Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Climate Change Solution

page: 3
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 11 2014 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz
Nice cherry picking on my post. What is important about Bill Gates is the equation he comes up with.

CO2 = number of people x services per person x energy per service x Co2 per unit energy

see the video here www.youtube.com... about 2:15
And the fact is is that people want to believe that only dealing with energy per service and CO2 per unit energy will solve the mythical CO2 problem. While Malthusians are concentrating on reducing the number of people and greedy banksters, the IMF, The World Bank and others are concentrating on marketization of services. All I did was highlight everything in the most uncomfortable way I could think off. What I said was indeed insane because these luciferian/bankster/UN/crony capitalists/whateveryouwanttocallums are indeed psychotic, psychopathic, sociopathic and insane. But when you stand back at look at it TPTB are nothing more than middle men. They are money changers, they print fiat counterfeit currency, they transport goods, run pipelines and power grids, they trade on the stock market, then they use their influence to further their positions through crony capitalism and employ the militaries of various nations to do their bidding. They are a shell, a facade and nothing more, but they are killers, murderers, rapists and pillagers. To believe that TPTB would permit any tech to be implemented that would exclude them is sadly naive and laughable. So if someone asks for solutions to the CO2 problem, then let's be realistic and look at the solutions that are likely to be implemented, like China's forced abortion and one child policies. I believe Robert Malthus was wrong in 1800 when he spouted his nonsense about the the world being overpopulated. He was wrong then and Malthusians are wrong now.

Anyway I differ with you on the point on Thorium reactors, they are developed and militarized. Just because you are not being told about them doesn't mean they don't exist. And the Thorium tech is not that complicated. There is nothing magical about a self regulating thorium reaction in a salt bath. There have been numerous documentaries on TV over the years that piece it all together.

Thorium reactors can run cars 250 000 miles on a few ounces of thorium. A LENR/ Cold Fusion reactor can run a house on a generator the size of a fridge. Those two technologies alone can replace the electrical grid. With the excess power, flying cars are feasible and so roads made of asphalt and concrete are no longer necessary thus reducing thermal mass heating. Not to mention no more oil refineries, pipelines or the necessary military to protect these assets. Sewage treatment and sewer lines are also no longer necessary because excess power can be used to heat or cook waste into compost. Excess power can free people from TPTB because basically every point where a middle man has inserted himself with the help of crony capitalism so as to extract excessive profit will be rendered obsolete. And yes TPTB will kill people to keep what they have. Here look at this www.abovetopsecret.com... and tell me the tech is not out there and that people are not being killed over it.


If you want to save the planet then you better come to grips with a few hard facts about how the world really works, otherwise your idealism is going to be used for someone else's ends.






edit on 11-5-2014 by dieseldyk because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 11 2014 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Yes, this is a piece of the solution. It is called "carbon retention," or REED. Look it up. Part of mitigating climate change is to reduce the release of so called "carbon sinks," which includes all of the carbon in let's say forests or ecosystems.

However, in no way will this sequester enough carbon to solve the problem. We are emitting far more carbon dioxide than we ever could absorb from plants. Fact. It's already been analyzed.

With all due respect, too often when people post about climate change they often haven't done a scant review of already offered solutions and how much those will impact the current issue. If they had, it'd be abundantly clear that most of these ideas have been reviewed and evaluated thoroughly.

Second, you say that Climate Change has a credibility problem. Do you mean to tell me that the vast majority of scientists that agree with anthropogenic climate change have a credibility problem?

The part that has been politicized is that conservative politicians and special interests such as Big Oil have spent billions riding on the Climate Change is a Farce wagon. That is the politicization, NOT the science.

When you ignore science based on long held beliefs or because that science might affect your lifestyle and pocket book, then it is you who is politicizing things, not the scientists.

originally posted by: Bloomoone
Climate Change policy suffers from a credibility problem. It might not be as much the credibility of scientific reports as it is the credibility of the individuals involved... namely politicians on an election year. You can dog on the Climate Change policy all you want. This post isn't about the policy, its about finding the solution to a problem. You're problem solvers right?

Lets say for instance that the Climate Change problem is genuine. At the end of the day, what's the real solution to the problem?

The Problem: Elevated Levels of Carbon Dioxide

Source of Problem: Too numerous to name here, but there are plenty of sources (exhaust, cow farts, etc.).

The Solution: Everybody plant a bunch of trees! I'm not kidding.

Thinking back to high school science... (keeping it simple here so that the politicians might understand it too) trees absorb carbon dioxide and in turn produce oxygen. Why couldn't we give nature a shot at fixing the problem?

Maybe the problem has been the destruction of trees all over the world over the years (especially in the Amazon). Maybe we should help to plant what has been lost. This place would certainly look a lot better with more trees.

Important note: I do not believe that we should stop harvesting trees (economicsustainability reasons). I just believe that maybe we need to be replacing them twice as fast as we're harvesting them.

ATS'ers, what say ye? Fire up the ole thinkers! What's the real solution?



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Um, Bill Gates did not come up with that formula. It is a well known environmental economics formula, as applied to emissions.

It is derived from the IPAT formula of human impact, or Impact= Population X Affluence (impact per person or resource use) X efficiency of such use


originally posted by: dieseldyk
a reply to: C0bzz
Nice cherry picking on my post. What is important about Bill Gates is the equation he comes up with.

CO2 = number of people x services per person x energy per service x Co2 per unit energy

see the video here www.youtube.com... about 2:15
And the fact is is that people want to believe that only dealing with energy per service and CO2 per unit energy will solve the mythical CO2 problem. While Malthusians are concentrating on reducing the number of people and greedy banksters, the IMF, The World Bank and others are concentrating on marketization of services. All I did was highlight everything in the most uncomfortable way I could think off. What I said was indeed insane because these luciferian/bankster/UN/crony capitalists/whateveryouwanttocallums are indeed psychotic, psychopathic, sociopathic and insane. But when you stand back at look at it TPTB are nothing more than middle men. They are money changers, they print fiat counterfeit currency, they transport goods, run pipelines and power grids, they trade on the stock market, then they use their influence to further their positions through crony capitalism and employ the militaries of various nations to do their bidding. They are a shell, a facade and nothing more, but they are killers, murderers, rapists and pillagers. To believe that TPTB would permit any tech to be implemented that would exclude them is sadly naive and laughable. So if someone asks for solutions to the CO2 problem, then let's be realistic and look at the solutions that are likely to be implemented, like China's forced abortion and one child policies. I believe Robert Malthus was wrong in 1800 when he spouted his nonsense about the the world being overpopulated. He was wrong then and Malthusians are wrong now.

Anyway I differ with you on the point on Thorium reactors, they are developed and militarized. Just because you are not being told about them doesn't mean they don't exist. And the Thorium tech is not that complicated. There is nothing magical about a self regulating thorium reaction in a salt bath. There have been numerous documentaries on TV over the years that piece it all together.

Thorium reactors can run cars 250 000 miles on a few ounces of thorium. A LENR/ Cold Fusion reactor can run a house on a generator the size of a fridge. Those two technologies alone can replace the electrical grid. With the excess power, flying cars are feasible and so roads made of asphalt and concrete are no longer necessary thus reducing thermal mass heating. Not to mention no more oil refineries, pipelines or the necessary military to protect these assets. Sewage treatment and sewer lines are also no longer necessary because excess power can be used to heat or cook waste into compost. Excess power can free people from TPTB because basically every point where a middle man has inserted himself with the help of crony capitalism so as to extract excessive profit will be rendered obsolete. And yes TPTB will kill people to keep what they have. Here look at this www.abovetopsecret.com... and tell me the tech is not out there and that people are not being killed over it.


If you want to save the planet then you better come to grips with a few hard facts about how the world really works, otherwise your idealism is going to be used for someone else's ends.









posted on May, 11 2014 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloomoon

IF all this global-climate-weather IS man-made, then the only solution is to;

Take control of the planet
Eliminate all forms of government
Kill everyone over the age of 30
Sterilyze 95% of the remaining population
Eliminate all coal plants, electrical plants, nuclear plants
Return to a purely agricultural-based society
Cars only for the elite (electric, of course)

Now that we have our "perfect" society, let me tell you why there will never be a solution to the issue.

The world won't agree on anything, together. I don't care if it's global-weather-doom, asteroids, zombie plagues, or bad-hair days.

In order to enact a solution for the PLANET, the PLANET would have to be unanimous in it's solution! And that is never, ever going to happen, unless you desire a one-world empire.

One country or one continent raising taxes or getting rid of coal-plants won't matter one damned bit!

My advice? Take a walk, plant a tree if you wish. Enjoy the day and focus on things you can actually change.



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer




IF all this global-climate-weather IS man-made, then the only solution is to;

Take control of the planet
Eliminate all forms of government
Kill everyone over the age of 30
Sterilyze 95% of the remaining population
Eliminate all coal plants, electrical plants, nuclear plants
Return to a purely agricultural-based society
Cars only for the elite (electric, of course)


If you believe those are the only solutions then I would have to say that is what you want to happen ....or...you didn't bother to read the thread.

It is pretty sad that most posters here can't or wont even try to outline some solutions they would rather argue about (for the most part) the same crap in every thread about climate change.
edit on 11-5-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

In my neighborhood, if I cut my grass, trimmed the hedges, swept the sidewalk, raked the leaves. . . it would not automatically clean up my neighbors' lawns.

Their unkept lawns would still blow debris over my lawn.



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

So is that to say you if your neighbor is crap you feel obligated to be crap as well?

I think you have missed the point though. You seem to think the only solutions are the ones you have spoke of. Why is that?

Do you not think there are other solutions? Because there are and some of them would be cheaper on your wallet than what you are used to now. Are you the type to cut your nose off to spite your face because that is essentially what I see so many doing when it comes to implementing solutions to combat climate change. They are so busy going nya-nya-nya I cant here you they miss the parts that would make their life better. I have the suspicion you have fallen in that category.

Let me ask you.

Are you against paying less for gas at the pump?
Are you against paying less for electric for your home?

If so why?



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

I'm all for paying less, anywhere.
But you're missing MY point.

I started with the premise that global-weather-la-di-dah was actually man-made.

If so then the only solution for a GLOBAL problem has to include the . . um. . .er. . . GLOBE.



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Everything has to start somewhere but if you are waiting for a combined effort from everyone on earth to do something on anything you will be waiting a long time except maybe war.

If a program works that is both good for your wallet and good for the planet then that program will be repeated by others. Of course I have already said this and outlined the reasons why. The information can be found in this thread or the links I have provided. That is the reason why I said I don't think you bothered to read the thread. At least not closely.



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Thank you for taking the time in sharing your posts for solutions. The world needs more people like you.

It is in the same spirit that you have come to the table with ideas, as I have come to the table asking for solutions. We cannot at any point along the way give in to the naysayers that our efforts are fruitless. I will still plant trees, as I hope you would pursue a passion of yours. Hopefully, we can spark a new generation of people who care enough to take interest in their own efforts. It is better to have tried and failed, than it is to have failed to try at all.

I do not claim to know it all. I have no need to fuel my ego. I will, however; claim to have welcomed all points of views. It is in the spirit of helpfulness that I admire your post the most. Thank you. Keep those ideas coming. You will have likely inspired someone.

I continue to invite those with ideas for solutions to come forward, share and care. There is nothing wrong with a million great ideas. There is nothing wrong with a million people who subject these ideas to debate. Its how solutions are born. We all begin somewhere. You CAN make a positive change! In fact, you already have. Keep the ideas coming.

PS - The luminous trees and glow in the dark road markings were pretty darn cool! Kudos! S&F I'm especially intrigued by the moss lamps. I look forward to these developments.



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloomoon

Thank you again for the kind words. As I said before I really like threads and discussions that are about finding solutions. I am certain there are an abundance of ideas on how to address climate change and I believe it will be discussions like these that will ascertain the correct path. The path we chose does not need to hurt us financially or necessarily mean we need to give up the standard of living we are accustomed to in fact many of these things in theory would give us a higher standard of living.

Beezer does have a point that without a global initiative one country alone will not make a difference that is why I try to consider plans that meet certain criteria such as can it be profitable to investors if it can then there would be competition and it would spread quickly. I believe that will be key with many initiatives otherwise it would require government mandates which IMO would doom many to fail. For example clean energy that is both profitable and affordable would attract investors and be supported by the public. Such an option has existed for some time but as I said before TPTB such as coal and oil have a vested interest in keeping that debate from happening.

I would love to have an algae lamp I think that could start out as a novelty and would spread before implementation on local streets. There are many ways these things can begin to take hold by the way I planted a lime tree today sorry to say it wasn't to combat climate change I am just tired of running to the store to get lime for my Coronas.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 05:40 PM
link   
I was recently at the doctors office and my doctor always has a great selection of magazines so this last visit I picked up a National Geographic and I read an article within it on building space based solar stations that then beam down the energy to earth. Such an endeavor would be costly but is nice to have options. It said we would need 4 such stations to supply power to 90% of the globe.

In space they would be placed in geosynchronous orbits where they are always in line of site of the sun. NASA has done testing and had success since the 1970s in being able to beam energy from one point to another. ATM I think such an investment is unreasonable however solar panel technology is advancing at such a rate that I think within the next 20 years it would be worth putting it on the table for debate.

Graphene has been a big game changer in solar production to where I believe soon we will see wide scale implementation of the substance in solar panels for the open market. For the subject of space and solar panels weight is a big issue and from what I have read graphene has already made it to where solar panels can be smaller and produce more.

Such a space based project would need to be a global initiative so for now it is not much more than an interesting subject to debate but like I said it is nice to know there are options.

I couldn't find the original article online from National Geographic that I read but I did find one that was on the subject. It is an interesting read IMO.



The core idea of space-based solar has been in development since the 1970s: Place solar panels on a satellite, beam the collected energy to a receiver on Earth, and convert the beam to electricity.

Collecting sunlight in the vacuum of space means that the solar panels can harvest our star's intense energy without losses due to atmospheric absorption.

A satellite in geosynchronous orbit can be exposed to sunlight around the clock with no interruptions due to cloud cover. And from orbital heights, the power stream can be redirected quickly to places with the greatest need.

With funding from the European aerospace group EADS-Astrium, Sweeney's team has been studying the best way to beam power from a solar-collecting satellite to the ground. So far, the group favors a narrowly focused laser in infrared wavelengths.news.nationalgeographic.com...



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Here are some people that are thinking ahead.




A small US-based company called Solar Roadways are developing a solar road surface that, if installed nationwide, has the potential to produce more renewable energy than the entire country uses. In fact, they’ve actually already developed a working prototype that’s been installed in a parking lot, and they’re now crowdsourcing funds in order to tweak the design and move towards production.

Solar Roadways, which was started by Scott and Julie Brusaw in 2006, designed and developed hexagonal glass solar panels studded with LED lights that could be installed on a variety of surfaces such as roads, pavements and playgrounds. These panels would more than pay for themselves and would benefit both businesses and homeowners as the energy generated from driveways and parking lots could be used to power buildings, and any excess can be sold back to the grid.

The panels also contain heating elements to melt ice and snow so are ideal in winter conditions, and LEDs to make road lines and signs which have been previously shown to reduce night time accidents. The surface could also be used to charge electric vehicles as oppose to fossil fuels, and future technology could even allow for charging whilst driving via mutual induction panels. Amazingly, the team also found that car headlights can produce energy in the panels, so cars driving around at night would be producing some electricity.

Read more at www.iflscience.com...


Also


A newly announced solar powered carport offers drivers of electric cars and plug in hybrids a way to avoid the greenhouse gas emissions from charging off largely fossil-fuel powered grids.

The iSolar carport, with roof made entirely of solar panels has been announced to coincide with the launch of BMW's i8 plug-in hybrid vehicle in Los Angeles. Southern California looks a particularly promising market for the iSolar. With no ice and snow to protect cars from most houses have dispensed with garages, but shade is still important, as the bright sunlight can make cars unpleasantly hot, and fade interiors over time.

By using solar panels to make up the roof, rather than adding them on top, BMW have kept the carport light enough that the support structure can be made of bamboo, further burnishing the iSolar's environmental credentials. When the car is in use, or fully charged, electricity from the panels is sent into the house.

Read more at www.iflscience.com...


A solar roadway sounds pretty interesting especially with the water treatment option I read somewhere that blacktop roads have a noticeable effect on local temperatures and their idea would make use of space and convert some of that otherwise solar heat into useable energy. "If" their roads have the added benefit of lasting longer than traditional ones they may even reduce roadway costs over a projected time frame. I know roads in my area seem to always be under repair or reconstruction.

I once looked into local contracting on road construction and was amazed how much waste was going on. You know all those road cones we always see someone had the bright idea that the state should rent them someones back got scratched and became very rich.



posted on May, 13 2014 @ 11:49 AM
link   
The only true solution is for those who believe people are the root cause of "climate change" is for those very same people to self suicide. They'd be the planet's savior and be immortalized. The sooner they start the sooner they can save the planet.



posted on May, 13 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lanisius
The only true solution is for those who believe people are the root cause of "climate change" is for those very same people to self suicide. They'd be the planet's savior and be immortalized. The sooner they start the sooner they can save the planet.


Be a good example of the words you teach. You first. We'll follow your lead.



posted on May, 13 2014 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Bloomoon

I don't believe it, ergo I'm in need of doing nothing and will continue to drive my truck, eat my steaks and use my electric whenever I desire. However, if you believe it, lead by example. Now is your chance to save the planet.



posted on May, 13 2014 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Lanisius

Just as I thought... quick to advise, but your advice doesn't suit you. You'd make a great politician by today's standards.



posted on May, 13 2014 @ 08:27 PM
link   
What should we do? Nothing. Not a damn thing. If we are going to assume for the sake of the thread that man-made climate change is real, then it doesn't matter, and the reason for this is because nothing we implement will be adequate. It would either be ineffective, marred by bureaucracy, not widespread enough, or hijacked by personal interests to name a few. Not to mention, anything that would truly HELP the world get better would require a MASSIVE paradigm shift in the way humanity thinks and cares about things. This paradigm shift could NEVER be legislated or enforced, it has to occur naturally and willfully. Otherwise it will breed resentment and resentment breeds sabotage. Therefore, if we are dooming ourselves, then so be it. Sit back and enjoy the end. Life will live on, it always does. As important as humans think we are, even our species has an ultimate lifespan and it's not like killing yourself off early doesn't already happen throughout the universe. So even if we are the first species to do so to ourselves, oh well.

Though I doubt that any of that will happen, so whatever. I still say we should do nothing since anything we do do will just make the everyday person more miserable and burdened with responsibility that will never be shared by everyone in the world. For instance China and India, try getting them on board before you start legislating in America to clean our skies. Sorry that I'm so fatalist about it, (for one, I have my doubts that it is man made, climate change certainly is real though) but that is just how I feel about it. Why fight inevitability? We've ingrained habits into the collective human thinking so much that we will never break them well enough to prevent this.
edit on 13-5-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-5-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2014 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Look around your house and see what you are generating. See that roll of paper towels? How about using cloth instead? Stop using paper napkins, use cloth. Those paper or Styrofoam coffee cups? Get yourself a cup and use only your re-usable, washable cup. Same for water. Stop buying those little plastic bottles. Disposable diapers? No, cloth diapers. Use a towel after your bath? Don't throw it in the laundry, hang it up to dry and use it again.
Fast food? One of the biggest polluters in the world is the fast food industry. Stop buying their paper-laden products. An added benefit is that your health will improve.
If you have a lawn, make it into an organic garden. It adds diversity to your environment and will supply you with food and beauty.
Plant trees.
Recycle.
Bring back returnable beverage bottles.
Quit buying "throw-away" products. My personal pet peeve are the "wipes" so popular now. My mother always had a washcloth in her purse. It got four children raised without significant illnesses. I have a washcloth in my purse, and several cloth hankies as well.
Go to your nearest thrift store and buy 6 or 8 bags for groceries. The ones made of net wash and dry the easiest and take up very little space in the car. You can even find cheap insulated bags for the cold stuff.
If we wait for the government to solve the problems we see, we'll be in for a long wait. It's up to us, in our day to day lives to look carefully at how we are treating the land. Instead of advocating for new laws and regulations, how about taking personal responsibility to conserve our resources?
We have the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts and for those who don't remember what our air and water was like before these laws were passed, it was bad. Take a look at the situation 40 years with air and water and you'll see we've made tremendous progress on conditions here in the US by holding the corporate entities responsible. But we all must make our own choices, and we must take the time to make thoughtful choices as opposed to "quick and easy" choices.





new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join