Global Warming

Chris

Gold
Oct 21, 2002
7,951
28
0
www.caribbetech.com
I would truly question your sanity if you were holding your breath ;)

But we are seeing a quasi-migration from the Northerners to our warmer climates, even in the DR. Without discussing politics, our large neighbors to the North has not really followed the principles of "making friends and influencing people", and sites like Escape from America are prospering..

According to this report, it seems like Europe is getting colder as we speak (Yes, I know I'm exaggerating here)

So, political influences are making people look for another place to live, and more frequently predictions on climatic conditions seem to be more dire. Seems to me more people are going to want to leave (possibly leave the planet). The 'Caribbean Island' dream is prospering in amongst our cousins up North.

So, this question is not for the 'breath-holders' lol amongst us. It is possibly directed more to the wannabe social scientists.
 

Texas Bill

Silver
Feb 11, 2003
2,174
26
0
97
www.texasbill.com
Cris---The proposition is one of "Catch-22"---

Global Warming will involve the Northern Climes, which will ,by the nature of the event, become more Tropical in nature. Where will that leave the current Tropical areas of tourism??? Out in the HEAT, I'm afraid, since most of the tourist areas are islands of the Caribbean, have limited Land space (which will undoubtably become innundated) and even more people/sq.mile occupying the available land.
The warming (not withstanding "The Day After Tomorrow" scenario) trend will be slow enough so that Nations will accomodate the changes over time---up to a point! If the Warming trend isn't reversed, well, we won't have to worry about the results---We'll all go the way of the dinosaurs.. Only solution will be to populate some other planet in another solar system that we can adapt to and survive on.
Nice future, what???

From the doomsayer's bible.....

Texas Bill
 

Chris

Gold
Oct 21, 2002
7,951
28
0
www.caribbetech.com
Texas Bill said:
Global Warming will involve the Northern Climes, which will ,by the nature of the event, become more Tropical in nature.

That is what is so strange to me... No, it does not seem as if this phenomenon makes things warmer at the outset, but it makes the water supply disappear - first it looks like it gets much much colder and then things turn to crap and it gets warmer, cause there is no more water, and no more vegetation... Does sound like a scene from a scifi movie..

"The conference also heard a gloomy analysis of the way the North Atlantic Ocean is reacting to global warming from Ruth Curry of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts. Her new study showed that vast amounts of fresh water more than 20,000 cubic kilometres have been added to the northernmost parts of the ocean over the past 40 years because the Arctic and Greenland ice sheets are melting.

According to Dr Curry, the resulting change in the salinity balance of the water threatens to shut down the Ocean Conveyor Belt, which transfers heat from the tropics towards the polar regions through currents such as the Gulf Stream. If that happened, winter temperatures in northern Europe would fall by several degrees."
 

Texas Bill

Silver
Feb 11, 2003
2,174
26
0
97
www.texasbill.com
Cris, you're right on that score------

I'm not a weatherman, but as fresh water is added to the "conveyor belt" of the Gulf Stream, the salinity is significantly reduced therefore the specific gravity is changed to a point that the salt water doesn't sink, returning at depth to the originating area, thus eventually shutting down the circulation which maintained the balance. The result is that the belt stagnates. That leaves the water to absorb the lower temperatures and because it is more fresh than salty, it freezes at a much higher temperature. Ergo, another Ice Age!
According to what and who i have read on the subject, such a scenario is possible over a short (50-100 years) period of time but could be accelerated depending on the amount of heat dissapated by the waters.
It is not beyound my comprehension or understanding, but I have to acknowledge that I don't have the necessary scientific education to fully explain all the entricacies. Just a generalized understanding of the mechanism at play.

That's also referred to as "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing". Just hopw I'm not too guilty of that.

Texas Bill
 

deelt

Bronze
Mar 23, 2004
987
2
0
Ultimately, if we really need to change trends in global warming we will need the US, China and India to ratify Kyoto. Period. End of discussion.

Thus, all DR can do is mitigate, compensate and prevent. In making the most of it, DR should be tapping into financial resources to create "sustainable development" projects (I know it's such a misnomer...what is sustainable development). Regardless, while DR could be farther ahead in this compared to where near by countries are in the process they do seem to not be totally asleep at the wheel. Here is a posting from yesterday's news:

--------------------------------------
World Bank PCF funds open to DR
Environment Minister Max Puig says that the DR could sell certified emission reductions (CERs) under the Kyoto Protocol to industrialized countries that are signatories of the treaty, such as Japan, Canada and Germany. He said these could be used for sustainable development projects. Puig spoke on occasion of the start of the worldwide implementation of the Kyoto Protocol, which the DR signed in 2002. Puig explained that the DR has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Canada and the World Bank to have access to the Prototype Carbon Fund (PCF). The fund establishes a partnership between 17 companies and six governments, managed by the World Bank. As the first carbon fund, its mission is to pioneer the market for project-based greenhouse gas emission reductions while promoting sustainable development and offering a learning-by-doing opportunity to its stakeholders.
Puig explained that through the PCF, the DR could carry out energy projects, including the capture of methane in garbage dumps for the generation of energy.
See http://carbonfinance.org/pcf/Home_Main.cfm for examples of projects underway in other countries.
The Kyoto Protocol is an international treaty on global warming.
-----------------------------------------

But then again in the same news clip, it also announces that Leonel sat with Rainieri & Co. to plan the building of other resorts...so it makes me chuckle, since I doubt the it will be an ecotourist site. Then, again, maybe they'll surprise me.

I hope they do.
Best,
Deelt
 

Keith R

"Believe it!"
Jan 1, 2002
2,984
36
48
www.temasactuales.com
Deni, China and India have ratified both the Framework Convention and the Kyoto Protocol. They simply haven't made any real commitments under the Protocol, which they are allowed to get away with because of their classification under its present wording. This is one heck of a gaping hole in the Protocol, in my estimation.

It also would help if Australia ratified.

Regards,
Keith

P.S. For the DR to have methane gas capture worth talking about, they'd better first get a real sanitary landfill. They also should give careful thought as to how they're going to utilize the gas (generate a small electrical plant? run buses and specially fitted cars? something else?)...
 
Last edited:

Chris

Gold
Oct 21, 2002
7,951
28
0
www.caribbetech.com
We discussed Kyoto on another thread recently. Keith mentioned that Mexico is now trading their CERs on the Chigago Mercantile exchange, if my memory serves me right (too lazy to check the thread). I'm totally with you on Kyoto, and that the other three bigs ones should now sign. And not just sign, but actually do. I just think that the DR will do very little, even though it is a signatory. Can you even imagine a real study on finding methane gas out of garbage dumps in the DR? My mind cannot get around it ;) We'll be lucky here if there could be emissions control set for vehicles - probably take 20 years to implement. So, as far as the DR is concerned, I think talk is cheap at the moment. No real action, lots of words, especially where the word 'fund' is being used. ;)

Sustainable 'development' is another thread I think. However, there are good models these days to look at, and good voices in the field, especially in the development of eco villages. I just think that more needs to be done on national and international levels.
 

Texas Bill

Silver
Feb 11, 2003
2,174
26
0
97
www.texasbill.com
And how soes all this add up when the DR is planning to----

authorize the building of TWO coal-fired Electric generating plants!!! in Manzanillo and another in Samana???

Have any of you seen all that green-grey stuff coming out of the smokestacks and drifting in the wind lately???

Isn't the so-called Protocol supposed to foster a reduction in emissions???

Texas Bill
 

deelt

Bronze
Mar 23, 2004
987
2
0
Keith
You are right I should have been more verbose and clearer, thanks for fixing that. I realize that China and India due to their "developing country" status are opting not to make any emmission reduction commitments which the US is using as an excuse not to ratify. At the heart of the matter our energy consumption patters are a big hindrance on this issue, but China and India by their sheer size will not be far behind under current growth scenarios.

The CDM regardless is a makeshift mechanism to JUST DO SOMETHING. Not to say that it is the panacea for GW.

On the methane gas capture...it's funny but your right. Also to even gather methane it has to be worth something for somebody. I just don't see
the sustainability of it in DR and will be hard pressed to find it working elsewhere, without a gov't subsidy. Yet the carbon fund is an effort to bring some money to DR. It's up to them to put the money to honest use.

For most of these plants to work the gas production cannot be far away from the end user. I think in the most efficient sites the distance is a few short miles.

Keith R said:
Deni, China and India have ratified both the Framework Convention and the Kyoto Protocol. They simply haven't made any real commitments under the Protocol, which they are allowed to get away with because of their classification under its present wording. This is one heck of a gaping hole in the Protocol, in my estimation.

It also would help if Australia ratified.

Regards,
Keith

P.S. For the DR to have methane gas capture worth talking about, they'd better first get a real sanitary landfill. They also should give careful thought as to how they're going to utilize the gas (generate a small electrical plant? run buses and specially fitted cars? something else?)...
 

deelt

Bronze
Mar 23, 2004
987
2
0
Interesting article in today's Washington Post

This is not to say that I support or not carbon sequestration, but I do think this article is balanced.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42365-2005Feb21_2.html

At the heart of the matter is that fossil fuels are cheap and are abundant natural resources in the US and China, feeding as the article says 85% of the world's commercial energy needs. For strong economies this is what matters.

I think the DR can pick up on some major issues:
1) Is or will DR ever support meaningful reductions in GHG emissions?
2) What incentives are there to go the anti-SUV/gas-guzzler route?
3) What are the incentives to go to the alternative energy route?

Just brainstorming here...putting it out into the DR1 enviro universe.

D
 

gringito

New member
Feb 21, 2005
126
0
0
Methane to Ethanol

deelt said:
Keith
You are right I should have been more verbose and clearer, thanks for fixing that. I realize that China and India due to their "developing country" status are opting not to make any emmission reduction commitments which the US is using as an excuse not to ratify. At the heart of the matter our energy consumption patters are a big hindrance on this issue, but China and India by their sheer size will not be far behind under current growth scenarios.

The CDM regardless is a makeshift mechanism to JUST DO SOMETHING. Not to say that it is the panacea for GW.

On the methane gas capture...it's funny but your right. Also to even gather methane it has to be worth something for somebody. I just don't see
the sustainability of it in DR and will be hard pressed to find it working elsewhere, without a gov't subsidy. Yet the carbon fund is an effort to bring some money to DR. It's up to them to put the money to honest use.

For most of these plants to work the gas production cannot be far away from the end user. I think in the most efficient sites the distance is a few short miles.
Very easy and economical to produce ethanol from methane and then use it as an additive to the gasoline in cars and trucks. You can make it out of methane which can be captured from landfills and water treatment facilities and also produce it form sugar cane very cheaply. Wee have done studies that show the DR could actually become a net exporter of ethanol in a very short period of time.
 

gringito

New member
Feb 21, 2005
126
0
0
We?

Keith R said:
We? [one eyebrow darts up.] Who might "we" be?

Gringo si, estupido, no. I am a very invested investor in the DR new to this board and willing to be open to all who are open to me. New here but living 50% of my time for 5 years. I realize that does not make me an expert and probably makes me appear even less than sane but such is life. I develop inrastructure projects here and in Colombia. Solid fuel power plants, ethanol from sugar cane and VGO from used lube oil. And I love this place and all it's problems. And I look forward to further discussion with you sir.

Regards,

Gringito
 

deelt

Bronze
Mar 23, 2004
987
2
0
Gringito,
The cost of processing the reaction is not what concerns me. It's getting the trash to the landfill and processing the water...if the gov't ever gets around to it. In a country that provides trash collection services on what seems like a monthly basis and distributes water to a selective cadre of people when they feel like it, these are just not efficient enough processes to make a steady income stream, and thus a profitable business.

Now ethanol production from sugar cane is something I would need to look into. Based on a quickie internet search I see that after a 3-5 year adjustment period one can get 30,000 liters ethanol/Ha/Year from 300 MT cane/Ha/Year; essentially, 100 liters ethanol/1 MT cane...This is assuming that the volatility of ethanol (it boils 78 deg. Celsius) has been effectively address, resulting in maximum capture, and cane yield is optimal.

Here's the two million dollar questions I see: How much does it take to process the trash? What does the ethanol market look like (that is what is it's size and duration)?

I would think it is hard to get favorable pricing for ethanol in such an unstable market. It seems logical that buyers demanding product will buy in bulk and would then benefit from purchaing from companies with more upscale production.

Based on my very unofficial survey, taxi drivers like other high gasoline/fuel consumers in developing countries find this type of gasoline messes up their cars. I think for this to really work car manufactures have to be in the loop to make sure that their products are in fact ethanol-friendly.

I have a long day at work tomorrow. I have to stop here.

Good luck.
D
gringito said:
Very easy and economical to produce ethanol from methane and then use it as an additive to the gasoline in cars and trucks. You can make it out of methane which can be captured from landfills and water treatment facilities and also produce it form sugar cane very cheaply. Wee have done studies that show the DR could actually become a net exporter of ethanol in a very short period of time.
 

gringito

New member
Feb 21, 2005
126
0
0
Right You Are

D,
There is great new technology to capture methane very cost efficiently from landfills but you are right, the problem in the DR is the lack of organized garbage collection. Our interest in producing ethanol in the DR would be limited to making it from sugar cane. The pricing for ethanol is just under that of automotive gasoline per gallon. It is very clean and has no negative effects on car engines. Some large or traffic congesteed cities like Bogota are mandating required ethanol/gasoline mixtures to help conserve gasoline and also help on emissions. The market for it in the States is very strong.
 

deelt

Bronze
Mar 23, 2004
987
2
0
Yes the inclusion of ethanol as an additive ann/or fuel alternative can appear a better alternative to using MTBE, etc. However, depending who you ask it can be a love/hate relationship with ethanol.

Best of luck.
D
gringito said:
D,
The pricing for ethanol is just under that of automotive gasoline per gallon. It is very clean and has no negative effects on car engines. Some large or traffic congesteed cities like Bogota are mandating required ethanol/gasoline mixtures to help conserve gasoline and also help on emissions. The market for it in the States is very strong.
 

Keith R

"Believe it!"
Jan 1, 2002
2,984
36
48
www.temasactuales.com
gringito said:
Gringo si, estupido, no. I am a very invested investor in the DR new to this board and willing to be open to all who are open to me. New here but living 50% of my time for 5 years. I realize that does not make me an expert and probably makes me appear even less than sane but such is life. I develop inrastructure projects here and in Colombia. Solid fuel power plants, ethanol from sugar cane and VGO from used lube oil. And I love this place and all it's problems. And I look forward to further discussion with you sir.

Regards,

Gringito
Gringito, chill. I never called or implied you or anyone else on this thread is stupid, nor questioned your credentials. Merely asked what "we" meant. Watch that chip on your shoulder.
Regards,
Keith R
The Environment Forum Moderator :glasses:
 

gringito

New member
Feb 21, 2005
126
0
0
Just Kidding Keith

Keith R said:
Gringito, chill. I never called or implied you or anyone else on this thread is stupid, nor questioned your credentials. Merely asked what "we" meant. Watch that chip on your shoulder.
Regards,
Keith R
The Environment Forum Moderator :glasses:
I didn't take offense to you comments and there is no chip on the shoulder here. I always enjoy your remarks and insights.

Regards