Obama Administration: Global Warming Will Cost Us Unless We Take Action

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

"So, after years of debating, evaluating and disregarding scientific evidence and pressure from both nature and other countries, we're finally willing to acknowledge that the problem exists.
That is all."

ecoho:

Strazdas:

ecoho:

honestly I think its more the fact that the "eco-idiots" as I like to call them want us to stop using what we have now and switch to unproven or inefficient tech before its ready. Really the best thing to do is use what works while improving tech so we can switch over and not have too big of an increase in cost or decrease in efficiency.

I think the big problem is that we arent doing enough to find the tech that works and we aren't finding it fast enough. And even when we do, we arent switching fast enough because of economical factors. For example we know that hybrid cars work. yet the vast majority of cars purchased are still combustion engine online because they are cheaper.

true but that's mostly because they guys in charge of making those decisions see only the crazy people who want us to stop making everything, hell they could probably make hybrids cost effective in about 10 years but they wont due to the fact that those "eco-idiots" I talked about would consider it a victory and then use that to justify any other means they use.

its also good to note that those people (the "eco-idiots that is) are against clean coal burning research, better fuel efficiency in cars, and anything else that may reduce how many emissions were putting up just because it still uses current fossil fuels.

I think the so called "Eco-idiots" are just that out of desperation. yes there are legitimate crazies out there (greenpeace), but that is true for any large group of people. Sometimes though it does feel that no matter what you do the only way to be heard is to become one of those crazies. and sadly not everyone has enough resolve not to go that route.

And i think you misunderstood me slightly. It does not matter to me that hybrids are not cost effective comapred to combustion only engines. people should STILL buy them. Ecology should be more important than slight economical downturn. that is really the big problem with ecology nowadays, we dont do anything untill it becomes profitable, whereas we should even despite it being less profitable than alternatives. This is what leads to lack of research into alternative energy sources for example. they arent seen as cost-effective when its much more proftiable to put this money into research on how to make your ipods smaller.

Also the crazies shooting themselves in the foot doesnt help either. After Fukushima there was a wave of crazy in europe that lead to massive Nuclear reactor shutdowns. the result? they were replaced by coal and gas plans and europe still has brownouts. a completely ecologically neutral power source turned into a damaging one because of panic. thanks to those morons we are set back in nuclear technology for decades now.

Can you explain more about clean coal burning, i havent heard about that one. Better fuel efficiency has actually been slowly going forward for last few decades thanks to advanced electronics being able to manage fuel more efficiently. Also lately (few years ago) there are a lot of "more efficient" fuel showing up in gas stations around here. i was skeptical at first but despite it being more expensive, it does look like it indeed is more efficient as i can drive further with same amount of fuel. no idea how that works but it does.

The problem with fossil fuels is, thats never going to be a long term solution though. thats because fossil fuels are running out, fast. oil extraction already peaked and the reason we arent having shortage crisis is only because the raise in price made some drilling locations profitable (like the bottom of an ocean). Some fuels we got enough for a long time (coal) but that is supposedly the most dangerous one. Im still for Nuclear power. we got enough fuel to last us tohusand of years, has no ecological inpact, modern reactors produce very little waste (1 teaspoon per year in a reactor big enough to power entire city, heck, big enough to power my entire (small) country) and then we have thousands of years to figure out better methods.

Stupidity:
snip about nuclear power

Despite your name, i completely agree with you.

Strazdas:

ecoho:

Strazdas:

I think the big problem is that we arent doing enough to find the tech that works and we aren't finding it fast enough. And even when we do, we arent switching fast enough because of economical factors. For example we know that hybrid cars work. yet the vast majority of cars purchased are still combustion engine online because they are cheaper.

true but that's mostly because they guys in charge of making those decisions see only the crazy people who want us to stop making everything, hell they could probably make hybrids cost effective in about 10 years but they wont due to the fact that those "eco-idiots" I talked about would consider it a victory and then use that to justify any other means they use.

its also good to note that those people (the "eco-idiots that is) are against clean coal burning research, better fuel efficiency in cars, and anything else that may reduce how many emissions were putting up just because it still uses current fossil fuels.

I think the so called "Eco-idiots" are just that out of desperation. yes there are legitimate crazies out there (greenpeace), but that is true for any large group of people. Sometimes though it does feel that no matter what you do the only way to be heard is to become one of those crazies. and sadly not everyone has enough resolve not to go that route.

And i think you misunderstood me slightly. It does not matter to me that hybrids are not cost effective comapred to combustion only engines. people should STILL buy them. Ecology should be more important than slight economical downturn. that is really the big problem with ecology nowadays, we dont do anything untill it becomes profitable, whereas we should even despite it being less profitable than alternatives. This is what leads to lack of research into alternative energy sources for example. they arent seen as cost-effective when its much more proftiable to put this money into research on how to make your ipods smaller.

Also the crazies shooting themselves in the foot doesnt help either. After Fukushima there was a wave of crazy in europe that lead to massive Nuclear reactor shutdowns. the result? they were replaced by coal and gas plans and europe still has brownouts. a completely ecologically neutral power source turned into a damaging one because of panic. thanks to those morons we are set back in nuclear technology for decades now.

Can you explain more about clean coal burning, i havent heard about that one. Better fuel efficiency has actually been slowly going forward for last few decades thanks to advanced electronics being able to manage fuel more efficiently. Also lately (few years ago) there are a lot of "more efficient" fuel showing up in gas stations around here. i was skeptical at first but despite it being more expensive, it does look like it indeed is more efficient as i can drive further with same amount of fuel. no idea how that works but it does.

The problem with fossil fuels is, thats never going to be a long term solution though. thats because fossil fuels are running out, fast. oil extraction already peaked and the reason we arent having shortage crisis is only because the raise in price made some drilling locations profitable (like the bottom of an ocean). Some fuels we got enough for a long time (coal) but that is supposedly the most dangerous one. Im still for Nuclear power. we got enough fuel to last us tohusand of years, has no ecological inpact, modern reactors produce very little waste (1 teaspoon per year in a reactor big enough to power entire city, heck, big enough to power my entire (small) country) and then we have thousands of years to figure out better methods.

Stupidity:
snip about nuclear power

Despite your name, i completely agree with you.

I don't know the specifics but clean coal burning is a more eco friendly and cost effective way of burning coal. In the last 10 years ive seen about six different stops and starts to it due to "eco-idiots" saying burning coal is bad no matter how you do it, then again I live in Wyoming which is the largest coal producer in the country so maybe its just a bigger deal to us.

also your right fossil fuels are not a long term plan but we need scaling back and more cost effective green methods, not just flat out use this because its better for the environment. Also if I hear one more person say were killing the earth I may just hit them, the planet will survive long after we all die out unless we literally blow it up at the core.

ecoho:

I don't know the specifics but clean coal burning is a more eco friendly and cost effective way of burning coal. In the last 10 years ive seen about six different stops and starts to it due to "eco-idiots" saying burning coal is bad no matter how you do it, then again I live in Wyoming which is the largest coal producer in the country so maybe its just a bigger deal to us.

also your right fossil fuels are not a long term plan but we need scaling back and more cost effective green methods, not just flat out use this because its better for the environment. Also if I hear one more person say were killing the earth I may just hit them, the planet will survive long after we all die out unless we literally blow it up at the core.

Perhaps it is more prominent talk in your region then. we dont even have a single coal plant in my country (most of energy comes from burning gas importer from Russia) so probably most people dont care.

I agree that more cost effective green methods should be found. but i also think that some things, such as being "more green" is worth paying extra for. And yeah, the whole killing earth shtick is getting old. Though what we are doing is killing our enviroment, as in, the flora and fauna we are used to having around. those are dieing out. massively. we may as well kill ourselves in the process of we continue to do nothing.

RJ 17:
I understand that not every article on this site is about gaming...but most at least have some tie-in to "geek culture". Really gotta wonder what a straight-up politics article is doing here.

Geeky tie-in? Come now. We have a straight-up political section. That means we're open to that sort of thing here.

OT: Okay, Mr. President. I'm on board. What should a guy like me who doesn't create the problem in the first place do?

Zachary Amaranth:

Scrythe:
I can't wait to see the new wave of conspiracy theories to come out of this.

Personally, I'm hoping that someone tries to connect the President and the Pope as being in cahoots via [insert secret society here].

Assuming that hasn't happened already, of course.

So secret society. Just the lizard people.

I, for one, welcome our new reptiloid overlords!

Alar:
Ummm... duh? We've known this. For fucking years. Why is this a surprise to anyone?

Because it's been played as a "controversy" in the media and court of public opinion?

Yeah, but those people are complete fucking morons. :\ And by 'those people' I do mean the media and court of public opinion, yes.

Alar:

Yeah, but those people are complete fucking morons. :\ And by 'those people' I do mean the media and court of public opinion, yes.

True, but the unfortunate thing is we need those morons to get anything done. At least until our glorious leader, Maobama, declares himself Eternal Overlord for Life and gains unilateral control.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.