Climate Change Solution

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Bloomoon


There are solutions but will people listen?

Thank you sincerely for your input. I listened. You made a difference.

a reply to: amazing

Agreed, this has been a nice non-political conversation. Everyone has ideas and opinions all politics does is serve to drive a wedge between people with different ideas that might otherwise come up with a grand solution. I appreciate every post in this thread. huh...that might be a first

a reply to: Bloomoon

Thank you for listening just to put this out there I have been corresponding with various news organizations one of which is Off The Grid to see if they would run a small story to get at the very least a conversation going on some of these alternatives.

One of course is the outline of replacing our fuel source at the pump I described in the thread I linked I think a huge part of the battle is making people aware that there are solutions once it is in the minds of the general public that is when I think we can expect an organized effort for such avenues to be explored and implemented.

I have given serious consideration into attaining some of these government grants to break ground on such an endeavour, but I feel extremely unqualified in such a field to do so. On a daily basis I have been acquiring a better understanding about what would be required to do such so I may be able to at least pitch such an undertaking to interested parties. At this time I believe its over my head.

The various suggestions and proposed "solutions" fail to take into consideration the basic physical fact tht CO2 levels are long-lived in the atmosphere.

The main problem with Kerry, Obama and others pushing a regulatory and economic agenda to curb or eliminate CO2 in the U. S. is that it will have NO IMPACT upon "catastrophic anthropogenic global warming."

Study after study confirm that even if we reduced emissions to ZERO, it will make no difference, now or in the foreseeable future, in the rate and magnitude of "projected" warming!

Here's 2 reports from "progressive" sites that tell part of the story:

Global Warming Is Irreversible, Study Says
NPR, January 28, 2009

"Turning off the carbon dioxide emissions won't stop global warming."

www.npr.org...

The Dangerous Myth That Climate Change Is Reversible
ClimateProgress, March 17, 2013

"We’d have to drop ... emissions to zero now and for the rest of the century just to ... stop temperatures from rising."

thinkprogress.org...

The other part of the CAGW fallacy is the over-reliance upon models that do not and never have accurately modeled global climate and CO2 impacts:

"95 percent of models overestimated actual temperatures."

www.drroyspencer.com...

What we should be focused on here is adaptation, which has served mankind through the last major ice age, 2 "little ice ages" and several "warm periods;" all of which we survived despite several degrees C difference from present “average”global temperatures.

Alarmists are doing their best to destroy industrialization without fair consideration of costs versus benefits.
Calling their critics and skeptics "deniers" does nothing to help, and ignores common sense.

a reply to: jdub297

Well, it's posible that humans can adapt but can the wildlife, some might be able to but the majority i think will die out if it runs wild, and then we are pretty #ed or some of us.

What about a Sunday service for air traffic?
You could still let the little puddle hoppers fly, just ban jets from flying on a Sunday. Stupid idea? prove it!

a reply to: jdub297

The various suggestions and proposed "solutions" fail to take into consideration the basic physical fact tht CO2 levels are long-lived in the atmosphere.

Alarmists are doing their best to destroy industrialization without fair consideration of costs versus benefits.
Calling their critics and skeptics "deniers" does nothing to help, and ignores common sense.

Well that isn't really true, either statement.

For one there have been agricultural proposals that would act to trap co2 by simply changing the way we farm and there are several industrial proposals that would be carbon neutral. The recent breakthrough the navy had in fuels would remove co2 from the environment and if that fuel was used in cars the emissions equipment already mandated would capture that co2 or a portion thereof essentially turning every car into a carbon scrubber that would start to reverse the damage that has been done.

The petroleum industry would take a hit though because it would eliminate the need for oil based fuels. I imagine there are many who would stand in the way of such a solution for monetary reasons. That part of the industry I would like to destroy.

The US has enough potential geothermal energy to run everything in the country many times over, but because the electrical grid is antiquated it will not handle the load. The money that was spent on bailing out banks or subsidizing the oil industry could have rebuilt the system many times over. As far as cost goes for geothermal it is a no brainer but I am not in politics.

There have also been advances in geothermal within the past few years that increase our ability to tap such a resource which is in the link I already supplied.

Also try to remember the last time the earth went through a drastic cooling or warming phase the human population was numbered in the thousands and could migrate to better acclimate and regions such isn't the case anymore.

Excellent progress. Keep those points and suggestions coming.

To Grimpachi: Its above all of our heads (climate related pun intended). Hang in there.... your input is just as valuable. Your heart is in the right place. Don't give up. Each one of us is going to make a difference, and we all can say that we started somewhere.

The problem is that when there is a massive wealth transfer involved there is something wrong with the process. Follow the money and you will find corruption...every time. I won't support anything that has a massive wealth transfer and consolidation of decision making in the hands of a few climate nuts in Belgium (or wherever).

Fix it and we can talk.

originally posted by: Metallicus
The problem is that when there is a massive wealth transfer involved there is something wrong with the process. Follow the money and you will find corruption...every time. I won't support anything that has a massive wealth transfer and consolidation of decision making in the hands of a few climate nuts in Belgium (or wherever).

Fix it and we can talk.

There is no wealth transfer here... no money motives here. We intentionally omitted politics at the head of the thread. We aim to discuss solutions here, and we're also trying to achieve that by simply talking. Your input is still welcomed. I just know that you potentially have something quite worthwhile sitting there as a reserved thought. We'll keep your spot at the table for when the time is right for you.

a reply to: Bloomoon

I like threads that talk about solutions instead of if there is a problem. So here are a few more..solutions.

A smart highway that promises to save energy while improving safety was unveiled along a 500-meter stretch in the Netherlands last week. Interactive and self-sustaining, it’s being called the “Route 66 of the future.”

Read more at www.iflscience.com...

Detractors of solar energy are quick to criticize that it doesn’t work at night or on cloudy days, but now a new innovation from scientists at MIT has taken a step toward changing that. They have developed a material which can absorb heat from the sun and store it to be available at the flip of a switch. The results have been published in Nature Chemistry.
Read more at www.iflscience.com...

We are finding better ways to harness the suns energy.

A group of researchers at FermentAlg, led by Pierre Calleja, have invented a street lamp that is powered by algae. Yes, algae; those tiny microorganisms responsible for that green sludge you might find on your pond. This streetlamp exploits the process of photosynthesis that these algae carry out. Photosynthesis is the system used by certain organisms to convert light energy (from the sun) into chemical energy (sugars) that can be used as fuel, using carbon dioxide amongst other things. These lamps can store the energy produced by these algae during the hours in which the sun shines, generating a super green and environmentally friendly lamp.

Read more at www.iflscience.com...

There has also been some research done into making the plants themselves a light source for roads and parks.

At the very least switching to LED street lamps would equal huge electrical savings and reduced need for more power stations.www.myledlightingguide.com... Many cities have already done the math and made the switch.

This still needs development.

Plants are able to create energy from sunlight through the process of photosynthesis. Manmade solar panels were created to do the same thing, though it turns out they are much better at it than plants, as some solar panels are about ten times more efficient at generating electricity. However, the process isn’t perfect. One lab decided to blend nature and modern scientific advances and has actually extracted energy straight from plants by interrupting photosynthesis to create truly green energy. The team comes from the University of Georgia and has published their results in the journal Energy & Environmental Science.
Read more at www.iflscience.com...

The construction of wind farms in coastal waters could have a benefit besides clean energy. Turbines take energy out of the wind, and modeling shows this could be a significant enough effect to reduce the damage from major storms.

Professor Mark Jacobson of Stanford University has spent 24 years modeling atmospheric behavior, including air pollution and climate. He has used his models to study the way hurricanes form, searching for the answer to the troubling question of whether Global Warming will mean more or fewer hurricanes. He has also studied how much energy wind farms take out of windstreams, so combining the two forms of research was a logical move.

Read more at www.iflscience.com...

Then there is also carbon capture farming. Hemp would be ideal for co2 capture farming.

a reply to: Bloomoon

Don't forget that 95 percent of all so called warming is due to the oceans. Look up carbon cycle.

Ok Op. Since the subject of how global warming is a scam is of of the table and the greenies here are spinning how green tech will solve the "non existent problem" with algae and smoke and mirrors. Let me add some real solutions that in store for you and everyone else if the TPTB get their way.

I'll start with Bill Gates. He is pretty smart, connected, informed and he summed up the problem as

CO2 = number of people x services per person x energy per service x Co2 per unit energy

see the video here www.youtube.com... about 2:15

While everyone here is dealing with solutions concerning energy per service and Co2 per unit of energy, which is dealing with efficiency and new greener tech. The solutions that are coming from TPTB are going to deal with the other two factors, namely the number of people and the services.

So here are the real solutions coming from TPTB

First let's take services
Because governments cannot be trusted to deal out services because they have an inherent propensity to wage war and so therefore must seek to maximize population at all times. The solutions are for the total privatization and marketization of water, carbon, and DNA. The very building blocks for life must be marketized and taken out of the hands of governments so that none of these things can be considered to be rights. Instead these will be privileges subject to the efficiencies of the market (actual crony capitalism) that will cause ordinary peons to bear the full costs of their decisions. This will reduce the services demanded and cause a decrease in CO2. (in reality it will only cause death disease poverty and suffering and huge profits for psychopaths)

Second, population
Population will have to be controlled because the increases in efficiency and greener tech decreases in Co2 per unit of energy will not be sufficient in the face of world population growth. Therefore it is necessary to control population through forced sterilization, forced abortions, sterilization through vaccination (Bill gates advocates for this in the video), release of pestilence and controlled depopulation through engineered disease, depopulation through war, genocide and other killings of useless eaters.

Depopulation will have the most significant impact on decreasing man made Co2.

I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. The greenies and techies are looking for solutions that TPTB have absolutely no interest in implementing, instead the solutions that are going to come out are the nasty homicidal solutions that will make the atrocities of the Nazis look pale and weak. Afterall, TPTB want to out do their grandfathers. Hope you enjoyed a little bit of truth because supporting the global warming is man made myth is showing support for those that want to kill lots and lots of people.

BTW the real solutions for getting rid of both pollution and TPTB are the same
1. Thorium reactors, the tech is already developed, its just militarized. see this www.youtube.com...
2. Cold fusion/LENR reactors see this www.youtube.com...

Just remember that all the greener technologies, thorium reactors, cold fusion, none will ever be used because of crony capitalism.

Let me start by saying that I do NOT believe in Anthorpogenic Global Warming. I am a believer in the cycles of the solar activity and how that has historically impacted earth's weather.

That said, I applaud Bloomoon (and the posters to date) on this thread. Being good stewards of our planet (how to improve our care of our natural resources) should be paramount. NOBODY wants dirty air, polluted water...EXCEPG those who serve to benefit from same. Issue scary reports of carbon rising in the atmosphere-CONTROL with some sort of TAX those who generate carbon...from their light bulbs to their vehicles to the gassy cows who produce their dairy. And that's just for starters. Replace "their" current energy producers with energy produced by your political donors (think Solyndra and LightSquared); replace "their" vehicles with the vehicles that are "green" that are highly funded by govt monies (and whose corporate officers are top political donors). And for the cows...well can there be a "gas-x" GMO grass seed (developed by corporations that line all the right pockets?) in the near future?

We live in a time were more humans than ever are living longer lives, with for the most part, more freedoms than our ancestors a 100 years ago. I truly believe that that FREEDOM is what disturbs the powers that be most of all. With OUR freedom, they lose "control" of the masses...and the masses are living longer and healthier lives than ever, so start chipping away at OUR freedom to drive; to set our thermostats; to set our refrigerators or furnaces as we wish. And "politicians" posturing to "save" the planet are grabbing more control of our life functions w/each new "regulation" FOR OUR OWN GOOD.

Bravo to all here who see good earth stewardship OUTSIDE of government mandates as the way to the future (whatever your beliefs on AGW are).

There is no solution. The change that is coming is as far from our control, as is being able to identify and fully understand the dynamics of the true cause...

There really is nothing we can do about it, except for those with the means to prepare to survive rapid and at times violent climate change that will leave the northern and southern hemispheres a lot less habitable.

In my opinion, of course.

The only true solution for those who believe that human activity is the cause of climate change is to euthanize yourselves - completely serious.

Imagine the drastic decline of auto & factory emissions as well as the consumption and processing of animals for meat? The benefits of millions & millions of true AGW believers euthanizing themselves is almost too long to list.

So I say unto you believers of AGW, who amongst you will lead by example and euthanize yourself so that the planet may be saved?

SolarCoin is the solution, incentivizing solar energy adoption worldwide via cryptocurrency. 1 SolarCoin represents 1 MWh of solar electricity generation.

§1 = 1MWh

solarcoin.org to go down the rabbit hole...

a reply to: jdub297

Is it a meme to bash the Obama administration whenever possible regardless of whether it even makes sense? Given you got stars, it does appear that this is the case.

The main problem with Kerry, Obama and others pushing a regulatory and economic agenda to curb or eliminate CO2 in the U. S. is that it will have NO IMPACT upon "catastrophic anthropogenic global warming."

Study after study confirm that even if we reduced emissions to ZERO, it will make no difference, now or in the foreseeable future, in the rate and magnitude of "projected" warming!

OK, so let's read your own sources:

As carbon dioxide emissions continue to rise, the world will experience more and more long-term environmental disruption.

...

If we continue with business as usual for even a few more decades, she says, those emissions could be enough to create permanent dust-bowl conditions in the U.S. Southwest and around the Mediterranean.

This doesn’t mean climate change is unstoppable — only that we are stuck with whatever climate change we cause before we get desperate and go all WWII on emissions. That’s why delay is so dangerous and immoral. For instance, if we don’t act quickly, we are likely to be stuck with permanent Dust Bowls in the Southwest and around the globe. I’ll discuss the irreversibility myth further below the jump.

In other words, the higher the CO2 in the atmosphere, the more irreversible global warming effects occur. So if CO2 concentrations continue to rise due to continued emissions, then the more irreversible effects there becomes.

Next time, read your own sources before spouting nonsense and having people who don't know any better believe it. Also stop quote mining for small slithers of information that you think support your pre-existing beliefs.

Calling their critics and skeptics "deniers" does nothing to help, and ignores common sense.

It is entirely fair to call people like you deniers, since you rant about progressives and don't read or interpret your sources properly. Also stop whining about being called a denier when you call those you disagree with "alarmists".

Alarmists are doing their best to destroy industrialization without fair consideration of costs versus benefits.

Are you really that naive to suggest that the only way we can have an industrialized society is dig fossils out of the ground and dump the waste into the atmosphere? How low you must think of humanity! Also can you please explain your experience with industry, energy, and manufacturing?

In many ways it's pro-industry, because it forces innovation, new inventions, new technologies, and renewing of old infrastructure. I find that thought very exciting.

a reply to: dieseldyk

Therefore it is necessary to control population through forced sterilization, forced abortions, sterilization through vaccination (Bill gates advocates for this in the video)

Bill Gates advocates removing the factors that cause families to create enormous amounts of children. Mostly this involves things like education, access to contraception, and healthcare. Countries with higher living standards have lower birth-rates.

Next time, do some research into what people are actually saying, not what you think they're saying.

1. Thorium reactors, the tech is already developed, its just militarized. see this www.youtube.com...

Thorium reactors are most definitely not already developed.

Also everything you said about TPTB was insane and baseless.

a reply to: BlueJacket

Wrong on all counts.

electric cars

Studies have been done on the lifecycle emissions of Electric Vehicles.

solar panels

Nope.

Mass solar panels actually kill wildlife and heat the ionosphere dramatically.

How exactly do solar panels, most commonly installed on the roofs of buildings already built, kill wildlife and heat the ionosphere?

dont even get me started on batteries.

Lithium NMC and Lithium NCA battery cells, commonly used in electric vehicles, are not particularly toxic, they can be thrown into regular landfills. Cobalt is about the worst substance inside them, but that is typically recycled.

Well done making things up and then having people who don't know any better believe it.