Posted on 10/05/2014 9:50:28 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Most clear-thinking people can see by now that there isn't going to be a functioning global carbon emissions abatement scheme in the foreseeable future. Whether or not that's a good thing (and I think it is) is a separate question. Because regardless, we should look at the world as it is.
Now of course, excessive carbon emissions into the atmosphere remain a serious concern and a real problem. So what can we do to solve it?
First, let's look at the main sources of carbon emissions. The two big ones are energy production and agriculture, which is set to explode over the next decades as billions of human beings get out of food insecurity. If we get those two carbon emissions sources under control, we've solved the problem.
Second, we should be real: We're not going to solve this problem through policy mandates. India and China and Africa aren't going to consign hundreds of millions of their people to more poverty than they have to just to be nice to the United Nations or the European Union.
Instead, what we need is better technology. Is it possible? Well, let's look at what we can do with technology that already exists, or is in the lab.
Agriculture looks like the trickiest one, but actually, it's not.....
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
If anyone was really concerned about global warming they could put an additive in jet fuel and cool the planet as much as they wanted.
I haven’t seen that proposed yet.
“Chemtrails?” Are you looking for trouble with Alex Jones and David Icke?
According to the local weather, the temps in here in west central FLA may go down to near record lows, so as far as global warming, my BS sensors are melting down.
I remember the beginning of “chemtrails”. It was an old Art Bell in the 90’s. A caller phoned in with a story about patterns in contrails, and Art mis-heard him and said “chemtrails?” ... to which the giddy caller agreed, and Art being the modern PT Barnum he was, birthed yet another persistent hoax in the popular mind.
There was a guy at Penn State that was working on a way to convert carbon dioxide into fuel, but he got busted for misuse of government grants and is now in the State Pen.
Just let Global Warming kill all these idiots and the rest will be just fine.
This won’t work. There’s a certain quantity of sunlight that falls on an acre. Whether that acre is tall or flat you are still going to have the same amount of sunlight.
If you build a vertical farm on it, the south side of the building will be tremendously productive because that is where the most sunlight is hitting. East and west somewhat less, and north will be the least productive, perhaps not at all.
But the skyscraper is just stealing sunlight from the ground far beyond its own footprint. Whatever is in its shadow becomes useless for growing crops. You can’t put a vertical farm in back of the first one because there’ll be no sunlight.
Vertical farming works best when the land to the north is unusable for growing anyway—like an existing south-facing wall. Then you are making good use of “wasted” sunlight and extracting a bit more efficiency out of the system. But this is no magic technique to get more production per acre. You’re better off saving the infrastructure money entirely and just growing on the ground.
GW is basically a wealth redistribution scheme.
There is no scientific proof that molecular level increases in CO2 in the atmosphere are causing global warming or any other climate changes. All of the global warming models have not predicted nearly two decades of no significant change in global temperatures and the downward trend we are actually seeing despite increases in CO2. These schemes to reduce CO2 as a means of foregoing some type of climate change are as futile as King Canute commanding the tide to stop.
“If anyone was really concerned about global warming they could put an additive in jet fuel and cool the planet as much as they wanted.”
Think of the emissions from the coal electrical plants that provide electricity to Chinese factories as well as the emissions from the freighters carrying the Chinese produced consumer goods to the US. Slap a high tariff on Chinese imports. The following problems solved:
1) Factories are built in the US employing some of the 90 million unemployed and reigniting the US economy.
2) The funding for China’s military buildup is ended. As a result we are, and our allies are safer at home.
3) Many China’s carbon emitting coal fired electric plants are forced to shut down. Carbon emissions and ocean pollution from global shipping is slashed.
4) US treasury receipts from the tariff revenue, reducing the deficit.
Why aren’t the climate change progressives all over this?
“Now of course, excessive carbon emissions into the atmosphere remain a serious concern and a real problem.”
Yeah, right.
“Global warming” stopped 18 years ago even though CO2 levels are at an all time high. (That’s why “global warming” was renamed climate change, you know, that thing that has happened on Earth for at least a billion years.) The seas didn’t rise. Glaciers didn’t melt. Antarctic ice is at the highest levels ever recorded by satellite. Arctic ice is growing at record rates. There are more polar bears than ever. Severe weather activity is at an all time low. Record lows have been recorded at thousands of U.S. weather stations during the last year. Record early summer snow storms just occurred in the Rockies. The list of incorrect model predictions just rolls on and on and on. It’s hard to fool people when they can look outside their windows and see with their own eyes that you are lying through your teeth.
I like it.
let’s repurpose the California Air Resources Board skyscraper into a giant 25 story vegetable garden.
I work with a couple of intelligent, well educated guys who go at it with me daily over AGW. The last time they asked me why I am a disbeliver I told them "because there is no evidence."
You would have thought I suggested Obamalamadingdong is Kenyan or something. The wanted to know if I had watched the new Cosmos series, or the movie "Day After Tomorrow." I am not making this up, I wish I was. I like these cats, otherwise.
The only skyscrapers full of vegetables would be tall buildings filled with gullible marks who believe this crap.
I probably should have checked to see if someone had used that one yet. ;’)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.