I guess the guy from Virgin Airlines is teaming up with Gore to start a new contest. $25 million to the first person/people to develop a method to filter the C02 out of the atmosphere and reduce or reverse the greenhouse effect. Better get started though, you've only got five years according to the rules of the contest.

:cheers:

I guess the guy from Virgin Airlines is teaming up with Gore to start a new contest. $25 million to the first person/people to develop a method to filter the C02 out of the atmosphere and reduce or reverse the greenhouse effect. Better get started though, you've only got five years according to the rules of the contest.

:cheers:

...and Branson is going to barf how much pollution for rides into space to observe the effects?

Hey, I got a idea! Hang ferns on his jets, so as they fly all over the globe they can convert evil CO2 into O!!

start planting more trees the ones the government use for all there buracratic bull sh*t paper work

I know it sounds silly...but why not use an industrial-sized CO2 scrubber...like the ones used in Rebreathers for SCUBA divers...trap the CO2 as frozen or liquid product...here in Wyoming we use CO2 to pressurize low-producing oil and gas wells...link five slow-producers with a manifold system...extra product and trapped CO2...I know it's a vicious circle, but until we quit clear-cutting trees or allow hemp to be grown legally (it grows 3 ft in a day in a good environment) we're never going to offset the "Oxygen Deficit" or whatever Al Gore calls it. Simple math...more people, more users, more consumption. No plants to offset...buildup of "high levels of CO2". I agree with the fizzissist Branson is part of the "problem" not the solution.

I know it sounds silly...but why not use an industrial-sized CO2 scrubber...like the ones used in Rebreathers for SCUBA divers...trap the CO2 as frozen or liquid product...here in Wyoming we use CO2 to pressurize low-producing oil and gas wells...link five slow-producers with a manifold system...extra product and trapped CO2...I know it's a vicious circle, but until we quit clear-cutting trees or allow hemp to be grown legally (it grows 3 ft in a day in a good environment) we're never going to offset the "Oxygen Deficit" or whatever Al Gore calls it. Simple math...more people, more users, more consumption. No plants to offset...buildup of "high levels of CO2". I agree with the fizzissist Branson is part of the "problem" not the solution.

The rebreather scrubbers would not be a net adsorber of CO2 because the active ingredients are obtained by heating a CO2 containing rock to drive of the CO2 so that it can then adsorb it again when it functions in the Rebreather.

Trapping CO2 from coal powered generating systems and then using it in oil well enhancement is being studied or actually in use on a small scale. I found this link http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf83.html and was amused by the name of the sponsoring organisation.

I am with you on the hemp. Hemp grown on marginal land for processing into biodiesel and chemical feedstock is probably more viable than ethanol from corn and would not artificially perturb corn prices possibly leading to higher food prices.

Hmm what we'd need is some type of Chlorophyll device that could convert the CO2 to Carbon and Oxygen and it'll have to be very efficient, maybe solar powered? You'd need a lot of these things. Some big clear area would be required, maybe a logged out forest or something? You'd also have to anchor these things in the ground so they dont blow away, maybe bury the bottom parts in the soil or something. I don't know what we couuld use, it's all too complex for my tiny brain.

Hmm what we'd need is some type of Chlorophyll device that could convert the CO2 to Carbon and Oxygen and it'll have to be very efficient, maybe solar powered? You'd need a lot of these things. Some big clear area would be required, maybe a logged out forest or something? You'd also have to anchor these things in the ground so they dont blow away, maybe bury the bottom parts in the soil or something. I don't know what we couuld use, it's all too complex for my tiny brain.

Now there is a good proposal for a research project! I think we may safely predict it would be a success. Can we form a company and float an IPO?

Sounds like a tree to me...

kenny1

The simplest easiest route would be to simply replant all the deforested areas. HiggRobot you're pretty funny for a machinist. :D Instead of all this "research and development" for a technological wonder gadget to solve the problem, it would be easy to take a page from Mother Nature's notebook and plant more flora...hell, in China and India you could find all the cheap labor you need to replant their areas...in America I would suggest Ma & Pa get off their bon-bon loving asses and go down to a home improvement center or greenhouse and buy a half-dozen ornamental trees to plant. That would involve a little Manuel Labore, but that would be good for the SUV driving, latte-swilling, super-sized asses of most Middle-Americans. Or you could just offer homeless people and the unemployed a meal and $5 per tree...sure the bums would wander off after 1 or 2 trees were planted, but a lot of the unemployed would soon see the $$$ to be made for 8 hours of labor...if they got good at it they could make $200 a day. Or if they were planting seedling, $0.50 a pop. Just my 2c's.

Sounds like a tree to me...

kenny1

Tree? what's that? never heard of it, i'm thinking of calling my device the "solar powered carbon dioxide to carbon and oxygen self regulating clean running self expanding conversion plant" or just plant for short, yes i may call it "plant"? but "tree" does sound good hmm plant..tree..plant..tree?? cant decide?

I am with you on the hemp. Hemp grown on marginal land for processing into biodiesel and chemical feedstock is probably more viable than ethanol from corn and would not artificially perturb corn prices possibly leading to higher food prices.
Actually, AlGore and many of the AGW crew have been experimenting with the byproducts of burning hemp, and it has given them a wealth of creative ideas.

That would be cannibis...I was referring to the reefer-free hemp...

Actually, AlGore and many of the AGW crew have been experimenting with the byproducts of burning hemp, and it has given them a wealth of creative ideas.

I wish they would, with commercial hemp that is, you will choke before getting any creative ideas because the active ingedient is such low concentration.

so can 1 patent a tree and seed and win the 25 mill?

Did you know that there are few manufactures in CA already start to fabrication CO2 filter machine.

Forgot AlGore, I have a feel he just want to create name for himself then he run for president again.

WYLD dont know what part of middle america your talking about but most of us out here in what is known as flyover country are running our ass's off trying to make enough to buy bean's to put on the table and pay our taxes and buy gas A better aproch would be render the treehugger's and polition's into dieselfuel and the secondary byproduct would be the reduction of hot air they produce as for the warming thing where in our third week of 0's at night and leas than freezing everyday so I say bring it on I would like nothing more than to see the gas company go broke from lack of sales !!!! Still cold in the midwest Kevin

Just curious what the price of Gas is in your country? over here we pay about $US4.00 per US Gallon, we mostly drive 4 and 6 cylinder cars.

I have seen the size of some of Americas vehicles and they are just freaking HUMUNGOUES compared to our tiny things, i don't understand why they need to be so huge???

I guese to haul our oversize ass's around. $2.13 a gallon us of which I think somthing like $.75 or more is tax Wouldent mind having a holden utility kind of a downsized ElCamino with 50's body styling GM could introduce it over here and everyone would think it was something new carry on down under
Kevin

Well, We Australians also have huge Asses, cept we call them Arses, so that can't be the reason for your Monster sized vehicles. I had a look at an Ford F350 at an expo and i could almost fit my car in the back of the thing! It's like, what the fudge would anyone want such a freakin huge thing like that for?? I'm pretty sure the only reason Americans drive big monster cars like that is because they have cheap fuel (gas). In the UK the price of fuel or gas would be about $US 7.67, they have even smaller cars than us:)

Btw, we Australians invented the ute back in the 1930's, this is what they look like today..yeah i know it's got a Chevy LS1 V8 :)

Well, We Australians also have huge Asses, cept we call them Arses, so that can't be the reason for your Monster sized vehicles. I had a look at an Ford F350 at an expo and i could almost fit my car in the back of the thing! It's like, what the fudge would anyone want such a freakin huge thing like that for?? I'm pretty sure the only reason Americans drive big monster cars like that is because they have cheap fuel (gas). In the UK the price of fuel or gas would be about $US 7.67, they have even smaller cars than us:)

Btw, we Australians invented the ute back in the 1930's, this is what they look like today..yeah i know it's got a Chevy LS1 V8 :)

Well some of us americans actualy have a use for our over sized vehicals it may be hauling equipment, like tractors, dozers, and things some of us just have to dam many kids so we buy very larg S.U.V.S to haul there kids and have enough room to keep from killing them, then other americans just have insecurity issuses, so they think that they are better than every one else so they buy big vehicals, them it becomes a competion to see who can have the biggest vehical, or as my wife says they are compensating for there small man hood LOL

Higgorbot Nice ride new Ls1 in that platform is about as thrifty as my 74SS454 Elcamineo can't hall much weight but will light up the tires with a trailer in tow I think the SUV definition must include four wheel drive and I would agree that most of the owner's in the U.S. never need four wheel drive Socker mom's, Daytrader's,Realestate Agent's Ect. My favoret is the Draft Dodging Tree hugger Liberials Driving a Hummer Can you say oximoron EUFSUV Dito's (EnviromintlyUnFrendlySportUtilityVehicel) Wonder If I came to visit if I could bring back a holden? Kevin

well suv is not nessaserly 4wd just means they are not a mini van LOL

I would agree that most of the owner's in the U.S. never need four wheel drive Socker mom's, Daytrader's,Realestate Agent's Ect. My favoret is the Draft Dodging Tree hugger Liberials Driving a Hummer Can you say oximoron EUFSUV Dito's (EnviromintlyUnFrendlySportUtilityVehicel) Wonder If I came to visit if I could bring back a holden? Kevin

i never did get the big deal with everyone having a 4x4 suv ,i ve heard so many people here justify having one by using the "good for when it snows "crap , it snows twice a year here and the snow generally stays for a couple days only, most of them will never be put into 4 wd
it s a attitude thing or something stupid

id like to take one of those mercedes or bmw suv's , a bottle of liquer and go out mountain climbing

i never did get the big deal with everyone having a 4x4 suv ,i ve heard so many people here justify having one by using the "good for when it snows "crap , it snows twice a year here and the snow generally stays for a couple days only, most of them will never be put into 4 wd
it s a attitude thing or something stupid

id like to take one of those mercedes or bmw suv's , a bottle of liquer and go out mountain climbing

I think they do put them in four wheel... they are the ones who get going so fast they go straight ahead at the first corner. How many 4x4s have you passed spun off on the side of the freeway in a snow storm.

'Round here an awful lot of folks seem to think that they've got 4 wheel drive, and 8 wheel stop.

Last year the county didn't plow our street for 3 weeks. Yes, literally...3 WEEKS! With some 3-4feet of snow, there were ruts that challenged my evil SUV's clearance, to the point that one of my rear sway bar mounts broke from over extension.

Too many people, and it seems like women in particular, drive their Expidishuns like sports cars, and we see 'em all over the place in ditches.

While watching the cartoon network aka spike TV the guy's on trucks showed how to remove rust from car part's with soda and water using a battery charger It removes all the rust and gives off hydrogen in the process wich could be used for fuel or could just blow your shop up they did warn against smoking around the vat of stuff Interesting a fuel that could be produced while being a byproduct of somthing usefull We almost all have rusty iron we would like to get clean. Kevin

We have hydrogen powered electric fuel cell buses in our cities, they have a big pipe out the back where clean steam shoots up and out it's amazing to see. The hydrogen is produced by electrolysis of salt water by solar power, it's all very green. There's a lot of salt water on the planet and the sun can shine about 32W per square foot in some parts, so it's pretty easy to get hydrogen. You can buy hydrogen powered fuel cells of all sizes, but at the moment they cost a heap though.

Anyone remember the solar car from logans run?

........ The hydrogen is produced by electrolysis of salt water by solar power, it's all very green. ............so it's pretty easy to get hydrogen. You can buy hydrogen powered fuel cells of all sizes, but at the moment they cost a heap though.

Hydrogen fuel cells are not only not cheap, they're not currently all that "green". The net energy cost to produce them, and the resultant hydrogen, is still in the negative.

Hydrogen fuel cells are not only not cheap, they're not currently all that "green". The net energy cost to produce them, and the resultant hydrogen, is still in the negative.

Ah, but if you fudge your baselines when you are comparing them to other things you can 'prove' they are green.

Hydrogen fuel cells are not only not cheap, they're not currently all that "green". The net energy cost to produce them, and the resultant hydrogen, is still in the negative.

Are you considering the "net energy" used over the life of the fuel cell? sure like solar cells they have high cost and may take more energy to produce but over their life times the amount of clean energy they produce far outways the initial energy used to make them.

Consider the fuel cells in our buses, they are 250kw and use 44kg (97lbs) of hydrogen to move 15000kg (33000lbs) per 300km (187miles). How much diesel would be needed to do that and how is this diesel made? with salt water and sunshine???

While we are here talking about co2, consider this. The H2 cell bus above after traveling 187miles would produce 0 grams of CO2, 0 grams of CO, 0 grams of NoX and 0 grams of Hydrocarbon.

A light gas powered truck travelling over 187miles would produce 97.54 kg (214.59lbs) of CO2 and that's not exactly a 33,000lb bus. A passenger car would produce 77.69 (170.93lbs) od CO2. Now how many cars are there on the planet and how far do they travel each day?

These numbers seem very high, I sourced my info from: http://www.fuelcells.org/info/charts/transbrochure.pdf
so it's probably biased against everything that doesn't have a fuel cell in it?

...I know it's a vicious circle, but until we quit clear-cutting trees or allow hemp to be grown legally (it grows 3 ft in a day in a good environment)

"3ft in a day." Where do you live and what are you smoking? Plant it today havest it the day after tomorrow.:wee:

"....How does all this sum up? In my estimate the Virgin Airways fleet pollutes our world with close to 8 million tons of CO2 each year. At current CO2 market prices, that would cost Branson $200 million annually. No wonder he turns green. Can he afford it? Let’s again do a few sums. A 747 produces about $30 million in revenues each year. Fifteen of them, plus 25 Airbuses, plus 100 baby Boeings: I have done the sums and arrive at a total of $1,6 billion in annual gross revenues. Almost half of that, 40%, goes to debt service and depreciation, 20% to fuel, and another 20% to crew salaries and maintenance. Branson’s profit then is $ 320 million a year. He would have to hide in Chapter 11 if he were charged for his emissions. He surely needs the technological fix he is angling for with his Virgin Airways Mitigation Prize..."


http://climatesci.colorado.edu/2007/02/12/how-green-can-one-get-the-virgin-airways-mitigation-prize-by-hendrik-tennekes/

That would be cannibis...I was referring to the reefer-free hemp...

Looks like it could happen :banana:

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Industrial_Hemp_Farming_Act_introduced_in_0213.html

fizzissist,

You forgot to add whatever he makes from his other companies, Virgin Records, Virgin Mobile, Virgin Credit, Virgin Galactic, Virgin Cola, Virgin Vodka, Virgin fuel..Virgin ect ect..i think he may be doing it for tax purposes but he'd be far from chapter 11.

...and Virgin Rail, and Virgin Carbon Trading, ....

Here's the latest from AlGore....the Earth's CO2 Powered Energizer Bunny:

Al Gore to Sound Off On Climate Change With Concert Event

By J. Freedom du Lac
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 15, 2007; Page C01

Gore is scheduled to announce the concerts today in Los Angeles. He's expected to be joined there by rock stars Jon Bon Jovi and Sting, rap musician Pharrell Williams and media executive Kevin Wall, who served as worldwide executive producer for Live 8, the 2005 concerts that drew attention to African debt relief.

The Gore-promoted event will be held July 7, according to published reports, with seven major concerts on seven continents. Producers are said to be considering Washington as the North American host city, but one likely venue -- the Mall -- might be unavailable to them, a National Park Service spokesman said yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/14/AR2007021401629.html

Naturally, the entertainers will all be carpooling in a Prius, there will be no carbon arc spotlights, electrical amplification, or anything that loads any additional or unnecessary CO2 into the environment....Anyone attending will be encouraged to walk to the concert.


From AlGore's new Live Earth LLC's website...
"Global warming is the greatest environmental threat humanity has ever faced, and dramatic climate changes are already happening all over the world. 2007 is predicted to be world's warmest year in history...."

"...That audience, and the proceeds from the event, will create the foundation for a new, multi-year global effort to combat the climate crisis led by Vice President Al Gore. Kevin Wall, Worldwide Executive Producer of Live 8, is producing Live Earth. ..."

http://www.liveearth.org/who_we_are.html

Note that it doesn't say FORMER Vice President.....subtle, aren't we???

Note that it doesn't say FORMER Vice President.....subtle, aren't we???

Yeah, he's no "DICK" Cheney.:drowning:

Snoop Dogg will be performing at AlGore's Live Earth concerts to help stop Global Warming!!

Now there's a smokesperson...uh, I mean, spokesperson you can hang your hat on!! Fine upstanding young man, he. I'm sure, like Clinton, he doesn't inhale.....uh huh.

Hopefully, he won't be in jail for the concert date, if he makes it back from his video production in Australia...Ah, you gotta love these guys who fly all over the world to make their livings tell us that we should curtail our travel and lifestyle.

Dogg, yer the kinda guy I want my kid to look up to!
(Great choice, Algore!)

Snoop Dogg will be performing at AlGore's Live Earth concerts to help stop Global Warming!!

Now there's a smokesperson...uh, I mean, spokesperson you can hang your hat on!! Fine upstanding young man, he. I'm sure, like Clinton, he doesn't inhale.....uh huh.

Hopefully, he won't be in jail for the concert date, if he makes it back from his video production in Australia...Ah, you gotta love these guys who fly all over the world to make their livings tell us that we should curtail our travel and lifestyle.

Dogg, yer the kinda guy I want my kid to look up to!
(Great choice, Algore!)

Not that i disagree or agree with you, but just how much do you know about the SNOOP DODOUBLEG be for you go ragging on him,

Not that i disagree or agree with you, but just how much do you know about the SNOOP DODOUBLEG be for you go ragging on him,

"NOVEMBER 6--The rapper Snoop Dogg was booked today on a felony charge of possession of a dangerous weapon. Snoop (real name: Calvin Broadus) posed for the below mug shot while being processed this morning by the Orange County Sheriff's Department. The performer, 35, was charged in connection with a September incident at John Wayne Airport during which security personnel discovered a collapsible baton in his luggage. "

As of Jan, he's still waiting to hear whether he's been charged with further weapons and drugs possession allegations from 2 separate arrests last year.

"...As previously reported, it wasn’t the only time Snoop landed in hot water last year. In October he was arrested at the Bob Hope airport in Burbank for allegedly being in possession of a gun and marijuana.

While, a month later he was taken in by police outside the NBC Studios in Burbank, this time regarding claims illegally having a firearm, cocaine and marijuana...."

http://www.entertainmentwise.com/news?id=27153

Note the requirement in his Concert Rider, Section 7(E) that all dressing rooms shall have NO FLOURESCENT lights...
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/backstagetour/snoop/snoop3.html

....and while you're checking out his Rider, don't forget to peruse Section 10, Security. This guy ain't exactly Mr. Rogers....
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/backstagetour/snoop/snoop4.html


....No, I don't know much about him. But apparently there are a lot of lawyers and police who do.

In any case, this guy is a good choice as a representitive for climate issues??? Gimme a break.

Hey nerver said he was, and i dont let my kids listen to his crap, but at the same time he is just one that got cought. how many other super stars out there do think do the same thing even gov. persenal. But yes Al Gore should pick someone a little less know for there use of illegal substance and firearms charges

I guess what I was trying to get at is the muddied method of Gore in his effort to stop 'global warming'....sure, if he is really sincere, then you want anybody and everybody to spread the news.

Problem is, the hypocrisy of those spreading it. The Dogg sure isn't about to change his lifestyle to 'Green', and many of the others in que for the concert series aren't either.

My point being that Gore is becoming our newest and best P.T. Barnum. And he doesn't want us to look behind the curtain.

Seems to me the scale of solving the problem, reversing the cycle would require something short of a miracle. Were losing from the Ice packs the equivalent of NH and CO each year in an areas the size of North America or the U.S. Rented Gores DVD but fell asleep after the carbon slides.

What is that bumper stick say, save the environment kill yourself. :)

Just kidding. What is that saying, "if you look close enough at any difficult question, you will find that you are part of the problem"

Other solutions building on the carbon converting chlorophyll based plant hypothesized.

Plant the Austree and Cudzoo wherever possible. Increase nitrogen levels in all major bodies of water increasing the marine carbon conversion "plants".

ha what an absurd farce this 'contest' is..

we have many efficient technologies. we need cultural change, not technological change. also, many people who posted in this thread need to learn how to string words into sentences into paragraphs; all while maintaining a valid and logical thought process.


cheers! :)

On a more serious note. I lived on Cape Cod for a couple years. Purely anecdotal but possibly relevant to Global Warming. Used to monitor the offshore bouys for fishing timing.

Had been flyfishing stripers for years there and things just got a bit out of kilter.

Usually you will have some seasonal changes in the Gulf Stream but the last year it changed. I would swear near shore water temps dropped 10 degrees in one day. Old timers complained of a barren winter for fishing. The following year was exceeding slow in coming up to average temps. Chatham is a unique intersection, the elbow of the cape, between the Atlantic, Gulf of Maine, Gulf Stream, Labrador currents, etc.

When the fish arrived they were starved and had some skin issues (Chesapeake Bay, Pfisteria). I also saw something like whirling disease in more than a number of fish. When things got hot they were hotter than I'd ever seen. To top it off we had some Tarpon spottings a bit out of there area. Strange but true. Relevant, not directly.

yes... whoever says they would welcome global warming without 100% irony is really a very selfish person, or more likely dosent understand or belive how drmatic the effects can be for some or all of the population..

Also, i have an idea to win the $. The invention is deceptively simple. It is 'real leadership'. Not oil\smog dealers. The current administration is directly responsible for the coal burning power plant i like 1000meters from being able to buy essentially unlimited 'right to pollute' from places like seattle where they get almost all their power from hydroelectric dams, but still, for some reason, get alloted a C02 emission right...

On a more serious note. I lived on Cape Cod for a couple years. Purely anecdotal but possibly relevant to Global Warming. Used to monitor the offshore bouys for fishing timing.

Had been flyfishing stripers for years there and things just got a bit out of kilter.

Usually you will have some seasonal changes in the Gulf Stream but the last year it changed. I would swear near shore water temps dropped 10 degrees in one day. Old timers complained of a barren winter for fishing. The following year was exceeding slow in coming up to average temps. Chatham is a unique intersection, the elbow of the cape, between the Atlantic, Gulf of Maine, Gulf Stream, Labrador currents, etc.

When the fish arrived they were starved and had some skin issues (Chesapeake Bay, Pfisteria). I also saw something like whirling disease in more than a number of fish. When things got hot they were hotter than I'd ever seen. To top it off we had some Tarpon spottings a bit out of there area. Strange but true. Relevant, not directly.

Yes, that is the best solution. Leadership, a real plan, execution. Soundbites are useless. Mitigate. Though we'll never truly control nature, we can mitigate our negative inputs.

Ok, less seriously, South Park cracks me up. I like Gore but he is an easy target. The children of South Park had Gore as guest speaker. With great "gravitas" he built up to his speech Keypoint for awareness of

Man Bear Pig

Throughout the show whenever he needed to validate his finding and erase doubt, he said "I'm serial"

We could have done worse

To be fair, but serial, and a bit apathetic. We are the plodding race/ populace led by sound bites, undereducated on the cause and effect. In reality we can't predict exactly what will happen. We can't introduce an aggressive solution without potentially creating new problems. I contend there is no magic bullet. We are adaptive, we might just have to adapt to a changing environment. Having contingency plans might be prudent. Doing a private space program is infinitely easier than reversing our impact while we continue to influence our environment. A president can't really orchestrate the solution only provide the right focus,set goals, promote expediency. Not an easy task considering undue influence, co-opted nature of the presidency.

This isn't really a problem for politics. The signs have been there for quite a while, more recently, the potential outcomes are clearer. In all likelihood we're late to the problem. Then again we don't know for sure. If the best and diverse scientific disciplines aren't brought together to create consensus then the predictions are not too far removed from the existence of bigfoot or bear man pig ; ) The question of timeline further complicates prioritization. It's a complex problem and ultimately I'd say manage risk and mitigate influences driving towards hypothesized tipping points.

Gore did a good job of simplifying the cause and effect, albeit probably oversimplified. An inconvenient truth, yes it is.

Perhaps the right path is better education, grass roots. Concerted tax incentives, which would direct both personal and corporate investment towards the right activities with practical relevance to the average person. We expanded the money supply to minimize y2k conversion. The same is relevant(Borrowing) Less loopholes to compliance. Yes, we are doing this already but we have the classic conflict that the status quo is pervasive, easy. We care but probably not enough. We might know we need to change but we don't have a clear, quick path to address it.

steps off soapbox.

i think countries like sweden set a precidint. why does someone else get to be reasonable and we are stuck being irate rednecks?


To be fair, but serial, and a bit apathetic. We are the plodding race/ populace led by sound bites, undereducated on the cause and effect. In reality we can't predict exactly what will happen. We can't introduce an aggressive solution without potentially creating new problems. I contend there is no magic bullet. We are adaptive, we might just have to adapt to a changing environment. Having contingency plans might be prudent. Doing a private space program is infinitely easier than reversing our impact while we continue to influence our environment. A president can't really orchestrate the solution only provide the right focus,set goals, promote expediency. Not an easy task considering undue influence, co-opted nature of the presidency.

This isn't really a problem for politics. The signs have been there for quite a while, more recently, the potential outcomes are clearer. In all likelihood we're late to the problem. Then again we don't know for sure. If the best and diverse scientific disciplines aren't brought together to create consensus then the predictions are not too far removed from the existence of bigfoot or bear man pig ; ) The question of timeline further complicates prioritization. It's a complex problem and ultimately I'd say manage risk and mitigate influences driving towards hypothesized tipping points.

Gore did a good job of simplifying the cause and effect, albeit probably oversimplified. An inconvenient truth, yes it is.

Perhaps the right path is better education, grass roots. Concerted tax incentives, which would direct both personal and corporate investment towards the right activities with practical relevance to the average person. We expanded the money supply to minimize y2k conversion. The same is relevant(Borrowing) Less loopholes to compliance. Yes, we are doing this already but we have the classic conflict that the status quo is pervasive, easy. We care but probably not enough. We might know we need to change but we don't have a clear, quick path to address it.

steps off soapbox.

Yes, it's a global issue and while the U.S. is a major component we are behind compared to more progressive countries. We are protecting our deep pocketed constituents while falling behind on ecological issues.

A private org might find a good plan but ultimately governments will have to facilitate them through programs.

On a personal level, I have good wind and sun energy potential but coming up with a cost effective solution that is not a one off, off the grid is quite challenging.

A more simple solution is find a cost effective solution for various people, geographies to reduce reliance on fossil fuels. Educate the voters and elect candidates that can support this agenda.

Otherwise we are just addressing the symptoms.

http://www.mypartypost.com/watchvideo/2796/SOUTH_PARK-_Day_After

The kids steal a boat break a beaver damn creating flooding mistaken for global warming.

A classic parody rated PG

Doesn't matter how many gunz or cigaweeds Snoop Dogg has in his trousers. Stupid kids all around America, millions of them, look up to people like him.

Unfortunately, the kids will also ditch their heroes/quit whenever the going gets tough. So basically they'll recycle a few cans for a couple days... then when it comes time to fly to Mexico for the annual spring break sex-fest, they'll say "screw dat, I'm flying!!!!"

Meaning they'll fly via airline & fly via acid.

The kids are gullible enough to go along with whatever fashionable political solution of the moment is put forward. Even if it means driving the last few nails into the coffin of our industrial capacity and relegating our standard of living to third world status. (But really, only lip service will be paid to killing our productive capacity, just as with class war, it will be business as usual with another tax layer added on.)

The plain truth is right there in their first year physics and chemistry books. But they will follow a leader who would flunk out of either class.

Low density energy sources suck. Most of them don't even have a payback and are only as cheap as they are to fiddle around with because we have inexpensive energy to produce the tools to gather it. You can't replace an excellent fuel with one that sucks, and expect to have your cake too.

--97T--

97t,

Yes I was suprised to see the lower density of energy created by hydrogen vs petroleum products and others.

Nuclear energy is pretty damn good if you don't halve a malfunction and could get rid of the waste.

Seeing how much electricity a solar voltaic panel creates is a bit underwhelming. I'd like to better understand how practical the paint (amorphous?) versions are and how easy it would be to collect energy from them.

Don't really know how efficient wind energy is.

Hybrids are greener as far as the car goes but you still have to produce the energy.

Solar collectors and using the constant temps of subterranean based home heating and cooling look interesting as well.

We should capture all the CO2 in big polly bags and drop them on Mars to create a runaway greenhouse effect there. Once it's ready for habitation we should bugger off from Earth cos it's knackered now anyway and live on Mars.. and grow another set of arms each so we can operate turret mils and lathes simultaneously :)

jsage,

Hydrogen is not an energy source nor a fuel. It is an energy carrier, like electricity. It must be manufactured, and making it is not very efficient.

Think of the millions of dollars that could be made honestly, if you could come up with a real alternative energy source. Too bad the only millions being made are with your tax dollars going to unscrupulous businessmen who know better. Either some new truth about physics has to be discovered, or we are stuck with the economies of scale we have now.

Oil, coal, natural gas, and hydroelectric are the real alternative energy. Alternative to what? Alternative to firewood, walking, tallow candles, horses in the street, scarce metal, and a hunter-gatherer/cottage industry type economy. Humans survived for millennia on solar and wind power. But it was a pretty miserable existence.

--97T--

Maybe we could help save the planet by planting Al Gore.....

----------------------------------------------
Hypocrisy Update: Al Gore’s Home Uses 20 Times the Energy of Average American’s
Posted by Noel Sheppard on February 26, 2007 - 22:14.

In another classic example of liberals telling Americans to “Do As I Say, Not As I Do,” Dr. Global Warming Himself, aka Al Gore, has been identified by the Tennessee Center for Policy Research as talking a good game about energy conservation while not walking the walk.

In a press release published Monday just hours after the conclusion of the Academy Awards, the “independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization” reported (emphasis mine throughout, h/t Drudge): “Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.”

The release marvelously continued: “Gore’s mansion, located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES)."

Lest we not forget that in his celluloid tribute to junk science, “the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.”

As a frame of reference, “[t]he average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy.”

By contrast, in 2006, Dr. Global Warming “devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.”

The release elaborated:

Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.

Yet, the really delicious hypocrisy was still to come: “Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.”

Isn’t that just ducky? This charlatan goes around the world telling people that they need to conserve energy to save the planet, and his consumption increased by almost 14 percent.

What a crock! As a result, the press release aptly concluded:

“As the spokesman of choice for the global warming movement, Al Gore has to be willing to walk the walk, not just talk the talk, when it comes to home energy use,” said Tennessee Center for Policy Research President Drew Johnson.

Yep, Fizz, that's the point:

YOU will suffer a lowered standard of living, not THEM.

Their work is much too important, and their luxury is a small sacrifice to pay for them getting the message out.

After all, it is YOU who are destoying the world, while THEY are working to save it. (For whom? For them, of course.)

--97T--

Meanwhile, in the PSRC (aka Kalifornia), there's a move afoot by the CARB to prohibit YOU from servicing your own car's air conditioning system with 134a ...you remember that stuff...it's the less efficient and mandated replacement for it's evil predecessoor, which is still readily available ...<see my other post on that one>...in the 3rd world.

Cost to California consumers is estimated at around $167Million, and a windfall to repair shops.

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070226006213&newsLang=en

I wonder if AlGore carpooled in a Prius to the Oscars????

:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

97t,

being overly simple here, so what happened with the Hindenberg was that electricity. Besides electricity and as in possible electrostatic discharge being the catalyst. So this is not hydrogen combustion? I know the difference between a fuel cell and hydrogen combustion.

Yes if I wanted a small scale way of storing solar energy, I could use electrolysis to liberate hydrogen. Although they are looking for benthic organisms which naturally produce hydrogen.

No doubt it is a catalysed process that requires energy. However, I'm not going to go put crude in my auto.

To illustrate why the Hindenberg didn't go up in an explosive ball of fire, you can do a simple, and fun...if not illegal...experiment using Pringles, some hydrogen, and a match.

Poke a 1/8" hole in the bottom of the can, remove the plastic top and seal, and invert the can full of chips over something that allows the chips to remain in the can. You need to be able to then fill the can with hydrogen from beneath, so that the air is replaced by hydrogen.

After it's full of hydrogen, light the gas escaping from the hole in the bottom that is now at the top.....and stand back.

When the hydrogen has burnt off sufficiently that there's just the right blend of hydrogen and oxygen containing air, it'll blow the can off...and leave the chips behind in a neat stack.

That proves that hydrogen powered Pringles could replace fossil fuels for automobiles and home power, but blimp technology still needs work....

:)

jsage,

I guess I don't understand your question.

It appears the Hindenburg suffered the consequences of liberation of the energy that was put into the hydrogen in getting it to separate from oxygen or whatever it was combined with, when it recombined with oxygen at an inopportune time.

Still, the energy that was liberated was a good deal less than the energy that was expended in getting it separated.

Find me a hydrogen well somewhere, and I'll buy stock in it. Until then, it's an energy carrier, not a fuel.

--97T--

I think it's difference between calling a potato a vegetable or a tuber. In this case I'm calling it a vegetable.

Im sure there is nuance I'm missing.

OK, the nuance is that fuel is something you can cut down or dig up, or whatever, and get a net return on energy from it. Like firewood. Fuels are energy carriers where mother nature already put the energy in, and all you have to do is burn it or react it to get the use of the energy contained in it.

Hydrogen, like electricity or a spinning flywheel or a battery is an energy carrier but YOU have to put the energy into it, energy gotten from somewhere else. So it is NOT a fuel.

That was my point. Sorry for being so long winded.

--97T--

When you separate hydrogen from water, contain it, compress it and store it you expend much more energy than you can get back by recombining (burning) it with oxygen.

That's why it's not an energy source with present technology.

We'll be nuclear one day. May take a while until we use up the other stuff, but it will happen. Funny, the loudest opponents of carbon fuels are also the loudest opponents of nuclear energy. Maybe they want our cars to run on farts.

The problem is simple and has an obvious solution.
There are more people on this planet then the planet can sustain.
The environmental mechanics of the planet are enacting a long series of irriversible events designed to reduce, DRASTICLY, the number of people on the planet.
There is NOTHING WE CAN DO to stop this chain of events from reaching the end resault.
We can not predict exactly what that end resault will be but I'm sure things will be VERY different when the cycle is complete.
There have been some very informitive programs on public TV describing the irriversible changes in the Gulf stream that are causing the ice caps at bothe poles to break up wich is in turn causing a volume of CO2 and Methane to be released from the melting ice and the thawing mud and Artic tundra, that makes mans contribution to the situation like liteing candles on a birthday cake.
WE have ALL EARNED our place in what is going to happen next.
What I wonder now is, how will I explain it to my 4 and 2 year old sons...

......What I wonder now is, how will I explain it to my 4 and 2 year old sons...

Merl before trying to explain things please get information from somewhere more reliable than TV, public or otherwise. Read books about physical geography and ocean circulation in a library, read about weather and climate and the way the atmosphere circulates, read about ice ages and solar cycles; preferably from books that are written as senior high school or college text books. Choose these books because they are intended to be correct and informative not just entertaining or scary which is often the aim of the TV programs. But even with these books don't take everything as gospel truth...but at the same time don't reject anything out of hand. Compare what different books say, are they consistent, is a logical picture being built up, are the same facts and data being interpreted in the same manner by different authors.

I am not going to try and convince you that the public TV programs you refer to are a mish mash of some correct facts indiscriminantly mixed in with utter hogwash; I hope with effort you will find that out for yourself.

I hope with effort you will find that out for yourself.

And whatever you do....don't listen to me. ...Or AlGore. Like Geof says, look into it for yourself. The resources available today are truly amazing, and often a mouse-click away.

Can any of you tree hugging hippies please tell me what happened to the OZONE HOLE? And don't say that R134 (or whatever it was) fixed it.

What about all the scientists that said that there wold be GOLBAL FREEZING in the 70's?

So far the nut job ecofreaks are 0 for 2. Yet they think that they got it right with 'climate change'?

Its a money grab. As ALGORE to sell you some carbon credits (OMFG you ppl are retarded) and get back to me when you have scientific PROOF of *anything* man made casueing the problem.

....The resources available today are truly amazing, and often a mouse-click away.

I am old fashioned enough to think that books, especially ones that have been written with an intent to inform, not influence, are a more reliable basic source. Not infallible...just more reliable and it is possible to compare and follow different lines of reasoning more easily in books.

I ran into this Global Warming documentary video on YouTube the other day. I must say it's a little long, but well worth the watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6Wr1hcIp2U

For some reason we've concentrated on the rise of CO2 as the cause of Global Warming, and discounted how that nuclear furnace we live next to, affects our climate...

Geof,
I have devoted a great deal of time and effort in resrearch of this subject and have given the global polution and the resaultant global warming and other consequences an enormous amount of independant thought and reflection. My eyes were open to this back when I was in junior highschool and I have been observing the whole situation since then.
I can't even begin to site all the sorces of data and opinion I have coverd over the years, I don't even keep track anymore.
The reference to the TV was merley made with the idea that so many people prefer the visual media now days that it might strike an interest in someone to do some research on their own.
As to me, I have formed my opinion based on the facts presented to me.
To deny the possible consequences of rampent polution, is folly.
As I said, it's my children (and everyone elses ) who must bear the punishment.

.....For some reason we've concentrated on the rise of CO2 as the cause of Global Warming, and discounted how that nuclear furnace we live next to, affects our climate...

I haven't and a lot of people haven't. Trouble is that accepting that some changes may be due to natural causes doesn't seem to satisfy the self-flagellating masochistic tendencies of some eco-freaks or the self-serving manipulative tendencies of some politicians.

Subject: Global Warming: The Eclipse Solution Or leave the co2 alone!


To those it concerns. Everyone!


This is to suggest a possible solution to the global warming problem.
I am a retired scientist but wonder what practical engineers think of this idea.
Maybe I am overlooking major or impossible obstacles?

By placing a thin film (The Eclipse) in orbit between the earth and sun we can cause some sunlight to be blocked from reaching the surface of the earth and ocean. The orbit must be near Geo-synchronous and move in the opposite direction of communication satellites. The synchronicity will cause the film to stay centered on the line that runs between the earth and the sun and thus block some of the sunlight that falls on the equator.

The amount of blockage can be regulated by the size of the film to just balance the effect of greenhouse gasses.

By a slight tilt in the orbit away from the equatorial plane and a slightly elliptical orbit it will be possible to avoid trying to occupy the same space as the communication satellites.

While expensive, the installation of the Eclipse will cost a lot less then the damage from the melting of the polar ice caps.

Further, we will be able to continue to use fossil fuels. We can increase the extent of the solar blockage as necessary to compensate for rising CO2 levels.

James F. Dillworth
dilly109h@yahoo.com and dillyh@peoplepc.com

Subject: Global Warming: The Eclipse Solution


To those it concerns. Everyone!


This is to suggest a possible solution to the global warming problem.
I am a retired scientist but wonder what practical engineers think of this idea.
Maybe I am overlooking major or impossible obstacles?

By placing a thin film (The Eclipse) in orbit between the earth and sun we can cause some sunlight to be blocked from reaching the surface of the earth and ocean. The orbit must be near Geo-synchronous and move in the opposite direction of communication satellites. The synchronicity will cause the film to stay centered on the line that runs between the earth and the sun and thus block some of the sunlight that falls on the equator.

The amount of blockage can be regulated by the size of the film to just balance the effect of greenhouse gasses.

By a slight tilt in the orbit away from the equatorial plane and a slightly elliptical orbit it will be possible to avoid trying to occupy the same space as the communication satellites.

While expensive, the installation of the Eclipse will cost a lot less then the damage from the melting of the polar ice caps.

Further, we will be able to continue to use fossil fuels. We can increase the extent of the solar blockage as necessary to compensate for rising CO2 levels.

James F. Dillworth
dilly109h@yahoo.com and dillyh@peoplepc.com

James,

The practical engineer in me suggests this alternative:

Wait a few years until solar activity dies down, after which cloudiness should increase, blocking some of the sunlight from impinging on the earth. If previous cycles repeat, we will someday be thankful for whatever residual heat we are absorbing now.

Perhaps Mars could use a device such as you propose to save its southern polar ice cap.

--97T--

I like the idea, and think that AlGore should be the one to save the planet by flying up there and deploying it.

The film? Exactly. The film should be constructed out of AlGore's film. That would be it's highest and best use.