• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Climate Change - What action should we take?

Ambrosia

Good of the Fods
Ambrosia
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
2,675
I was recently involved in a discussion with A.A.Alfie about climate change in this thread.
We both agree that the earth is warming.

I'd like to ask the good folks at JREF what they think we ought to do about global warming.
What practical things can be done to ameliorate the effects of global warming?

For the purposes of this thread, discussion about the causes of global warming is offtopic, there are a myriad of other threads where that is being debated.

Given that we know the earth is warming, allowing for the fact that we are not 100% sure yet of the cause of this warming, what can we do to try to arrest the warming trend?
Should we do anything at all?

Instead of arguing over what is causing the problem, can we argue over what we might do about the problem? :)

Some of my thoughts to get things rolling.

All new buildings ought to have white painted roofs. All new roads built ought to be made reflective and not black. Companies researching new energy sources or much more efficient energy sources/uses ought to be given large financial incentives to carry out this research.

What do you think we should do?
 
Can we move all the cold over to you? Put it right over your head? Cuz there is too much of it over here.
 
I have 8" of snow outside my door right now as it happens. So no, keep your own cold over there.

I was hoping mhaze that as a prominent anti "AGW" poster on these forums that you might be able to make some suggestions about what action we could take, if you feel we ought to take any action at all, to counteract the observed warming trend.
 
i am all in favor for reducing car emissions. they create disgusting and unhealthy smog. they also contribute to AGW.

reducing pollution makes the air we breath and the water we drink much cleaner. and it reduces carbon emissions. its a win-win.
 
Nice ideas but they seem to lean towards the cause being purely greenhouse.

My ideas would centre around cure and harm minimisation than those others consider more preventative - whioch for mine may be a complete waste of time. I am assuming we can't prevent the natural cycle that is global warming.

If the seas really are to rise: what amount and at what rate? Are there low lying countries and islands that will be disaffected? Then perhaps we borrow some pretty old technology from the Dutch with regard to dykes. Simplistic perhaps but a starting place.

Will people really lose their homes and lands? If so, how many, when etc. It may be a huge logistical exercise but we have plenty of time (how long - I am not sure, perhaps someone caould enlighten me). It seems however a simple matter of 'rolling out' solutions and peoples in stages.

If we don't have the cure - we must address the symptoms.
 
We need to cut emission to 40% less than 1990 levels by 2025. Everyone should be given a quota based on an audit of last year's usage. Your quota will decline by 5% per year until targets are reached. Next year you will have 5% less electricity, 5% less gasoline, 5% less heating oil. Its up to you how you are going to deal with that. You can take public transport, turn the air conditioning down, install solar panels or a wind turbine, whatever you wish. Just remember it is going to go down by 5% each year.

That way nobody is coerced into doing anything and markets will develop for more efficient heating, transportation,etc.
 
how about we just give tax incentives to build more efficient cars, buy more efficient appliances, etc etc etc.

make clean stuff cheaper..and make dirty stuff more expensive. that's the way...I say.

:)
 
Well, we will be forced to find something to burn other than fossil fuels because we are going to burn them all up. Given that, why don't we spend on moving that process ahead EARLY what we are spending on senseless wars (including wars on victimless crimes?)
 
Ambrosia said:
I have 8" of snow outside my door right now as it happens. So no, keep your own cold over there.

I was hoping mhaze that as a prominent anti "AGW" poster on these forums that you might be able to make some suggestions about what action we could take, if you feel we ought to take any action at all, to counteract the observed warming trend.
Click to expand...

But we don't want all this cold. :)

Sure, action? Action to revitalize basic heavy industry in Europe and North America, move it back from third world countries with tax incentives to greedy capitalists and no restrictions on CO2 emissions, but basic pollution controls in place.

Otherwise, you have uncontrolled, both CO2 and pollution from third world countries rampant.

It's not the answer you'd like to hear, but that is not relevant to whether it is a good answer.
 
ectoplasm said:
We need to cut emission to 40% less than 1990 levels by 2025. Everyone should be given a quota based on an audit of last year's usage. Your quota will decline by 5% per year until targets are reached. Next year you will have 5% less electricity, 5% less gasoline, 5% less heating oil. Its up to you how you are going to deal with that. You can take public transport, turn the air conditioning down, install solar panels or a wind turbine, whatever you wish. Just remember it is going to go down by 5% each year.

That way nobody is coerced into doing anything and markets will develop for more efficient heating, transportation,etc.
Click to expand...
How are you going to give everybody a quota that diminishes by 5% yearly without coercing anybody? Unless you mean it's gonna be strictly opt-in... In that case, congratulations! Your plan is already in full effect.

Anyway, my recommendation is... we should take no action at all about climate change.

Instead, we should focus on reducing pollution, increasing efficiency, conserving more, and recycling more, all of which are excellent and admirable goals worthy of industrialized and developing nations alike.

And speaking of industrializing, we should definitely keep doing a lot more of that. That's what's going to give us the most resources and the best technology to adapt to whatever the future may bring. Remember: climate scientists actually have no freakin' clue if there's another major ice age right around the corner. And they've got nothing at all to tell us about the likelihood of planet-smashing asteroids in the next 200 years.

In fact, if we really want to do something about climate change, we should industrialize just as fast as we can, right up to the point where we can actually control the climate. After that, we can pretty much write our own ticket, climate-wise.
 
Last edited:
BenBurch said:
why don't we spend on moving that process ahead EARLY what we are spending on senseless wars (including wars on victimless crimes?)
Click to expand...

How far away are we from stuff like zero point energy? Clearly ZPE exists, its postulated as the reason the universe is still expanding, we just have no clue how it works.

If we split say 50% (or some other arbitrary figure) of our "defense" budgetting into scientific endeavour to try to harness ZPE or some other novel form of energy, how long might it take to be able to use it as an alternative to burning things?

mhaze: how do you know what answers Id like to hear?

why can't we throw any answers onto the table and then talk about how useful they might be?
 
1. Medium term - massive nuclear build program, if nothing else we'll need to replace the stations that are due to be de-commissioned.

2. Another medium term scheme - Big investment in wind, tidal barrage and tidal stream generators (here in the UK, we're ideally sited for this).

3. Probably get shot at for this one, but nationalise the railways and buses (at least rural ones), co-ordinate them so that they run when people need them and at a rate that makes it cheaper than using the car.

4. Better grants for heating, boiler replacement, etc. Most energy is used for space heating.

5. Investment in Desertec and HVDC grid systems.

6. Find ways to provide incentives for businesses to save money by developing better processes, getting more efficent machinery, etc. In the UK, Tescos (spit) have really taken on an eco-friendly policy. They are switching vehicles to gas, new stores have more natural lighting, etc (hasn't stopped them from dragging half their produce across from the other side of the world though). They're doing it because it saves them money though. That's the biggest educational hurdle - getting across that it can save money, rather than that it's all about taxation.

7. Grants for solar water heating and ground pumps.

8. All new housing estates to use centralised CHP schemes or take up schemes like Fintry, using income from a wind generator to improve insulation and fuel economy.

There's probably a whole host of other ideas.

My pet wacky idea is polywell fusion reactors, I'd say they are looking promising based on the little bit of news that's filtered out about them.
 
The other thing we can do right now is stop travelling by air. Most airlines are not making much money anyway, just shut them down and each country could keep a small fleet for government conferences, dignitaires etc.
 
1. Nuclear Power all the way
2. Plug in Hybrids
3. Investment in light rail and other public transportation
4. Provide more protected areas that cannot be used for timber or farming, especially rain forests. Work with countries like Brazil to make this possible. Protect other Carbon sinks
5. Moratorium on all new coal powered plants. Set a 50 year plan to phase out all existing coal power plants
6. Natural Gas power plants and cars. Not a perfect solution but better than oil
7. Wind, tide, wave and solar power(concentrating) WHERE IT MAKES SENSE TO DO SO
8. R and D in battery technology and capacitors

Things not to do:
1. Leave airplanes alone, they will be using fossil fuel for a very long time
2. Photovoltaics. Great for remote locations, awful investment as an energy source
3. Bio-diesel
4. Organic Farming
5. Carbon offsets and Carbon trading
6. Carbon capture, carbon sequestration and "clean coal"
7. Don't use renewables just to use renewables where they don't make any sense like photovoltaics in the Pacific Northwest
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom