Not signed in (Sign In)
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.
    •  
      CommentAuthorm1k3y
    • CommentTimeDec 19th 2007
     (341.21)
    @Kosmopolit exactly! peer2peer power generation then becomes possible
    •  
      CommentAuthorUnsub
    • CommentTimeDec 19th 2007
     (341.22)
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    The only thing that would really make a difference is a LOT less humans. We could do whatever we wanted pollution wise if there were only a few million of us.

    The poor countrys that are really doing insane amounts of damage to the world feel totally entitled because the west did it before and now they see it as there turn.
    China and the other asian countries do not give a crap. The Chinese literally pray to thousand dollar bills FOR MORE MONEY!!!
    The impulse when they see a tree is to cut it down and sell it. Hybrid cars use NICKEL batteries and nickel mines are one of the worst forms of pollution ever.

    It is silly to think that a few people riding bikes to work and recycling will have any effect. Ironically one of the most effective groups has been hunters fighting for habitat for animals to shoot. Ducks Unlimited for example has saved thousands of square miles of oxygen producing wetlands.

    People are not willing to make the kinds of changes it would take to actually make even a noticeable difference.

    Our best hope to survive as a species are
    1- a huge war wipes out enough of the population that the earth has time to recover. Something with lots of low radiation nukes and biowarfare. Ideally it would take out all the poor countries as they are the ones who have the biggest families.

    2 My favourite idea is what I call the not putting all our eggs in one basket plan. We would need to spend a insane amount of cash(manhattan project for 100 years)
    and colonize several other planets. If we had kept up with the rate of investment and development from the 60's we would be half way there by now.

    3 - I call this my "the world needs a vasectomy plan". Someone makes a bioweapon that sterilizes almost everyone. If say 1 in a 1000 people was fertile then
    the next few generations could start with all the wealth and knoledge but without all the mouths to feed.

    4- Fascism ,the only way we could actually keep things even remotly close to the way things are and not kill the world is if we had a all powereful one world government using the threat of global extinction to keep us in line. Capitalism is incapable by it's very nature of making long term plans.
    Hopefully I will be dead before this becomes a option.
  1.  (341.23)
    1) Paint your roofs white, increasing planetary albedo.

    2) Don't like suburbia? Consider the suburban home maintains a great deal more CO2-eating plants than the average urban apartment. And in some areas, more than the same land would support if it were open grassland or desert. Also consider that a lot of people don't like living in rabbit warrens.

    3) With nanotech, we will eventually face a deficit of CO2, because nano-machines are built out of carbon, and CO2 is the most freely available source.

    4) Don't like humans? Consider how easy it is for you to decrease the human population by one. If you manage to take a few politicians with you, that would be a real service to the rest of us.

    5) Worried about rising sea levels? Build sea-walls, or relocate to higher ground. If you don't, you must not really be all that worried.

    6) Nobody is going to force either China or the United States to deliberately slow or stop their economies for any reason. Deal with it.

    7) Most people generate a good bit less CO2 while masturbating than while having sex with a partner. Wank away!

    8) Some people are going to get very rich over this global warming business, and unfortunately it won't include me.
    •  
      CommentAuthorhyim
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2007
     (341.24)
    @ Unsub

    /rolleyes.
    •  
      CommentAuthorhyim
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2007
     (341.25)
    wired just dropped a slideshow : The Year's 10 Craziest Ways to Hack the Earth
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2007
     (341.26)
    "5) Worried about rising sea levels? Build sea-walls, or relocate to higher ground. If you don't, you must not really be all that worried."

    Or you live in Bangladesh or various other parts of the third world and moving isn't really an option.

    Not everyone's a middle class suburbanite from the developed world.
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2007
     (341.27)
    A few interesting links:

    Shell is the first oil major to back biodiesel production from algae.

    EU legislates to force carmakers to cut carbon emissions.

    and

    Closely watched start-up nanosolar, which aims to slash the price of solar panels, ships its first commercial products.

    http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=50926
    •  
      CommentAuthorm1k3y
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2007
     (341.28)
    @Kosmopolit it doesn't mean the Dutch can't build something for them?! suddenly Sterling's scenario from Distraction - where the Dutch become a SuperPower with their high-tech dykes looks more likely

    @hyim - Vertical Farming FTW! .. all the rest are far too crazy IMHO. Doesn't anyone remember (apart from @MusiM (props dude!!)) Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis. This planet is one big hella complicated system. We've nudged it pretty hard with our industrialisation. The last we should be doing is poking it with a totally different stick (ie freaking giant space mirrors)...
  2.  (341.29)
    @ Kosmopolit

    Point taken, although my message was addressed to people here, who presumably are mostly middle-class urbanites or suburbanites. Any Bangladeshis here, please chime in.

    Also, these past several months I've noticed quite a few global-warming-alarm programs being aired on Discovery, The History Channel, etc. and sponsored by major oil companies. So now can we drop the ad-hominems and debate the science rather than who's getting paid by whom?
    •  
      CommentAuthorAriana
    • CommentTimeJan 3rd 2008
     (341.30)
    C'mon, Scott-- new year, fresh start. No need to necro a thread no one's touched in two weeks just to snark.
  3.  (341.31)
    Scott - what ad hominems?

    The only time I referred to oil companies was to link to a story about BP backing biodiesel production.
    •  
      CommentAuthorJay Kay
    • CommentTimeJan 3rd 2008
     (341.32)
    Scott - what ad hominems?

    The only time I referred to oil companies was to link to a story about BP backing biodiesel production.


    I'm pretty sure he was referring to the specials that have been on the Discovery and History channels, not you.
  4.  (341.33)
    Sorry, being an old fart like me means 2 weeks ago is the day before yesterday.

    The ad-hominem remark wasn't directed at anyone here, but at how so much of the discussion on this matter in most places I've seen, over the past two or three years, has been more about who-do-you-hate than what-are-the-facts. In my view, nobody should get a free pass, and all claims should be treated with skepticism. Now that oil companies are lining up on both sides of this issue, maybe now the discourse can elevate to a higher level. Or, maybe not.
    • CommentAuthornleavitt
    • CommentTimeJan 3rd 2008 edited
     (341.34)
    We could... use existing technology to drastically cut our energy requirements?
    http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/51
    •  
      CommentAuthorUnsub
    • CommentTimeJan 4th 2008
     (341.35)
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    I think with a few tweaks suburbia could be quite environmentally harmless and possibly even helpful.
    The first thing that would have to go is the awful evil lawn. Replaced with a lot of food and oxygen producing plants it would make a HUGE difference.
    Also instead of trucking in our produce from factory farms it could be grown locally ,saving energy and using less chemicals.

    I love fast cars and bikes. Fortunatly their are powerful engines where the air that comes out the exahst is cleaner than the air that goes in. I also would hope we would get much more motorbikes and what are known as side by sides. The side by sides are 700cc golf cart type vehicles that are street legal in europe and make a perfect second car for grocery getting etc.

    Just like everyone growing their own vegetables is better than huge farms ,individual homes producing at least some of their own electricity is much better than huge hydro projects.
    Their are lots of good solar/wind(they work better together) systems. We used to have lots of wind generators here in Saskatchewan before all the farms got power lines but the power companies insisted that your home system must be proved to be DESTROYED before they would hook you up to the grid. Thankfully all our power ,insurance and communications are crowns(owned by the sask government)now. We have the best service and rates in Canada even with a small decentralized population. The free market nazis hate it.

    It is kind of like a P2P system for producing energy and food.

    I was a bit bummed out before Xmass when I wrote the last post. I am feeling a bit more positive now. I still think the best way
    to save the environment is reduce drastically the number of people. If there was reverse birth control ie people had to consciously use some pill to get pregnant and their were no unwanted or accidental pregnancies then I think that would work.

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.