FRIHOST • FORUMS • FAQ • TOS • BLOGS • DIRECTORY
You are invited to Log in or Register a Frihost Account!

Climate March

   Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News
 


Dante
There was a global march about climate change on the 3rd of december, did anyone notice?

http://forum.campaigncc.org/?q=image/tid/27

The issues are very serious, as Caroline Lucas, Green Member of the European Parliament points out on the BBC:

Quote:
Green MEP for South East England Caroline Lucas, who is joing the march, told BBC News that greenhouse emissions need to be cut by between 80 and 90% by 2050.


The issue being that if we do not make cuts of that magnitude, warming will lead to a more rapid release of CO2 from decaying dead matter, that might make the warming process irreversible: Beyond that limit we have no idea of how warm the planet could get.

Warming in the past of the kinds of levels we could expect if these limits are exceeded have lead to mass extinctions. We have a level of CO2 now 40% higher than at any time in the last 600, 000 years.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/politics_show/4240697.stm

This is serious, very serious, and most climate scientists now agree on this. So why isn't this top of the political agenda? Why is the US government ignoring this?
ocalhoun
If global warming goes out of conroll, there are ways to fix it.

Ever heard of nuclear winter?

We could cause a similar thing to happen, though to a lesser extent, in order to reverse global warming. (it would be better, perhaps to do so with conventional explosives, so as to reduce the fallout)
otiscom
The global march created enough hot air on it's own!
a.han
ocalhoun wrote:


Ever heard of nuclear winter?




Don't know if I know all the facts, but a nuclear winter is a bad idea. I think a nuclear winter occours because the dust from an explosion travels up and stops the sun from getting throgh. So it all goes cold for a while.


So it will be cold and therefore no crops will grow which means the whole food chain gets messed up. The dust also prevents toxic gases (from fires and what not) rising out the atmosphere so it creates lots of pollutents for humans.

Once the dust settles after a few months, the ozone will be really really damaged. So it'll be in a worse state than before you started.

This is a little vague cause i read this somewhere a while ago.
SunburnedCactus
Uhh, I think the costs of a nuclear winter would outweigh the benefits. Severely so.
Dante
Also dust falls out of the atmosphere fairly quickly, wheras radioactivity stays on for thousands of years, as does warming from raised CO2 levels.

So that's a farily temporary or destructive solution.

There is an idea to pump CO2 into limestone bedrock, or to try and get the oceans to pick up CO2 via bacteria that will die and drop their bodies to the bottom of the ocean containing CO2, but the technology isn't really worked out yet.

Bit less of a gamble than using nukes. Are we all just paralysed by the fear of it?
ocalhoun
OK, new solution:
CO2 is one atom of carbon and two atoms of oxygen.
first, split the molecule, then process the results.
Pure carbon can be compressed into diamonds.
Oxygen can be released safely into the atmosphere.
Then, simply do this on a large scale.
Sell the diamonds to pay for the operation.
Dante
The reason why we are taking carbon and combining it with oxygen, is becuase it releases a lot of energy when we do so.

The reverse process takes energy, plants do it with sunlight.

Making diamonds also requires huge amounts of energy, and is very expensive, which is why its only used to make tiny diamonds for industrial use.

So where is all the energy going to come from?
ocalhoun
Huge solar collection facilities floating in the ocean could generate enough power to make such an operation feasable.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2007 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.