HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #121  
Old Posted May 31, 2019, 9:42 AM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is online now
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cold Garden
Posts: 20,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eau Claire View Post
Not sure where you'd get that idea from. Why would I be talking about all this carbon capture technology if I was?
Fair enough. I apologize, I had only read the last few comments of the conversation.
__________________
Strong & free

'My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.' — Jack Layton
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #122  
Old Posted May 31, 2019, 3:53 PM
Eau Claire Eau Claire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 181
Here’s another Canadian one:

https://www.canada.ca/en/natural-res...and-prize.html
“Canada Announces Four Finalists for The Sky’s the Limit Challenge $5-Million Grand Prize
From: Natural Resources Canada
News release

May 29, 2019 - Vancouver, British Columbia - Natural Resources Canada
Reducing pollution from aviation will create a more competitive and sustainable industry and is critical for building a low-carbon economy. Creating cleaner fuels are central to those efforts.
Canada’s Minister of Natural Resources, the Honourable Amarjeet Sohi, today announced the four finalists of the Impact Canada The Sky’s the Limit Challenge with each finalist receiving up to $2 million to develop his or her solution.

The finalists are:
-Carbon Engineering Ltd for its Sustainable Aviation Fuel., made from Air, Water and Renewable Electricity (British Columbia);
-Enerkem for its Sustainable Aviation Fuels from Agro and Forestry Biomass and from Municipal Solid Waste through a Hub and Spoke approach (Quebec);
-FORGE Hydrocarbons Corp for its Lipid-to-Hydrocarbon Biojet Project (Alberta); and
-SAF Consortium for its Production of Sustainable Aviation Fuel from flue gas–captured CO2 and low-carbon hydrogen (Quebec)...”


But of course everyone already knew about this competition, right? Because, of course, the CBC has been keeping everyone informed about all these great programs and great advances that have been made in recent years, right? The CBC’s job is to inform, after all. It would never ignore all these programs and advances and just engage in deceptive fearmongering to try to manipulate people, right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #123  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 11:12 AM
SaskScraper's Avatar
SaskScraper SaskScraper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Saskatoon/London
Posts: 2,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
It is certainly plausible, but I have yet to see a scientific explanation that this year’s combination of factors (unusually cold winter, unusually high snowfall, unusually wet spring) is related to climate change. Maybe it is, but it is ridiculous to state that every instance of bad weather is because of climate change.

Weather ≠ Climate
Weather is a snapshot, so to speak, an instance of what the current climate is. If weather in eastern Canada skews to be colder and wetter it could be a sign of more colder wetter things to come in the future.

It's interesting to see how the Capital cities of Canada's northern territories matched up to Capital cities in southern Canada in this last month of May 2019.
Average day time high in Whitehorse was most similar to the average high in Toronto for month of May for example, average high in Yellowknife was closest matched up to Charlottetown, PEI and Iqaluit's average high was closest matched up to somewhere like Stjohns' Newfoundland & Labrador for day time highs in May.

In fact some of the last temperature readings on Friday evening in the last hours of May of 2019 exemplifies perfectly the entire month's Canadian climate in a nut shell.



Meanwhile, it has been very dry conditions in Western Canada. Alberta forest fires appear to be a very similar circumstance to the forest fires in Saskatchewan everyone probably vividly remembers back in 2015 when over 13,000 Saskatchewan residents were evacuated due to fires.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saska...uees-1.3139554
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #124  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 11:33 AM
TownGuy's Avatar
TownGuy TownGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Cobourg, ON
Posts: 1,911
Another interesting factoid. Maple Creek avg. high in February was -15C, avg low -28C. Unspeakably cold. Get used to it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #125  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 12:14 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaskScraper View Post
Weather is a snapshot, so to speak, an instance of what the current climate is. If weather in eastern Canada skews to be colder and wetter it could be a sign of more colder wetter things to come in the future.

It's interesting to see how the Capital cities of Canada's northern territories matched up to Capital cities in southern Canada in this last month of May 2019.
Average day time high in Whitehorse was most similar to the average high in Toronto for month of May for example, average high in Yellowknife was closest matched up to Charlottetown, PEI and Iqaluit's average high was closest matched up to somewhere like Stjohns' Newfoundland & Labrador for day time highs in May.
Weather is not in any way a “snapshot” of climate.

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/n...e_weather.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #126  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 12:34 PM
SaskScraper's Avatar
SaskScraper SaskScraper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Saskatoon/London
Posts: 2,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
Weather is not in any way a “snapshot” of climate.

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/n...e_weather.html
All I had to read was first sentence in your link

"The difference between weather & climate is a measure of time."

Which, in effect, is indeed a snapshot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #127  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 2:02 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaskScraper View Post
All I had to read was first sentence in your link

"The difference between weather & climate is a measure of time."

Which, in effect, is indeed a snapshot.
A snapshot implies a representative sample. The weather at a particular time is not a representative sample of climate.

If you had read further: “An easy way to remember the difference is that climate is what you expect, like a very hot summer, and weather is what you get, like a hot day with pop-up thunderstorms.”

Now maybe there has been a shift in climate and eastern North America will have a cool, wet climate in the future, but one cool, wet spring is not an indicator of this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #128  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 3:45 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Colebrook, NH (as well as QC & FL)
Posts: 25,456
Over the last ten years or so, I'm pretty sure Eastern Canada broke more heat records than cold records. (My impression, at least.) Weather seems more erratic, it seems. (Again, I'm aware weather's rarely reliable, but it seems slightly worse nowadays.)

Slower Gulf Stream, planet warmer on average, it would be surprising if the net effect of climate change was to make Eastern North America actually cooler.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #129  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 3:46 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Colebrook, NH (as well as QC & FL)
Posts: 25,456
Quote:
Originally Posted by TownGuy View Post
Another interesting factoid. Maple Creek avg. high in February was -15C, avg low -28C. Unspeakably cold. Get used to it?
Brutal. How does that compare to the surface of Mars?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #130  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 3:56 PM
MonctonRad's Avatar
MonctonRad MonctonRad is online now
Wildcats Rule!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 19,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
Brutal. How does that compare to the surface of Mars?
I'm pretty sure all the palm trees have died off and the banana crop is toast.
__________________
Go 'Cats Go
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #131  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 4:39 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
Slower Gulf Stream, planet warmer on average, it would be surprising if the net effect of climate change was to make Eastern North America actually cooler.
The scenario of both ends of the country experiencing opposite trends also seems more likely than mere independent random chance would allow. And it makes sense when you think about weather as mostly due to warm and cool air (or wet and dry) moving around from one place to another (i.e. the earth doesn't really have "warm" or "cool" days; solar radiation is pretty constant). When the cold arctic air moves south, other air tends to replace that from somewhere else. We don't see the creation of extra actic air during the cold periods. Hence when some unusual area is experiencing arctic outflow patterns, somewhere else is going to be warmer than average.

The Maple Creek stuff is funny. I visited the Prairies around Victoria Day weekend this year and it was maybe +4 with wind and rain in the early afternoon one day where I was. Maple Creek fell to -5.4 on May 19. The average high was 17 but this was a mix of +30 and +4 days in May, which I do not personally consider desirable at either end. Prairie weather is all over the place.
__________________
flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #132  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 6:05 PM
acottawa acottawa is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,420
In Ottawa the unusual thing this year has been the combination of wet and cold. For example, 2017 was quite wet, it wasn’t particularly cold. The previous coldest spring I can remember was 2004, which wasn’t unusually wet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #133  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 10:50 PM
Andy6's Avatar
Andy6 Andy6 is online now
Starring as himself
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto Yorkville
Posts: 8,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
A snapshot implies a representative sample. The weather at a particular time is not a representative sample of climate.

If you had read further: “An easy way to remember the difference is that climate is what you expect, like a very hot summer, and weather is what you get, like a hot day with pop-up thunderstorms.”

Now maybe there has been a shift in climate and eastern North America will have a cool, wet climate in the future, but one cool, wet spring is not an indicator of this.
Well, it is some evidence of it, but not very much. It’s certainly proof, if any were needed, that a warmer climate is consistent with prolonged periods of cooler weather than was normal even before the warming. Being now able to think back over more than 50 years, the weather we get now seems to be the same as it always was. Maybe that’s not quite true statistically, but if so the difference is beneath the level of ordinary human perception, at least for me.
__________________
crispy crunchy light and snappy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #134  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2019, 10:52 PM
SaskScraper's Avatar
SaskScraper SaskScraper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Saskatoon/London
Posts: 2,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by acottawa View Post
A snapshot implies a representative sample. The weather at a particular time is not a representative sample of climate.

If you had read further: “An easy way to remember the difference is that climate is what you expect, like a very hot summer, and weather is what you get, like a hot day with pop-up thunderstorms.”

Now maybe there has been a shift in climate and eastern North America will have a cool, wet climate in the future, but one cool, wet spring is not an indicator of this.
in other words, weather is the exact aspects of the climate at a given time, ie a hot summer day, as expected, with pop-up thunderstorms which isn't unexpected since part of the weather for that climate.

without weather at given points in time, you can't have a measured aspect of climate, that's why when looking at climate statistics you have objective weather measurements used to describe the climate.


Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
The scenario of both ends of the country experiencing opposite trends also seems more likely than mere independent random chance would allow. And it makes sense when you think about weather as mostly due to warm and cool air (or wet and dry) moving around from one place to another (i.e. the earth doesn't really have "warm" or "cool" days; solar radiation is pretty constant). When the cold arctic air moves south, other air tends to replace that from somewhere else. We don't see the creation of extra actic air during the cold periods. Hence when some unusual area is experiencing arctic outflow patterns, somewhere else is going to be warmer than average.

The Maple Creek stuff is funny. I visited the Prairies around Victoria Day weekend this year and it was maybe +4 with wind and rain in the early afternoon one day where I was. Maple Creek fell to -5.4 on May 19. The average high was 17 but this was a mix of +30 and +4 days in May, which I do not personally consider desirable at either end. Prairie weather is all over the place.
exactly, with climate change, some areas will have weather skewed to be warmer and some areas can skew colder on average, some areas will skew drier on average while other areas will get wetter.

+4 Victoria day weekend on "The Prairies" but you don't feel comfortable enough not to be so vague of where exactly you supposedly were?
As juvenile the humour is from some SSP posts that you think is funny, the reality is that the climate in the country may not allow for palm trees etc other than for southwestern BC, other parts of the country can't sustain large areas with arid plants either like cacti like The Prairies and interior BC can simply because of the harsh climate in eastern half of the country that gets so much snow, meters upon meters upon meters, for large part of the year, that's probably why if there were a new ice age coming, we would notice ice sheets forming in Quebec first, that province is still half covered in snow & ice and we are only 3 weeks away for days getting shorter in 2019.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #135  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2019, 12:53 AM
TownGuy's Avatar
TownGuy TownGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Cobourg, ON
Posts: 1,911
Ontario has 2 native cacti species and their range is not limited by climate but rather habitat loss.

I just have to head down to the sandy shoreline of Lake Ontario to see plants that look like they belong in a desert.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #136  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2019, 1:03 AM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is online now
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cold Garden
Posts: 20,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaskScraper View Post
Meanwhile, it has been very dry conditions in Western Canada. Alberta forest fires appear to be a very similar circumstance to the forest fires in Saskatchewan everyone probably vividly remembers back in 2015 when over 13,000 Saskatchewan residents were evacuated due to fires.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saska...uees-1.3139554
Or, you know, back to 2016 when the largest city in the country north of Edmonton was partially destroyed while tens of thousands of people were forced to evacuate through a literal tunnel of fire.


https://www.muskokaregion.com/news-s...to-huntsville/



It's actually not that uncommon for Northern Alberta to see devastating fires, nor is it for Northern Saskatchewan. The difference between us and Saskatchewan is that we have a significant population in the north (north of the ECR), with about 400 000 people. While Saskatchewan's north (north of Prince Albert) has less than 40 000 people.

Another one of Alberta's northern cities was destroyed back in 2011, but at least in Slave Lake they had three highway routes for evacuation of their 7000 people, while Fort McMurray in 2016 only had one way out for all 80 000 people, except for the airport. Thankfully these lessons have taught us a great deal about how to prevent such catastrophes going forward, and there is finally a second highway out of Fort McMurray soon to begin construction.

For reference, both of Canada's city-destroyer fires of the last 8 years were both in May.

__________________
Strong & free

'My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.' — Jack Layton
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #137  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2019, 1:39 PM
Eau Claire Eau Claire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 181
Busy week so just in and out with a quick article, because it’s very good:

https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2019/0...ation-profits/
“McKinsey & Company estimates that by 2030, CO2-based products could be worth between $800 billion and $1 trillion, and the use of CO2 for producing fuel, enriching concrete and generating power alone could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by a billion metric tons yearly. The Global Carbon Initiative projects that, with the proper incentives, by 2030 the overall CO2 based product industry could utilize seven billion metric tons of CO2 each year—about 15 percent of our current global emissions...”


The article goes on to list a number of current and potential uses, some of which were new to me, and it lists a number of key emerging companies, including several Canadian companies. It’s still relatively early days but there is sooo much potential here. Remember that growth with a new technology like this tends to follow an S curve rather than a straight line, so by 2050 these numbers could well be much bigger, much more than just proportionally bigger, but let's not be too quick to count our chickens before they've hatched. Lots of hard work, and perhaps a bit of government support as well, will be required to turn that potential into a reality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #138  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2019, 1:56 PM
Eau Claire Eau Claire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 181
So everyone knows that the forest fires have nothing to do with climate change, right? Good. Once again, we’re warming at a rate of between 0.02 and 0.03 C per year. The IPCC didn’t pick the end of the century, 80 years from now, as it’s deadline because we’re at some kind of crisis point today. 50 to 80 years x 0.03C may well add up to a problem towards the end of the century, but not today.

The bad news, however, is that we may well be having these forest fires for another 20 to 30 years. The real main cause of these forest fires is the build up of dead material on the forest floor, because we’ve been putting out forest fires for the last 100 years, and not letting the smaller fires burn and natural the forest renewal process take its course. And as a result we’ve got these huge fires just waiting to break out all over the forested area of the province. The same thing was discussed in that PBS show earlier in this thread. I know that they’re thinning out and doing prescribed burns around towns now, but there is just too much forest to thin out manually. It’s going to have to burn off, and because of the way we’ve managed the forest over the last century those fires are now going to be big ones.
https://globalnews.ca/news/5340342/a...e-suppression/
(For those who’ve been following along, ironically the expert in this article is from Queens!)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #139  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2019, 2:37 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eau Claire View Post
So everyone knows that the forest fires have nothing to do with climate change, right?

Wrong, while I get your point about poor forest management adding to the problem dryer hotter weather has universally become longer over the past 40 years. Areas like B.C's Sunshine Coast which despite it's name would get ample amounts of rainfall no matter what the season are experience more frequent droughts and hot weather. To say climate change has "nothing" to do with forest fires is naive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #140  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2019, 3:47 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is online now
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cold Garden
Posts: 20,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by TownGuy View Post
Ontario has 2 native cacti species and their range is not limited by climate but rather habitat loss.

I just have to head down to the sandy shoreline of Lake Ontario to see plants that look like they belong in a desert.
That's wild. I'm from there and never had any idea that Ontario had native cacti. Alberta does as well, but they're just everywhere in the southern 1/3 so it's hard to miss them.
__________________
Strong & free

'My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.' — Jack Layton
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:04 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.