of future events, or so I've heard.
Nostradamus - Wikipedia

 

While I prefer making predictions of past events, I'm still pretty sure, if I had to, I could make a confident prediction of how the likelihood of snow here this week compares to the likelihood of snow the last week of July. I could still be surprised, but I think it's a chance I would take.

 

That monthly consistency should be a clue why it is so specious to reference the (in)accuracy of 10-day forecasts when questioning 10-year climate projections.

If we can 'predict' local monthly averages to less than a degree a year in advance, without any current observations and forecasting power at all, it should be clear that the much larger daily errors of the 10-day forecasts are not a factor in the longer term climate projections.