Climate Change. Yes the science is settled.

by mavie 137 Replies latest social current

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    BTS, there are better options out there

    The issue is not whether or not solar etc generates electricity, of course it does. That is not the point. The point is that currently there is no commercially viable replacement.

    I hope that one will be forthcoming.

    Burn

  • jimbo
    jimbo

    Hey!!

    We all need to thank Al Gore...didn't he invent the internet?

    He also gave the term (POLITICAL-----SCIENCE) new meaning! What a man!!!

    Jimbo (I could use a little global warming today)

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    And it is that simple, in life you have two choices, do nothing or do something.

    And if you do something over a nothing? IS that a smart choice? Just because something is possible and plausible does not make it true. I should know, one day dubs knocked on my parent's door and it was plausible. They chose to do something. Well intentioned though they were, it was the wrong choice.

    but one thing you cannot call it is being paralyzed into inaction and thus contributing nothing towards a brighter future.

    Making wrong choices does not lead to a brighter future.

    Burn

  • sweetstuff
    sweetstuff

    But, making positive choices, individually for example, recycling, does make for a better brighter future. You are assuming that the choices I am thinking of, have negative consquences, without even bothering to ask what they are. Now that sounds religious to me.

  • VoidEater
    VoidEater

    The problem is that their is nothing better than oil as a transportation fuel.

    Depends on what "better" is - less polluting might be "better". Perhaps you meant "energetically efficient", but then we'd have to limit that to the kind of combustion engines we currently use.

    If there was something better available, we would be using it already. People buy the best product they can get.

    You actually have part of that right - they use the best alernative available to them. The best alternatives available are not always the best that exist - they're the best that corporations conspire to provide. Why do we not have a large trolley system in Los Angeles (any more)? It wasn't dismantled because people didn't use it.

    People buy the only product they can get when only one product is made available. When better products are available, they become vocal and committed. Recall the outcry of electric vehicle leasors when those vehicles were pulled out of the market.

    There has been no actual free market activity that chose oil as the "best" product. An industry created the market because it could make a mint. And it has.

    Think about it. A gallon will drive a 2 ton vehicle at high speeds nearly 20 miles.

    Think about it. Virtually no typical consumer on today's streets needs a 2 ton vehicle. The vast majority of traffic does not require high speeds, most trips are within miles of home.

    Try just pushing that same vehicle 100 feet and you will realize how much energy is contained in a relatively small volume.

    The same could be said for electricity (available from renewable sources), hydrogen (which I am aware has origination problems), and even steam. Not to mention used cooking fat, for goodness sake.

    Indeed, some fuels are much more efficient - and would be a fiasco on public streets.

    The issue, then, isn't really about efficiency or consumers picking the best product that fits their needs. These are red herrings, used to misdirect.

    It's about entrenched business interests.

    And that's the real argument, isn't it?

    There is not inexpensive transportation fuel available that is as energy dense and as easy to transport to markets.

    If it's so safe, why have there been so many production accidents in the news over the past year? How many times have residents of Richmond, CA had to stay inside their homes due to another explosion and fire?

    We don't use oil because it's "the best" - we use it because it is entrenched. It is convenient. It is status quo.

  • sammielee24
    sammielee24

    Global warming also has to do with our ever growing overpopulation of the earth. For every person alive the amount of land required to grow grains and factory farm animals, more structures, more transportation - the list goes on and on and on - it increases substantially the amount of gas emissions into the air. We tear down forests, rain forests and pave over farmland or put condo's on it, so we can live better and bigger.

    I ask everyone who is really concerned - what are you doing about it really? It's not just about separating your garbage is it?

    How many kids do you have? Are you a vegetarian? How big is your house? What kind of car do you drive? Do you live and work in your own community where you can walk or take public transit? Do you bus your kids to a school outside your community? Do you take cruises or trips on planes often? Do you buy cheap foreign made goods so they end up in the landfill a year later? Do you have investment interests in oil, coal, etc?

    There is a buzz in the news about passing laws in a number of countries, possibly the USA as well, to limit the number of children per family to one - how many would support that especially since in many religions around the world procreation is seen as a fundamental necessity and/or right. I think we can all do something, but I think we all need to recognize the natural ebb and flow of nature as well. sammieswife.

  • llbh
    llbh

    From an economic point of view, personal and national why drive in around in cars of a large engine capacity ihave s 2litre car that is both economical and less environmentally damaging than a larger engined car. It is also cheaper!! Insulating homes better saves money too.

    Recycling makes sense why pay to dump rubbish when it can be reused?

    We can make positive choices that help ourselves and our nation money and save energy , Win win

    llbh

    i

    I

    i

    i

  • VoidEater
    VoidEater

    How many kids do you have?

    None.

    Are you a vegetarian?

    I try, but I have a meat habit.

    How big is your house?

    Admittedly bigger than I need, and that's a long story. But it's fairly energy efficient and uses solar for hot water.

    What kind of car do you drive?

    A two-seater. 32 mpg.

    Do you live and work in your own community where you can walk or take public transit?

    Public transit.

    Do you bus your kids to a school outside your community? Do you take cruises or trips on planes often? Do you buy cheap foreign made goods so they end up in the landfill a year later? Do you have investment interests in oil, coal, etc?

    N/A, nope, never, none.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    Depends on what "better" is - less polluting might be "better". Perhaps you meant "energetically efficient", but then we'd have to limit that to the kind of combustion engines we currently use.

    Possible negative externalities aside. It is "better" than the alternatives have been to date.

    You actually have part of that right - they use the best alernative available to them. The best alternatives available are not always the best that exist - they're the best that corporations conspire to provide.

    There has been no actual free market activity that chose oil as the "best" product. An industry created the market because it could make a mint. And it has.

    Thats ridiculous. In the early days of the automobile there were several technologies vying for the market. There were electric and steam powered cars. The internal combustion engine running on an oil distillate emerged as the winner-because it was the best. The British Navy switched its fleet from coal to oil despite a domestic dearth of production for the same reasons.

    Think about it. Virtually no typical consumer on today's streets needs a 2 ton vehicle. The vast majority of traffic does not require high speeds, most trips are within miles of home.

    Who are you to decide what a consumer needs? It is up to them to decide what is in their economic interest. Consumers want speed, comfort, safety and range.

    The same could be said for electricity (available from renewable sources), hydrogen (which I am aware has origination problems), and even steam.

    The problem is not the energy source but energy storage. Batteries have have had a very low energy density compared to fossil fuels. This could now change with Lithium Ion and Lithium Iron battery technology. Hydrogen for the same reasons. It is the least dense element and requires crazy pressures to even be a consideration.

    Not to mention used cooking fat, for goodness sake.

    You can't be serious? As a boutique fuel maybe, but as a mainstream fuel? Restaurants don't dump enough of the stuff for everyone, LOL.

    The issue, then, isn't really about efficiency or consumers picking the best product that fits their needs. These are red herrings, used to misdirect.

    On the contrary, that is the core issue.

    If it's so safe, why have there been so many production accidents in the news over the past year? How many times have residents of Richmond, CA had to stay inside their homes due to another explosion and fire?

    It is relatively safe. There is an element of danger in anything.

    We don't use oil because it's "the best" - we use it because it is entrenched. It is convenient. It is status quo

    The reason it is entrenched is because it was "the best". It has been the best, because of its convenience. Fill 'er up. Less than 10 minutes later off you go for another 400 miles.

    Nothing else has approached that-to date.

    H
    |
    H--C--H
    |
    |
    H
    HYDROCARBON JESVS
    DE-MANDS YOVR BODILY
    FLVIDS AND ORGANS.

    PRECIOVS, PRECIOVS
    ORGANS AND FLVIDS.

    PRAISE BE TO
    HYDROCARBON JESVS:
    KING OF FVELS.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    How many kids do you have?

    One. And I want lots more. You guys can stop breeding if you like. My descendants will inherit the earth.

    Are you a vegetarian?

    No. And I never will be. The human animal is omnivorous.

    Do you live and work in your own community where you can walk or take public transit?

    I do not. I enjoy my rural solitude.

    Do you take cruises or trips on planes often?

    Not as often as I'd like.

    Do you buy cheap foreign made goods so they end up in the landfill a year later?

    I buy the best values I can find.

    Do you have investment interests in oil, coal, etc?

    No. And I wish I had a few years ago. I'd be rich!

    There is a buzz in the news about passing laws in a number of countries, possibly the USA as well, to limit the number of children per family to one - how many would support that especially since in many religions around the world procreation is seen as a fundamental necessity and/or right

    I do not support any coercive measures. Every human mouth that comes into the world comes with one brain and two hands. The grey matter will solve whatever problems we come across.

    "Be fruitful and multiply"

    Burn

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit