Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We could look at Germany or other countries where solar has become commonplace. Roofs that are completely covered in solar panels so homes could be self-sufficient. Since we lived like this for decades on ancient solar tech, I know this is possible: IF you have only Energy-Star-type appliances and have some discretion.
Public transportation is key. Not to totally eliminate cars of course, but it works in other countries. Encourage smaller vehicles. This isn't pie-in-the-sky. Just look at other countries, you never see the humungous vehicles the U.S. has. So they aren't strictly necessary.
Somehow and I don't know the answer, but we have to encourage Brazil and other rainforest countries, to stop cutting them all down for farming and harvesting.
Makes me think of places like Easter Island, where apparently the natives sat and watched the very last tree cut down and that was "OK"?
Plastic recycling is key. Why can't it be chopped up and added to road materials, like Hawaii does with glass, for example?
We could look at Germany or other countries where solar has become commonplace. Roofs that are completely covered in solar panels so homes could be self-sufficient. Since we lived like this for decades on ancient solar tech, I know this is possible: IF you have only Energy-Star-type appliances and have some discretion.
Public transportation is key. Not to totally eliminate cars of course, but it works in other countries. Encourage smaller vehicles. This isn't pie-in-the-sky. Just look at other countries, you never see the humungous vehicles the U.S. has. So they aren't strictly necessary.
Somehow and I don't know the answer, but we have to encourage Brazil and other rainforest countries, to stop cutting them all down for farming and harvesting.
Makes me think of places like Easter Island, where apparently the natives sat and watched the very last tree cut down and that was "OK"?
Plastic recycling is key. Why can't it be chopped up and added to road materials, like Hawaii does with glass, for example?
Or at least make ways for them to not have to commute in those vehicles one or two hours a day. They can still have them to drive for trips, etc..
We could look at Germany or other countries where solar has become commonplace. Roofs that are completely covered in solar panels so homes could be self-sufficient. Since we lived like this for decades on ancient solar tech, I know this is possible: IF you have only Energy-Star-type appliances and have some discretion.
Public transportation is key. Not to totally eliminate cars of course, but it works in other countries. Encourage smaller vehicles. This isn't pie-in-the-sky. Just look at other countries, you never see the humungous vehicles the U.S. has. So they aren't strictly necessary.
Somehow and I don't know the answer, but we have to encourage Brazil and other rainforest countries, to stop cutting them all down for farming and harvesting.
Makes me think of places like Easter Island, where apparently the natives sat and watched the very last tree cut down and that was "OK"?
Plastic recycling is key. Why can't it be chopped up and added to road materials, like Hawaii does with glass, for example?
I don't disagree with you, but some realities need to be pointed out.
I have visited Germany three times now. The last time I went there we stayed in a bed and breakfast for a few days in a little town along the Rhine.
I had a conversation with the lady managing the B & B about how the Germans produced electricity. She told me that she would appreciate it if I always turned off any remotely unnecessary power because electricity in Germany was very expensive. The Germans are doing much to produce "clean energy". However, there is a trade off. The trade off is very expensive electric power.
I do think we need to reconsider nuclear power. Its a clean, largely environmentally friendly way of producing electricity. I also think we have large resources of natural gas and while this is fossil fuel its much easier on the environment than coal is. I view natural gas as a sort of "bridge" that can be available while we perfect solar energy a bit more and build things like a smart power grid.
I think electric cars make more sense than opting for public transportation. Of course, I live in the West where population densities make public transportation less practical.
I do agree though that this issue needs to be dealt with. It is not made up. It amazes me there are people who post here who think they know more than the NOAA, the CIA, and the vast majority of reputable scientists. Without any citation to authority, their opinions should be ignored.
Injecting reflective aerosols into the stratosphere, mimicking the volcanic eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in 1991; the reflective aerosols spewed into the atmosphere from Mt. Pinatubo cooled the Earth by about 1 Degree F for 3 years in a row by reflecting a portion of solar energy arriving from our sun back into outer space. This could easily be accomplished via a fleet of high altitude weather balloons tethered to the surface via hoses through which reflective aerosols would be pumped from the surface of the planet.
Brightening the marine cloud layer by dispersing pulverized sea salt into the clouds, thereby reflecting even more solar energy back into outer space.
Here is a visual of the first of the above:
Note: Famed polymath Nathan Myhrvold approached Nancy Pelosi's office over a decade ago with simple geoengineering projects that would reverse global warming. Pelosi's staff told him they didn't want to solve global warming; they wanted to tax carbon. Taxing carbon provides a long-term steady stream of revenue to the federal government, whereas solving global warming does not.
Last edited by RationalExpectations; 04-09-2021 at 04:23 PM..
Note: Famed polymath Nathan Myhrvold approached Nancy Pelosi's office over a decade ago with simple geoengineering projects that would reverse global warming. Pelosi's staff told him they didn't want to solve global warming; they wanted to tax carbon. Taxing carbon provides a long-term steady stream of revenue to the federal government, whereas solving global warming does not.
Please provide some verifiable documentation of that assertion. Besides the fact that I doubt any villainous politician who may be up to something nefarious would willingly reveal her evil designs to Nathan Myhrvold , I find it difficult to take only the word of Nathan Myhrvold (a repeatedly accused "patent troll") as undisputed truth.
If you don't believe in man made climate change, BTW , please don't post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NatesDude
The topic of the thread was clearly stated to be about people who believe in man made climate change giving ideas about solving it . If you don’t believe in it then fine, but please don’t clutter up the thread debating it . This is for those who do believe to offer reasonable , doable solutions .
Hmm, didn't see that. Sorry.
So what you really intend for this thread, is that posters come up with suggestions on how to get government to spend zillions of dollars on a quixotic quest, how to persuade people it's realistic and get them to open their wallets, and NOT mention that it's fictional?
Sounds good. I like fairy tales and wishful thinking as much as the next guy. Paul Bunyan stories were terrific. Carry on!
First off, let me explain that I am not a climate change denier. I believe it is real. The point of this thread is how would we deal with it realistically today , given the urgency that those passionate it about claim. What can be done today and in the next few years to begin to solve the issue? If you don't believe in man made climate change, BTW , please don't post. This isn't a debate about the merits of man made climate change, this is about real world solutions from those who do believe and find the matter urgent...................................
I don't, simply because everybody that believes in man-caused climate change refuses to do anything about it....TODAY. It is always tomorrow. Always 20 to 30 years away.
According to John Kerry, the world, as we know it, ends in eight years. This is what we need to do NOW, to make it happen.
First...you need to convince the public about the urgency of the issue.
In 1973, we had an energy crises and the Governors of Washington, Oregon, and California immediately imposed a 55 MPH speed limit. I was living in Canada and driving to Berkeley for Thanksgiving. They shut off the lights!!! Streetlights, were off, business lights were off when closed, parking lot lights off, everything unless it was open. That made an impression. It was easy to drive 55 after that.
The same urgency needs to be done today. Turn off the lights a nightly reminder about the climate crises.
Second...you need to implement that same 55 MPH speed limit. Transportation accounts for half the CO2 emissions. In Washington state, IF our climate governor implemented that our CO2 emissions would have GONE DOWN instead of UP!! Europe is implementing slower maximum speeds to reduce CO2 emissions.
The Governors of Washington, Oregon, and California can do it tomorrow. If they are serious about man-caused climate change, they would do it. They haven't.
Third....significantly reduce jet travel. Ban private jets. Limit commercial trips to COVID pandemic levels. We survived that with little effect....saving the planet we should do no less.
Fourth...Limit immigration. Americans per capita emit more CO2. At Zero Population Growth. Stable CO2 emissions.
Fifth.....Encourage fracking for natural gas. Replace coal with natural gas due to cheap natural gas prices. Likewise, ban the use of electricity in new hookups, for stoves, hot water heaters, furnaces and other items with heating elements. The right choice for heating is natural gas, not electricity generated by coal or natural gas.
Six.......Develop Plan B. All the analysis is showing that the US cannot stop climate change on its own. There are ONLY eight years left.
What is Plan B? We need nuclear power to charge electric cars, dams to provide water due to climate change droughts, building of sea walls to prevent flooding. I would even support the building of off-shore windmills of the Washington, Oregon, and California coasts. Run them down the eastern seaboard all the way to Florida. Off-shore wind makes sense.
Nobody is talking about a Plan B??
Anyway, IF i see 55 MPH I would believe that man-caused climate change is a serious issue.
a. Ramp up the implementation of nuclear power. Continue with modern designs for fission while funding R&D efforts for fusion and thorium. They aren't ready for prime time yet, but technology will develop.
b. Allow coal and gas power plants to continue operating. We need the power in the interim and there's a natural life cycle to a power plant that includes the ramp up time to get sufficient nuclear operating.
c. No new rules on petroleum powered cars. Electric will come when the market is right and battery technology gets there. Increase R&D into battery technology, but don't try to make outlandish claims to force a change into society that doesn't meet societies' transportation needs; those just cost you credibility and make it harder to focus on the actual problem. The change will happen naturally when the technology is ready.
d. Increase R&D on solar cells, but again, allow the market to work so that solar and wind happen where they are most efficient and effective. Let R&D bring the cost/benefit ratio in line and then the market will function to implement the solution. Much more effective than trying to force fit a solution that onto the problem.
e. Adapt and learn to live with the minor changes that happen. Climate has changed throughout history. Ultimately we will have to adapt to it rather than trying to force a solution that won't work.
f. And perhaps biggest one of of all: Stop with the overblown fear mongering and catastrophizing. It doesn't do any good; it distracts from real solutions to real problems; and it eventually turns everyone off like the boy who cried wolf.
I find these to be very good, reasonable answers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NatesDude
Since my point is to ask believers in man made climate change how they would deal with what they see as the issue , I have missed nothing . Please let them discuss the topic without interference .
I may not believe entirely in climate change, but I want to chip in my $0.02, in the hope that it fosters reasonable debate, and I do believe human activity is contributing to sea level rise and, we are using up resources at an exponentially increasing rate. Rather it's not that I don't believe in climate change so much as I reject certain groups alarmist, raining hellfire approach to it, especially since I find certain groups untrustworthy, but there is another forum that supposed to be allocated for just that.
On this very specific point, we won't budge; there have been many drastic changes in Earth's climate throughout our history that we had nothing to do with.
I do believe our current rate of resource consumption is entirely unsustainable. Brazil and Indonesia have lost roughly 25 and 50 percent of each of their respective country's rainforests and, it wasn't even to sell the lumber or profit off the biodiversity ...it was to burn acres per minute so the land could be used for grazing cattle, which is infuriatingly wasteful. Unfortunately, we can't order these countries to stop being so ineffiecient. If we could, I'd gladly give up beef and stay with chicken or turkey, really.
We can't keep relying on fossil fuels or we will run low enough that we may cause even more war.
I have seen solar powered buses in Germany and, think they are a great idea. I also think there needs to be some sort of cultural shift away from single-use plastics. I look at the stupid water boktles scattered around, all the paper wasted on fliers and junk mail and, I say to myself, "We use up too much stuff making crap." Too much coal and garbage pollution, I believe is causing sea levels to rise. We already fight to much over resources, that will be exacerbated by having less land, most of that land being where many cities currently reside.
----------
I can only concur with nuclear power as a solution. Only nuclear fission can currently generate the energy surplus needed to be the foundation of other green technology, like solar power, on a national level. I don't propose trying to change POVs to all electric yet, they currently have so many drawbacks (8 hour recharge times, 100 mile ranges, or less depending on the weather, etc...) but for buildings, and large vehicles like trailer trucks and, buses, we need solar.
TLDR? I rambled, then concurred with nuclear power and solar power in that exact order.
Gas replacing coal electric.
EV replacing IC vehicles.
Residential solar panels.
Lower birth rate (shrinking populations in the developed world)
Remote work replacing on-site.
LED replacing incandescent.
Energy Star appliances nearly universal.
Battery tech advancing rapidly.
What more can be done? Someone mentioned China and India. Well, thanks to China’s one-child policy for 50-60 years, they are heading toward a population implosion by 2100, probably 800 million.
India is still growing. Africa is bursting with people, and the Middle East is still growing rapidly.
I think technology will save the day. EV cars and efficient solar and safe nuclear will spread across the world in the next few decades.
Electric jet planes are in the works, clean and quiet. Electric autonomous cars will move people cleanly and quietly. It's coming.
Domestically, the U.S. is cleaner and more efficient than it's been in at least a century. Your Climate Tsar won't have anything to do.
Please provide some verifiable documentation of that assertion.
I'm suspect you won't like my answer. First person account of a meeting participant as discussed personally with me.
BTW, I spent much of my career in the patent business, and worked for the man who coined the term "patent troll;" he and several of my co-workers ultimately went to the dark side - they joined Nathan at Intellectual Ventures.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, I find it difficult to take only the word of Nathan Myhrvold (a repeatedly accused 
