Lithium batteries, not worth it

The Milankovitch effect works on the ice cover on the northern reaches of the Northern hemisphere. CO2 levels rise because the as earth's albedo is reduced and more solar radiation is absorbed. making the oceans get warmer, so they doesn't dissolve as much CO2. The excess moves into the atmosphere.

If you could timing data for the

Pushing CO2 levels up from 315ppm to 421ppm from 1958 to 2023 is a 34% rise. That isn't a "tiny fraction".

And it has raised the global average temperature by 1.3 degrees Celcius. Where it matters - around the Arctic circle - it has pushed it up move, melting the ice cover, meaning that more solar radiatio is being absorbed up there, producing even more warming.

Water has a habit of condensing out of the atmosphere and falling as rain. Water vapour imbalances equilibrate out in about three weeks. CO2 hangs around in the atmosphere for about 800 years.

Very wise. You don't actually have any ideas to give - what you post is straight climate change denial propaganda - and if you are gullible enough to fall for that any original ideas that you might have would have to be too ill-informed to be worth passing on.

We didn't have to. Our sun is a "young" metal-rich population 1 state formed some 4.5 million years ago, when the universe had already had 8 billion years worth of supernova,

Since the planet hadn't formed when the supernova that forged our heavy metals went off, the distance isn't all that important. The supernova - or probably a whole lot of them - had to occur somewhere in our galaxy, but a few billion years is enough to let the metals get spread around

Wrong time scale.

In those days there were no civilizations, no humans, and none of our current crop plants and fewer useful animals. The atmosphere didn't cause life to 'explode', that happened with time (to create new species and expand into new ecological niches).

Current losses of species mean something important. It means we cannot associate the current increase in CO2 with a "great explosion" of life today. Correlation is NOT seen, nor causation.

Yep, as long as you don't factor in the cost of maintenance and repair. Each wind turbine is likely to have a fault at least 3x per year and possibly 10x per year. A whole army of repair technicians travelling to far flung sites on the top of mountains has to be paid for in our utility bills.

More like a six pack of empty beer cans in the drivers footwell :)

Everybody does,

But the utility companies keep on building more of them, because they still make more money out of them than out of the coal-fired and gas-fired generators, which also need maintenance, along with the power lines that distribute the power.

If the climate alarmists are now predicting that a few degrees rise in temperature is going to destroy all the ice at the poles and the world's land masses are going to flood where do all these ice core samples come from? If the world was a lot hotter with elevated levels of CO2 wouldn't all the ice have melted?

Hereabouts, they don't even carry gasoline. They tow you to a gas station.

The ice cores came from Greenland and Antarctica, and they are safely in refrigerated storage.

Global warming will probably destroy any ice at the north pole - which is just an ice sheet floating on the Arctic Ocean - in a few decades.

Sea level rise depends on getting the Greenland ice sheet and the west Antarctic ice sheets to slide off into the ocean. They won't melt in situ for thousands of years yet, but they are showing signs of instability. The east Antarctic ice sheet is a lot thicker and will last a lot longer.

This is one of the less well-informed posts I've seen here.

Do normal power stations not need maintainance? In fact don't they have full time staff?

Pitifull isn't it?

Actually they like it. As you would like more oxygen.

In the UK, alcohol tax is 900%.

The one thing the laws of chemistry have to say, is that nothing exists or can exist that will do a better job than lithium.

Which means the whole battery powered world is a bust. It cant be done. Parts, yes, All? No.

The problem with that statement is that it is only true at low current draws.

In fact a gas combined cycle power station *exceeds* 60%. Provided it doesn't have to shut down for wind.

The alcohols ain't bad. But you get more energy density out of straight hydrocarbons. In the Diesel/ kerosene range its the ideal fuel for most things.

And you know this because? That period also coincides with the end of the little ice age, and we know that mildly warming oceans outgass lots of CO2 until the organic life catches up with it

Sorry. Its hard to spot who wrote what

LiFePo has been around years. Its less energy dense (heavier) but tends to be able to handle more abuse. And I think mostly doesn't catch fire.

Ultimately in the model world, it was tried, but straight LIPO just got better and didn't blow up so much and offered better performance.

LIP is within 50% of its peak theoretical performance now and is very mature tech,