Learn Climate with Open MIT Resources
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- Whether you are new to climate change, an experienced advocate, or a professional weaving climate into your work, MIT has free high-quality materials to deepen and expand your understanding about the climate, energy, and solutions. With a range of engaging introductions to complete in-depth open courses from MIT’s Environmental Solutions Initiative, OpenCourseWare and MITx, MIT supports students, teachers, professionals and lifelong learners with engaging and essential climate change knowledge.
This webinar was held on October 25, 2022, as part of International Open Access Week 2022 around the theme “Open for Climate Justice.”
Speakers:
Sylvia Scharf: Climate Education Specialist, MIT Environmental Solutions Initiative
Curt Newton: Director, MIT OpenCourseWare
Dana Doyle: Director, MITx Program
MIT resources discussed:
MIT Climate Portal: climate.mit.edu/
MIT Climate Primer: climateprimer....
TILclimate Guides for Educators: climate.mit.ed...
SCALES Project: scales.mit.edu/
MIT OpenCourseWare: ocw.mit.edu
MITx Online: mitxonline.mit...
MITx on edX: www.edx.org/sc...
MIT Open Learning Library: openlearningli...
License: Creative Commons BY-NC-SA
More information at ocw.mit.edu/terms
More courses at ocw.mit.edu
Support OCW at ow.ly/a1If50zVRlQ
We encourage constructive comments and discussion on OCW’s RUclips and other social media channels. Personal attacks, hate speech, trolling, and inappropriate comments are not allowed and may be removed. More details at ocw.mit.edu/co....
professionals like you making our world more safer to live.great job effort worth appreciating
ty
The current system is not capable of bending the curve of carbon emissions to the degree that the charts indicate is necessary to hold overall disruption of the climate system within a 2°C range.
An alternative system is possible, but search engines do not pick it up. The ideas are suppressed. [I think someone or some group has gamed the SEO system (by swamping the site with inauthentic traffic, perhaps, or through some other means).]
We should charge high fees to industries when they extract resources or emit pollution.
If random polls show that most people think that rates of extraction or some other kind of impact on the environment should be more strictly limited, the associated fee should be raised.
Sharing fee proceeds equally will ensure that the policy is fair and that it is supported by the people at large. The policy would promote sustainability and end poverty.
If you are going to raise the specter of scarcity in relation to nuclear power (in the course materials), perhaps you should not put 'geothermal' in the 'renewable' category. The uranium and thorium within the Earth keep it hot, due to radioactive decay. As this material becomes depleted over time (when the atoms decay to more stable states), the capacity to generate geothermal power will be diminished.
Thorium can be converted to a nuclear fuel by exposure to neutrons. It is four times more abundant than uranium, and FAR more abundant than U-235.
Molten Salt Reactors can be built rapidly in factories.
How does PET plastic impact environment.
long term breakdown,UV, and heat ?
Good job ❤
How do you persuade or message the average citizen who is asked to pay higher prices for gas and oil, but who sees the lights/heat/AC blazing overnight at big box stores made of corrugated steel and are built with very little insulation? Or, how do you persuade or message those companies to power down when the utilities are unneeded?
well first you need your science to be more clear and to look less like big government propaganda. When the predictions always overestimate temperatures, but the margins of errors are huge, there will be a lot of skeptics.
How difficult is it to switch off the lights😮
@@mwatkins0590 They are attempting to make predictions about inherently unpredictable chaotic systems. Systems which due to their unpredictable nature spawned entirely new field of science. They then present conclusions which do not match data in the slightest and use it to scare the general ignorant population into compliance. Reality of the situation is we are sooooo far removed from proving anthropological climate change it is not even funny yet if you ask them or you ask the general public they are convinced it is a given and definitely known as fact when it is absurd. It stopped being science many many decades ago unfortunately.
@@mwatkins0590 Climate scientists mostly underestimate. Climate "skeptics" just cherry pick situations where the models overestimated. I say skeptics with quotes because they aren't real skeptics, they're using it as a shield so they don't have to defend their actual belief.
En roads is awesome
Some issues, Ecosystem and Economy-> ruclips.net/p/PLhH8w0wcKSeDpkunKyRWBkPCcjiEk6AL7
Very interesting.. thank you for sharing.
This reminds me of the project that got really big with a map for each state (TheSolutionsProject map)
The only solution is fission and fusion. All the others are a waste of time. Also, this should be handled with less propaganda. Why are you obcessed with climate? Energy scarcity is worst.
Of March 2019 I presented my proposal for a carbon fusion lamp to permanently convert exhaled CO2 into Oxygen.
How does it work?
It was before a peer reviewed by invite only engineering conference held inside MIT Electrical Engineering Dept on Vasser Street of Cambridge, MA.
Naranjo and Putterman of UCLA improved on a Farnsworth fusor via a cryogenic pyroelectric crystal electrode so I suggested to use a molecular sieve to only allow carbon dioxide CO2 to enter to be ionized and deflected apart for cryogenic pyroelectric crystals to fuse carbon ions together to form oxygen ions reunited to defuse outward as molecular oxygen O2.
Such a lamp should be first used for street lights since it could never fully replace heated rhodium CO2 carbon dioxide scrubbers.
Other scenarios are:
Molecular sieves to only allow carbon dioxide CO2 to enter a tower into orbit comprised of Robert L Morrison's Patented lighter than air solids sealed in a metal foil for an apogee
dome in orbit where carbon dioxide is ionized to allow carbon ions in laser optical trap ejected beyond Earth orbit while oxygen ions are deflected to reunite into molecular oxygen allowed to drip back through tower conduits to earth surface.
Have all surface vegetation replaced with Upper atmospheric reflective vegetation comprised of epiphyte genes to extract nutrients from air, genes for lighter than air methane, genes oxen intestine gasbags, and genes for reflective Hawaiian silver sword shrubs.
Replace all rail transit with lifting body airships of Robert L. Morrison's patented lighter than air solids sealed in metal foil having nuclear powered jet engines along with Marshal J. Corbett of Grumman Patent of ground based louver covered ducted fans having laser ionization for cold plasma aerial highways depicted in of Wachouski's film "NeoSeoul 2144 A.D".
Steinmetz a colleague of both Tesla and Einstein had weather modification patents as early as 1917.
@@thomasciarlariello3228 The only paper I find from Naranjo and Putterman discusses fusion of Duterium via piezoelectric crystals to generate a high voltage field. Of which I only had partial access however even then Its clear the efficiency is rather poor as it is with all fusors. The purpose of the papers i seen was to demonstrate a potential simple neutron source and not fusion. This leads us to the problem all CO2 capture devices suffer from which is the process of generating the electricity creating more CO2 than then we have captured. We're we to have efficient fusion and pure clean electricity as you noted there are much more efficient means of carbon capture.
As far as the rest of you post I have to admit I have no 8dea what the hell you are talking about .
@@thomasciarlariello3228 Morris materials at sea level are roughly the density of our atmosphere and as density gets lower the higher you get these materials would not even be slightly enough to float to the stratosphere and above. It would struggle to get off the ground. Mind you that is the BEST of their materials which would struggle to get off the ground at sea level.
My brother grabbed my computer and turned this on x2 speed... what?
If on 2x speed it'll use less electricity.
Can we change humans? Or just educate them at least
Thought change...what a dangerous phrase.
You know what? I was for thought change but you've changed my thoughts on that. Now I am against thought change.
If the course objective were to disprove CAGW, it would be of more value to everyone including faculty at MIT.