[Michaelangelica]

I just posted this on

After IPCC, 25 scientists speak on global warming : climate-weather : earth : Article : Earth & Sky

and thought i should also post it here.
I didn't realise how boring I was becoming about Global Warming!

Can we use this thread for summerising some positive ideas for change?
Have I left out any relevant threads?

We have had the rhetoric
We have identified the problem
Now how about some constructive solutions??
EG
http://hypography.com/forums/earth-s...ht=Terra+preta

http://hypography.com/forums/science...ht=Terra+preta

http://hypography.com/forums/earth-s...planet+cooling

http://hypography.com/forums/earth-s...these+man+made

http://hypography.com/forums/earth-s...an-made+gasses

http://hypography.com/forums/earth-s...=gasses+banned

Get cracking! Time is running short and there are a lot of people on the net looking for ways to help solve the problem

[ronthepon]

This is going to be an excellent thread if it goes on.

[Zythryn]

There is no single magic bullet. However there are a number of steps we can take to solve the issue.


1. Education! Clear up the misinformation about GW.

2. Compact flourescent bulbs!
Small change, yet if everyone used them (or leds) instead of incandescant bulbs it would be a huge help.

3. More efficient engines for transportation. Internat combustion engines are only 10%-25% efficient. Triple that and you are using one third the fuel (even if it remains gas).

4. Insulation and energy efficiency of homes and buildings. The operation of homes and buildings take a huge amount of energy. The more efficient those are the better off we all are.

5. Alternative energies. Use more wind, solar, geothermal, hydro and tidal power. We have all of the above in abundance.

6. Stop giving HUGE amounts of subsidies and tax breaks to oil companies. a) they don't NEED it. b) the subsidies could be much better spent on alternative fuel research. It creates an unfair competition advantage for the oil companies so we get stuck with old technology.

[Cedars]

I would add these links to your list also. While they dont directly talk about solutions to the issues, the polls themselves show part of the problem (some inaction) and some of the options are pieces of the solution.

http://hypography.com/forums/communi...u-commute.html

http://hypography.com/forums/communi...u-recycle.html

http://hypography.com/forums/communi...bs-do-you.html

[jackson33]

most folks in China, India, Africa and many other places have no idea what insulation, light bulbs or even the concept of conservative are. they take the family on a week end trip on their ox driven carts, poop behind the nearest tree and enjoys life as they know it. talk about CO2...with some methane.

being thrifty is very good and i support the notion. however the end results of everyone doing all thats suggested will surge the CO2 and some other elements as production of these items happen. Insulation is a nasty product and what these factories produce may shock you.

any one can now, drive a vehicle with no use of oil products. they can also live in nice homes with total solar or wind power. Evergreen Solar will be out with a unit ten times more powerful then there current in two years. this will allow many larger buildings to convert w/o appearing to be a joke.

the oil companies have kept all of us moving in manners to become what we are. give a little credit and if you want, join in the profits. by the way last i heard those companies you speak of are owned by some 2.1 billion people around the world. no source; add up the stock holders of all the companies involved with this product. by the way several billion fly each year, who prefer a good jet fuel over solar power...

[InfiniteNow]

Care to back any of that up with more than personal ignorance Jackson?

[W.Davidson]

You could try adding sulfur to aviation fuel. It would be emitted as sulfur dioxide and would reflect back incoming solar radiation, cooling the planet. It wouldn't do the engines much good, though, so maybe planes could be fitted with a separate facility for adding the sulfur to the air which would not involve burning it in their engines.

However, it's a drastic measure, and I don't like the idea of technological 'fixes'. A few years back, scientists were talking about another technological fix that involved adding iron to the oceans. This would greatly stimulate phytoplankton growth. The phytoplankton would use up dissolved CO2, so more would be drawn down into the ocean from the atmosphere. However, other scientists have argued that this would alter the Earth's albedo, more than cancelling any benefit from reduced CO2 levels.

[razetheladder]

the single biggest thing we as individuals can do to fight global warming is to go vegetarian. a recent UN report (fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html) found that the livestock industry accounts for 18 percent of human-induced greenhouse gases (more than cars!), and a university of chicago study (chronicle.uchicago.edu/060511/veggie.shtml, geosci.uchicago.edu/%7Egidon/papers/nutri/nutri3.pdf) concluded that switching from a typical american diet to a vegetarian diet reduces your contribution to global warming more than if you switched from a regular car to a hybrid. not to mention all the other environmental damage done by the meat industry, or the horrific suffering of the animals.

[jackson33]

Originally Posted by W.Davidson

You could try adding sulfur to aviation fuel. It would be emitted as sulfur dioxide and would reflect back incoming solar radiation, cooling the planet. It wouldn't do the engines much good, though, so maybe planes could be fitted with a separate facility for adding the sulfur to the air which would not involve burning it in their engines.

However, it's a drastic measure, and I don't like the idea of technological 'fixes'. A few years back, scientists were talking about another technological fix that involved adding iron to the oceans. This would greatly stimulate phytoplankton growth. The phytoplankton would use up dissolved CO2, so more would be drawn down into the ocean from the atmosphere. However, other scientists have argued that this would alter the Earth's albedo, more than cancelling any benefit from reduced CO2 levels.

much, i think as to do with an over reaction. planting trees for instance is a good idea or even establishing large amounts of plant life in the swamps of Louisiana or Florida. the problem is all this will die and create more of the problem your trying to eliminate. cleaning up under brush in the forest would do more for CO2 emissions and help plywood and paper mills but has been rejected by groups.

Russia, is said to control weather by seeding clouds and such. we have done some of this, but many complained of where the rains would have fallen and caused more social problems then say reducing the grade of a hurricane.

many metal objects have been planted in the oceans, to encourage forms of life that thrive in this environment. off shore in California some obsolete oil rigs could provide many species a home, but environmentalist are objecting. i do not know of any out come, but in court the concern seems to be costing the oil company over the well being of life, by the enviro's...

as for jet fuel, it has been improved for emissions. JP 2 to 4 and i think 5 now, but i do not know if its for efficiency or air quality. GE bought Westinghouse some time ago, are have been the primary Jet engine builders which have been also improved.

[jackson33]

Originally Posted by razetheladder

the single biggest thing we as individuals can do to fight global warming is to go vegetarian. a recent UN report (fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html) found that the livestock industry accounts for 18 percent of human-induced greenhouse gases (more than cars!), and a university of chicago study (chronicle.uchicago.edu/060511/veggie.shtml, geosci.uchicago.edu/%7Egidon/papers/nutri/nutri3.pdf) concluded that switching from a typical american diet to a vegetarian diet reduces your contribution to global warming more than if you switched from a regular car to a hybrid. not to mention all the other environmental damage done by the meat industry, or the horrific suffering of the animals.

yes and the pig farms, chicken hatchery and turkey farms along with all the fish farms as well have problems. then agriculture its self produces a very large amount of CO2, uses even larger amounts of fresh water and requires many forms of fertilizer. aside from some major health problems i doubt the end results would be that great.

as i just inferred on the post before there are many things we can do and are not allowed to for the very groups that claim to be trying to limit the problems. trying to re-organize human society, is not going to happen. society will change, for reasons we may not now know, but it will be based on acceptance of a problem, not the possibility or opinions of some with alliterative motive.

by the way those feed yards also produce the fertilizer we use in the field that now produce many times the yields of previous generation of crops. add the leather products and the efficiency you have a much better picture then the old pasture systems. the whole problem is the proverbial catch 22...