Jump to content

Global Warming


23 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

What do you think about global warming?

 

Recently, browsing at Apple's trailer website, I found an interesting movie about it. It's called "an inconvinient truth".

 

I think that we all should contribute to have a better planet by reducing the CO2 emitions of factorys, houses, cars, etc. I know this could take years, but we should start in our own houses, using electricity only when necessary, using gas (methane) only when you take a shower, trying not to use the car, etc. These are simple measures that, If we all apply them, will work and will reduce the ammount of greenhouse gases.

 

For my own part, I do not want to leave my future childrens or grandsons a devastated world, with no Antarctica or clean air and I'm taking all the actions that I've described above.

 

Regards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C02 emmissions from cars are negligable - most modern cars expel cleaner gases than they draw in! It's the petrochemical processes that are the major polluter. People make a big deal about hydrogen powered fuel cell cars being a 'clean' alternative. What they fail to understand is that we get hydrogen from sea water via a process of electrolysis - where does the vast amount of electricity come from for this process? Answer: Big dirty fossil fuel burning power stations!

 

The major problem is not consumers, it's industry. The only way to clean up is to get the big industrial players to clean up their act - and that's a lot harder than just controlling your own carbon footprint.

 

I still say fusion is the way forward - we should have working fusion power station prototypes within 15 years, they produce vast amounts of energy with far less radioactive waste - the waste they do produce has a far shorter half-life aswell. There are the usual eco-mentalist suggestions (wind, water, wave etc) that are only really useful in very limited locations too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People make a big deal about hydrogen powered fuel cell cars being a 'clean' alternative. What they fail to understand is that we get hydrogen from sea water via a process of electrolysis - where does the vast amount of electricity come from for this process? Answer: Big dirty fossil fuel burning power stations!

 

Hydrogen power is more a means of flexible and efficient energy storage and distribution (for more than just autos). Once we're all on hydrogen, cleaner forms of energy can be used to produce it in mass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hydrogen power is more a means of flexible and efficient energy storage and distribution (for more than just autos). Once we're all on hydrogen, cleaner forms of energy can be used to produce it in mass.

 

There is no scientific proof that global warming even exists and that it is caused by humans. I think we should stop looking for alternative energy and start trying to reduce energy use regardless of where it comes from. The problem is that everyone wants a solution that doesn't include any change in human behaviour. We must change our ways rather than methods to reduce pollution - all poluution. Not just air pollution.

 

If everyone would drive small 2 seater cars to get to work or actually worked from home, fossil fuel use from cars would instantly drop by 25%. It's stupid to haul 2-3 tons when we go to the store to buy 2lbs of milk.

 

Global warming is based on hype (like killer bees, y2k , nuclear holocaust etc). In the 70s , the headlines was to get ready for another glacial age.

 

I still believe that fuel is the best thing for cars. Just think about it:

 

1) A lot of energy is stored in a relatively small space

2) You get 300-400 miles of being able to haul 203 tons

3) It takes about 7 minutes to "re-charge"

 

1) Eleetric cars wouldn't do much of a difference since the electricity to charge them would still be generated by fossil fuel. It will take hours to re-charge. We have trouble just keeping our cell phones re-charged. Battery disposal of millions of carswould be a nightmare.

 

2) The cheapest way to produce hydrogen is from natural gas. Production from water requires tons of energy.

 

3) IF cars would run on alcohol, 3rd world agriculture would shift towads producing alcohol products. This would create severe food shortages for already poor and starving people.

 

This is a good fiction book based on facts (with references)..

 

http://www.crichton-official.com/fear/index.html

 

This is also a good read:

 

http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/...hockeystick.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think "Global Warming" is a bit of a misnomer - The best phrase now should be "climate change"

 

I have actually started thinking seriously about this and find myself actually recycling more, turning off unused electrical goods etc.

 

I also car share which helps.

 

Now if only I was in my own house instead of rented I would seriously start thinking of solar energy.

 

I annoys me that other people seem to be just dismissing this as somebody elses problem when we ALL need to do something, even something as small as changing from normal lights to power/energy saving ones (as I have)

 

Think - do you really need to leave your TV on standby at night?

 

My 2p :angel:

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately i think climate change is something that nobody is prepared to acknowledge as long as it costs them more money - maybe it will take a 'day after tomorrow' style disaster to get people to do anything by which point it will be too late, but that isn't going to happen in our lifetimes so in short no-one really gives a damn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Global warming is based on hype (like killer bees, y2k , nuclear holocaust etc). In the 70s , the headlines was to get ready for another glacial age.

 

Actually, there’s a great deal of scientific evidence that points to “greenhouse gasses”, deforestation, etc. as the most likely contributors to this "climate change". More evidence points to us (humans) being the cause than not. In fact, the evidence against it is more like the "evidence" against evolution - based on conjecture and belief, not research and observation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think global warming is real and that it may one day be a serious issue. There ARE scientific facts, the government and media just ignore them. Why would they do that? Gasoline is very profitable, especially now that the U.S. is stealing all the oil from Iraq. While there may not be much we can do right now, the near future should hold many solutions to the pollution problems. There are a few new technologies being worked on by small groups of people that produce more energy than is put into them. One of them uses water and electricity to create a gas that can be burned. I can't really remember what gas is produced, but I know it works because I made one at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think global warming is real and that it may one day be a serious issue. There ARE scientific facts, the government and media just ignore them. Why would they do that? Gasoline is very profitable, especially now that the U.S. is stealing all the oil from Iraq. While there may not be much we can do right now, the near future should hold many solutions to the pollution problems. There are a few new technologies being worked on by small groups of people that produce more energy than is put into them. One of them uses water and electricity to create a gas that can be burned. I can't really remember what gas is produced, but I know it works because I made one at home.

 

That's what I thought too until I did personal research on the research myself . I think the media is actually biased FOR global warming alarmists.

 

There is a the perception amongs the population and the media that there is a scientific consensus about the fact that global warming is human induced. If you start looking you'll realize that this is far from reality. Honest scientists that come up with opposing theories are victims of character assassinations , labelled as oil industry lapdogs or crackpots. Global Warming is an unproven theory. No one can prove that it is true. No one has proven that it is false either. The danger is all the money spent on cilmate research could be spent on more pressing issues.

 

I think that it's important for all of us to limit our energy use and I am for policy that enables that. However, I don't want to be lied to. There is just as much hypothesis that disproves global warming as the ones that prove it.

 

90% of the Kyoto protocol is based on the work of Micheal Mann and his famous "hockey stick" temperature graph. There is some doubts that is starting to come out that his method was flawed and full of statistical errors. There more serious allegations that he data-mined the data and overweighted some data that support global warming. ( http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/0...uller101504.asp )

 

Have you ever heard of the "Medieval Warming Period"? The alarmists don't like to mention it.

 

I am not in support of the big oil industry. My comments probably sound like I am and that's quite understandable. I have simply decided to make my own judgements rather than depend on my goverment, the UN , environmental groups or the energy companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think global warming is a load of BS. Look at the climate when the dinosaurs where here. It was alot hotter then, but now it's cooled down. Maybe the temps might be getting a slight bit higher, but I doubt that it will lead to anything like what happened in the Day After Tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone knows the day after tomorrow was a holywood interpretation so not likely to happen but even if you doubt that global warming is caused by man that doesn't make it any less of a problem - a few degrees more and the ice caps will still melt, dumping millions of tonnes of fresh water into the oceans, this wil affect currents that distribute heat accross the planet and will drastically alter climate. If there is a chance it is being caused by man then we should be doing all we can to try and prevent it - lest we want large portions of our cities to have a 'waterfront' view!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone knows the day after tomorrow was a holywood interpretation so not likely to happen but even if you doubt that global warming is caused by man that doesn't make it any less of a problem - a few degrees more and the ice caps will still melt, dumping millions of tonnes of fresh water into the oceans, this wil affect currents that distribute heat accross the planet and will drastically alter climate. If there is a chance it is being caused by man then we should be doing all we can to try and prevent it - lest we want large portions of our cities to have a 'waterfront' view!

 

 

Again, this is not a proven theory. A lot of these ice caps are already on the ocean. Does a glass of water overflow once the ice in has melted?

 

It's important that the ecology movement bases itself on fact and not doctored data or they will lose credibility if they are proven wrong. It's also important for dissenters to get a voice. I used to be a big supporter of the Kyoto protocol. I used to shake my head after what I read and saw on the "Geographic Channel" . But now I'm starting to have doubts on the science of it all.

 

The earth is 4.5 billions years old. To me, the cilmate is unpredictable and will remain so for ever. How can anyone tell me what will happen in 50-100 years when they can't tell me what the temperature will be this week, this season or this year? All the future climate predictions from the 70s were plain wrong. The human development and growth predictions were themselves correct.

 

I may look like a crackpot - but I don't care. And I am not a right winger either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The earth is 4.5 billions years old. To me, the cilmate is unpredictable and will remain so for ever.

 

But you can look to history for a quick reference of what meddling with our environment to the extent we already have will get you. Have a peek at the fate of the Maya, among others for just a microcosm of what we could potentially be in for.

 

Or put more simply, we probably shouldn’t be {censored}ting where we eat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you can look to history for a quick reference of what meddling with our environment to the extent we already have will get you. Have a peek at the fate of the Maya, among others for just a microcosm of what we could potentially be in for.

 

Or put more simply, we probably shouldn’t be {censored}ting where we eat.

 

I am 100% certain that humans have affected the environment for the worse. However, I am not so certain that we have any effect on the climate. I am not saying we should continue to live like we are living now. That is why I think we should focus our human resources on the environment itself, not exclusively on climate change. It's the easiest way to get a research grant these days with very little questions asked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is why I think we should focus our human resources on the environment itself, not exclusively on climate change.

 

The environment and a focus on climate change are not mutually exclusive. Working towards one benefits the other - even if some of the more "alarmist" climatologists are over exaggerating (and we don't know if they are). Moving towards more flexible energy distribution, such as hydrogen, is a necessity, no matter how efficient our autos get. A flexible energy infrastructure makes economic sense, and environmental sense... even if it will take > 20 years to get there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, this is not a proven theory. A lot of these ice caps are already on the ocean. Does a glass of water overflow once the ice in has melted?

 

Yes but a large portion of them sit above the ocean so their displacement will only take effect when they have melted - i haven't heard any scientists saying melting the ice caps wouldn't be a bad thing! And we know that the sea level as been rising by about 1-3mm over the past 100 years, prior to that (i.e prior to large scale industrialisation) the rise was far smaller 0.1-0.2 mm per year. I'd say that was a pretty strong indication of some sort of effect occuring from outside the environment itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't even start to discuss with the ones that still think that the Climate Change is b/s.

 

FFS, just look at nature and the sky not cities blind oil-feeded lemmings!

 

here's the trailer: http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount_cl...ttruth/trailer/

 

Unfortunately i think climate change is something that nobody is prepared to acknowledge as long as it costs them more money - maybe it will take a 'day after tomorrow' style disaster to get people to do anything by which point it will be too late, but that isn't going to happen in our lifetimes so in short no-one really gives a damn.

 

So, are you betting in not doing anything just like the generations before us? Never underestimate the power of denial. IMO, we're the unlucky generation, the 'end of the cycle is now'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

More like "An Inconvenient Piece of BS That is Just A Wast of Money"

Think a few years back. They used to think that there was global cooling. The whole "Climate Change" is just there so that they can put something in the media to scare everyone. So the climate might change a little bit, but I doubt that there will be any catastrophic even from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More like "An Inconvenient Piece of BS That is Just A Wast of Money"

Think a few years back. They used to think that there was global cooling. The whole "Climate Change" is just there so that they can put something in the media to scare everyone. So the climate might change a little bit, but I doubt that there will be any catastrophic even from it.

 

That bit is significant, just see the weather where you live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
More like "An Inconvenient Piece of BS That is Just A Wast of Money"

Think a few years back. They used to think that there was global cooling. The whole "Climate Change" is just there so that they can put something in the media to scare everyone. So the climate might change a little bit, but I doubt that there will be any catastrophic even from it.

 

If I recall correctly, Huricane Katrina could have been alot better. but it was summer, the waters were already warm becuase of it, and becuase of global warming the waters got even warmer. So if there is any proof of global warming being a bad thing, it already happend

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That bit is significant, just see the weather where you live.

Exactly. I live in Antofagasta, near the capricorn tropic and every year, the winters become colder and there has been a little bit of rain (strange thing since the city is located in the world's dryest desert) and the summers become more and more hotter. How's that possible? We're supposed to live in a well-balanced climate, since we are near the shore.

 

My father has a Master degree in "environmental engeneering" and he has shown me many documents that support the fact that our climate is changing waaaaaaayy fast and that it is because of the global warming and pollution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...