Global Warming

[LtKillroy]

If you do not want to read a buncha rants, opinions, and wild accusations, stop reading here.

--------------------------------------------

So we watched An Inconvient Truth in science today, and I was semi-convinced something should probably happen on bad consequences. At the very least, not using oil seems like an all-around good idea for many reasons. Thoughts? Arguements? Counter-graphs to combat Gore's? Anything else? If you can help it, attempt not to troll. Opinions are good, different opinions are better, "LULZ WUT SO RANDUM  " is not. I think we had this discussion before but it was awhile ago.

[homerofgods]

I think the financial crises is getting too much media attention, and the enviroment is forgotten. it is the worlds leaders who must do something. Im glad Obama won the election in USA cuz I think it will be at least better. but I don't think we do enough at all, maybe it will be too late soon, and people don't realise it. I can't do a shit about it but if I could I would.
I wish there was a STRONG international commitie that gave the world the facts and solutions.
the young people often care about the enviroment, maybe they will save us again.

[Mangled*]

Don't worry... despite how pathetic humanity is there are already projects in development which will reverse global warming, hopefully before it's too late.

There's somebody, I believe he's a British structural engineer, who has developed a strong concrete-like building material that has a negative carbon footprint, it's porous and can absorb carbon from the atmosphere.

There's those peope in San Fransisco developing algae fuel which I believe also has a negative carbon footprint and has similar efficiency to petroleum.

And there's also a planned project (I forgot the specifics of this so it's probably incorrect) to force carbon into the rock in volcanic regions of iceland where it is absorbed by the porous rock and reacts to form a solid form...

[iDante]

And there's also a planned project (I forgot the specifics of this so it's probably incorrect) to force carbon into the rock in volcanic regions of iceland where it is absorbed by the porous rock and reacts to form a solid form...

I remember reading about that, sounded pretty interesting. I don't know how much it would actually do though.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=qw1143460260377B224 - here's something on that.

[homerofgods]

I imagine this is very expensive, and small amounts of co2 depositing compared to what we spit out, I don't think we need to stop the biggest Co2 sinners, and even that won't be enough.
If someone find any more facts about global warming it would be nice.

[a-4-year-old]

If you do not want to read a buncha rants, opinions, and wild accusations, stop reading here.

--------------------------------------------

So we watched An Inconvient Truth in science today, and I was semi-convinced something should probably happen on bad consequences. At the very least, not using oil seems like an all-around good idea for many reasons. Thoughts? Arguements? Counter-graphs to combat Gore's? Anything else? If you can help it, attempt not to troll. Opinions are good, different opinions are better, "LULZ WUT SO RANDUM  " is not. I think we had this discussion before but it was awhile ago.

Kill more cows, driving a range rover is more environmentally friendly than a farting cow.

driving a prius isn't any better anyway, lithium mining isn't very enviornmentally friendly either.

The only way to go is powering your homes with one of the renewables, electric cars don't mean anything because you still burn coal for the electric.

[PANZERCATWAGON]

lately ive been having apparently record breaking levels of sunshine in my country. i love global warming

in fact i make it a priority to leave my fridge door open all day on those particularly hot afternoons to help speed up the process. i reckon by 2015 we will have weather that rivals modern day egypt

[iDante]

The only way to go is powering your homes with one of the renewables, electric cars don't mean anything because you still burn coal for the electric.

Only on the east coast (of America). Over here on the west there is mostly hydroelectric power or wind power. In most of Europe Nuclear power is the stuff. I dunno about the rest of the world though.

[Rook_PL]

Dudes, don't freak. Human kind observes the climate changes for about no longer than 1000 years. In Medieval there were grapevine fields in Poland while few hundred years after people were getting on foot (or rather in sledge) to Sweden because all Baltic sea was frozen. Nobody proved that global warming exists. All scientists (well, the serious ones) talk about a possibility of mankind's influence on global climate. Oh, and water vapour is few times more "greenhouseish" than carbon dioxide.

[Brock]

This has been discussed a billion times...

And I can basically see this... 

Goverments and oil companies are pretty much in bed together.  I guarantee you we have the full capability to start making major changes in the way we do things, without the world economy falling apart.  However, there is far too much money to be had in the gas/oil/petrol industry, and the people who are in charge are far too greedy to make changes yet.

And although this is sort of sad, I think it's going to take a major disaster (related to global warming) where millions of people die, to make them change their ways.

Lets say the ocean rises a couple feet and half of Florida goes underwater.  Millions become homeless, and millions of dollars are spent trying to hold the rising waters back.  Venice is probably fucked too.

Anyways.

for tl;dr:

I think we have the capability to change without asploding the economy, but governments and oil companies like money too much.

[iDante]

Dudes, don't freak. Human kind observes the climate changes for about no longer than 1000 years. In Medieval there were grapevine fields in Poland while few hundred years after people were getting on foot (or rather in sledge) to Sweden because all Baltic sea was frozen. Nobody proved that global warming exists. All scientists (well, the serious ones) talk about a possibility of mankind's influence on global climate. Oh, and water vapour is few times more "greenhouseish" than carbon dioxide.

Wait, so what are you arguing for?
Have some basic info before posting. Then when you do post, maybe make your post legible. Thank you very much.

[a-4-year-old]

The only way to go is powering your homes with one of the renewables, electric cars don't mean anything because you still burn coal for the electric.

Only on the east coast (of America). Over here on the west there is mostly hydroelectric power or wind power. In most of Europe Nuclear power is the stuff. I dunno about the rest of the world though.

you're talking about like 5 states and some countries that are smaller than states, I'm talking about almost all china and most of america.

[bja888]

I was semi-convinced something should probably happen on bad consequences

Haha.. don't read the communist manifesto. People of weak mind fall prey to any idea that has gained some ground. Don't listen to the media either, thats how Hitler gained power.

[PANZERCATWAGON]

I was semi-convinced something should probably happen on bad consequences

Haha.. don't read the communist manifesto. People of weak mind fall prey to any idea that has gained some ground. Don't listen to the media either, thats how Hitler gained power.

yeah and while youre at it, dont read any books either, or talk to anyone, or trust your eyes

its all second hand information after all and they all could be trying to trick you

[Blue-ninja]

I watched the Inconvienient Truth like last school year.

When Al Gore got his 60th birthday cake, he complained that the sixty or so burning candles were a threat to the environment and demanded they be put out.

I was a bit of a alarmist then, now, less so. I don't care much about myself, and therefore, I could care less about what goes on around me. But I tell you that I agree with everyone else that the people in medieval times experienced exactly the same thing we are experiencing now. It's all probably old news now that most people are going green.

Plus, they also have built a village in the trees. Very Ewok-like and consumes less resources.

[tehsnipah]

Instead of Global Warming, it's Global Freezing right now in my place -_-

[Twistkill]

I've always wondered about the application of solar energy. It has a limitless supply, is available everywhere on the face of the earth, has no negative environmental effects (at least from what I can tell) and only requires an initial start-up cost, ie. a house that has solar panels generates its own electricity instead of the tenants paying the electric bill to a third party every month. Surely this technology could be developed for commercial use?

I've realized this isn't entirely related to global warming, but it's worth mentioning.

[Hair|Trigger]

Don't worry... despite how pathetic humanity is there are already projects in development which will reverse global warming, hopefully before it's too late.

fail. 

Anyways, I'm unsure at this stage on how to feel about climate change and all, really, i've been thinking and I guess the only lead we have is to listen to what scientists have to say and respond accordingly and see if it gets us anywhere.  I doubt I'll be around still when things turn to shit though

[Wormdundee]

I've always wondered about the application of solar energy. It has a limitless supply, is available everywhere on the face of the earth, has no negative environmental effects (at least from what I can tell) and only requires an initial start-up cost, ie. a house that has solar panels generates its own electricity instead of the tenants paying the electric bill to a third party every month. Surely this technology could be developed for commercial use?

I've realized this isn't entirely related to global warming, but it's worth mentioning.

The reasons it hasn't caught on in a big way yet are twofold.

1: A standard home with its roof covered in solar panels wouldn't be able to fully power itself (north american home I should say). So Space -> Power efficiency basically. Although there have been great strides made recently in solar panel efficiency. I remember reading a story on Digg about a new kind of much more efficient solar panel. So that's good news.

2: Cost. Right now, to cover your roof in effective solar panels would cost at least ten thousand dollars. Not a lot of people have a spare ten thousand to throw into buying solar panels.

Of course there are certain people who have managed to actually create more energy than they use via solar panels and wind turbines. They can then sell it back to the power grid.

[STM1993]

I've always wondered about the application of solar energy. It has a limitless supply, is available everywhere on the face of the earth, has no negative environmental effects (at least from what I can tell) and only requires an initial start-up cost, ie. a house that has solar panels generates its own electricity instead of the tenants paying the electric bill to a third party every month. Surely this technology could be developed for commercial use?

I've realized this isn't entirely related to global warming, but it's worth mentioning.

I have been in a program whereby they taught us about renewable energy as alternatives to the current fossil fuels we're using (this is related to global warming). Renewable energy is basically energy that cannot run out. There are some sources (from memory):

Solar
Wind
Hydropower
Biomass
Geothermal
Hydrogen

Solar energy is green and has little or no negative environmental effects. But converting solar energy to electricity is currently pretty inefficient, and it would take up a lot of space to build solar panels. They'd only work if there's the sun, so the problem is we do not know if there's some kind of solar eclipse or daylight saving problems - the weather is a main problem. Solar panels are actually pretty expensive at the moment. Wind energy is similar, but less expensive and more dependent on the weather. Often, people would use solar and wind together.

Hydropower is water - we're gonna be building dams on rivers or whatever to generate electricity. Problem is, it would affect marine life and there are few places where this can be used. Also, droughts are gonna be a major problem.

Biomass is obviously using biological stuff as the fuels. It's cleaner than fossil fuels, but they're less efficient and also kind of harm the environment in another sense, can't really remember what (I have the notes but I can't be bothered to take them out). They're only renewable if the amount of biomass required is less than the amount of biomass produced.

Geothermal is basically using the heat from the Earth itself. As clean and useful this is, there are very few sites where geothermal power plants can be placed.

Hydrogen is good. Clean (though you need to extract the hydrogen out from water or whatever first, you can't get it from the air), produces water vapour when reacted with oxygen (in a hydrogen fuel cell). Problem is, it is difficult to store hydrogen. And you know how powerful a hydrogen explosion can be (Hydrogen Bombs, Hindenburg...).



We're still using fossil fuels because they're basically the most efficient of all these and in a way, far less expensive. They are also usable in wider varieties - I mean, you can't possibly have a car that runs on geothermal energy right?

If you want to talk about nuclear energy, that's non-renewable, it's just an alternative source of energy. But think about how dangerous nuclear power is, and the nuclear waste is hazardous unless disposed of properly.