It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Climate Change: Finding the Middle Ground

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:20 PM
link   
Also I may add that our shell fish is contaminated also, we here in the south are having a very interesting thing happening to the farming fields.

Is a new kind of weed that is taking over and swallowing the crops.

One farmer during the summer was complaining about the weed it seems that use to be a type that was easily taken care with the usual weed killer and fumigations, but now the weed has mutated growing taller and stronger and the seeds spreading faster than usual, also is resistant to anything they have that has work before.

Is this a sign of things to come as nature takes care of its own making more stronger and harder to kill plants?

The problem is that the weeds are not edible.



apc

posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I don't think there's all that much "we" can do. I think it comes down to what "you" can do. You can do what's best for you. Sure, you can do some things that are good for the people as a whole... you can recycle, conserve energy, drive a more fuel efficient vehicle. But in the long run, it's just a waiting game... waiting for the technology to catch up to the demand.

>
It will happen btw... it's a matter of evolution. When the demand for breakthrough grows strong enough, it happens. Always has. And either it always will, or we all die. Most of us, anyway.

[edit on 5-1-2007 by apc]



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   
marg, can you find the botanical name of the weed in question. I'll look into my sources to see if I can come up with any possible bioremidiation techniques that are cheap enough to deploy(symbiotic organisms that protect the "crops" while choking out the "weeds").



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
I don't think there's all that much "we" can do. I think it comes down to what "you" can do. You can do what's best for you. Sure, you can do some things that are good for the people as a whole... you can recycle, conserve energy, drive a more fuel efficient vehicle. But in the long run, it's just a waiting game... waiting for the technology to catch up to the demand.



Hmmm. Did you read the whole thread?

Energy is only a one part of the problem.

Also for example - Changing weather and weather patterns as well as rainfall patterns and aquifer depletion mean we have to rethink our food supply - as a nation, and a planet.

...and there's much, much more.

Point being - we're talking full system overhaul here.





posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:29 PM
link   
I doubt it will come down to a WW2 type of overhaul. More like a step by step evolution like the tronics evolution of the 50s,60s and 70s. Those are for the countries that make it. The countries that don't make it.... well it won't be pretty, that's for sure.


apc

posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Yes... although a few posts did manage to jump in there while I was typing mind. Typing kinda slow at the moment........ it's Friday.

I just mean people can really just do what's best for themselves... and that means being conservative in their resource usage (and politicsohwaitnevermindIdidn'tsaythatnononono).


We will evolve naturally to fit our ever changing world. The outcome of that evolution however may not be very pleasant.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:38 PM
link   
Sardion this the information I found.



Tropical spiderwort, Commelina benghalensis, is now the most troublesome weed in Georgia cotton and the second most problematic weed in peanut. The weed competes with crops for water and nutrients, and smothers the crops at the same time. One reason for the surge in the weed's growth is its resistance to the commonly used herbicide glyphosate. Conservation tillage [undertaken in conjunction with the use of GM glyphosate-resistant crops] and reduced use of soil-applied herbicides may also be contributing to the problem.

www.newfarm.org...



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000

What I'd do is put an emphasis into Plug-in Flexi-Fuel Electric Drive Hybrid Cars(FHEV) for the next decade with appropriate tax incentives and disincentives applied. While doing that I'd also start upgrading the grid into a Smart Grid,(google it). The technology developed for both will eventually usher in a truly economical pure electric vehicle.



This is an older post, but it got me thinking.

One of the problems with an "electric car" is that it will put that much more of a drain on our electric generation.

I think that anthracite coal-burning plants may be part of the solution, again in the desert SW of the US. There are massive coal deposits on the Navajo reservations, and rural areas that are begging for the government to develop their areas. Anthracite is low sulfur, and much more efficient than petroleum. But again, most people think "dirty" when you mention coal, which means it'll probably never happen.

I agree with sardion; obviously, no one "fix" will work.

I am pro-free enterprise, but one of the problems with tax incentives/punishments is that the poor are not as economically "agile" as the wealthy are. A lot of poor people are driving old guzzler cars. Even tho gramma's old cadillac only gets 12 miles a gallon, it's paid for; so it's cheaper than trying to buy a brand new hybrid car, with payments they cannot afford. Forcing them to to adjust against their will could help induce an artificial recession--at the very time when the economy will be vulnerable due to energy concerns . . .

On an unrelated topic, I think the USA wastes massive amounts of electricity on security lighting. And the thing is, lighting that is always "on" actually invites crime. Thieves are afraid of getting someplace out in the dark, where they cannot see the threats to them. Studies have proven it, but no one believes it, because it's not what the lighting sales brochures say.

Cameras that cause a visible response to your presence, would be just as deterrent; say, a single spotlight that follows you when you intrude on the property. Much MORE effective than lights on, which say "we're not home."

same with streetlights that illuminate an entire deserted causeway or parking lot.

.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
One of the problems with an "electric car" is that it will put that much more of a drain on our electric generation.


With current technology, this is not quite true. In the US at least, 40-60%(depending on the season and location) of the electricity generated during the night goes to waste(as in it never gets used). Plug-in Hybrids could actually make the grid more efficient by storing wasted energy at night and using it up during the day. 30 miles total is the average amount of time the average commuter in North America drives every day.


But again, most people think "dirty" when you mention coal, which means it'll probably never happen.


Current coal technology is still pretty disgusting, but new technologies are being developed that may eventually make it a thing of the past.

Get a load of the power of Algae

Watch Part 3 for a demonstration of this technology



I am pro-free enterprise, but one of the problems with tax incentives/punishments


I hope a tax disincentive wouldn't be designed as a punishment, just as a way to keep new gas guzzlers off the road. I don't want to make them illegal, just make uneconomical to buy a new one.




On an unrelated topic, I think the USA wastes massive amounts of electricity on security lighting. And the thing is, lighting that is always "on" actually invites crime.


Really? I've found the opposite. There was the nook near my house where I grew up that all the teens used to go to drink and do drugs. They put a light up and it drove the teens away(they did it after I had grown up so I didn't care
)

LED lighting could solve the security lighting wastage. I personally Like to see what's lurking on the other side of a vast parking lot in what would usually pitch black at night if it weren't for the security lighting.



Thieves are afraid of getting someplace out in the dark, where they cannot see the threats to them. Studies have proven it, but no one believes it, because it's not what the lighting sales brochures say.


Studies don't prove or disprove anything. Correlation doesn't equal Causation in science. The evidence produced by studies can be used both for and against in arguments if the actual study isn't on hand to refer to. If I'd used this argument at school I'd have a new hole in my right now, metaphorically speaking that is(engineering school btw).



Cameras that cause a visible response to your presence, would be just as deterrent; say, a single spotlight that follows you when you intrude on the property. Much MORE effective than lights on, which say "we're not home."

same with streetlights that illuminate an entire deserted causeway or parking lot.

.


I like that, added with LED to minimize usages as much as possible. Don't know what to think about the camera idea, but street lighting would be perfect fit for this technology.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:29 PM
link   
I definitely don't have the solutions for wastage of lighting. I will say that security lighting is least effective when you are lighting a flat surface like a yard or parking lot.

Much more efficient to light a vertical surface, like the side of your house. It takes less power, and the human eye naturally sees moving forms when they are backlit.

A lot of really new houses have exterior lights built under their eves. Again, a huge waste to light it all night, but that type of backlighting DOES make thieves nervous.

A single light on a pole in the middle of a parking lot actually creates shadows.

There's a 4 lane street about a mile from my house, with streetlights. The street is deserted by 10 p.m. on weeknights (it's a connector for a suburb), but the lights just blaze away.

I'm certain a real engineer could come up with some economical solutions.

.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:36 PM
link   
Anyone out there thinking beyond energy and the power grid?

Industrial agriculture requires power admittedly, but what about the other issues?

...If the climate shifts any further - we won't need energy for agriculture.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Anyone out there thinking beyond energy and the power grid?


Always. You know me sofi.
I'll just have to pull a couple of texts firsts is all. Have any suggestions? They are quite extensive.


Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
I definitely don't have the solutions for wastage of lighting. I will say that security lighting is least effective when you are lighting a flat surface like a yard or parking lot.


You have some good ideas though.




Much more efficient to light a vertical surface, like the side of your house. It takes less power, and the human eye naturally sees moving forms when they are back lit.


Yes. I've learned the hard way in many a FPS game that this is true. How about this. I was having a discussion with one of my classmates a few months ago and we came up with an idea for a sustainable clean light source. We basically came up with a rough framework for a "perpetual light" machine. Basically it would act as a thermal panel at day and will be converted to electricity to charge capacitors by piezo-crystals and at night a light sensitive patch on the surface of the panel will close a circuit allowed the OLEDs to draw energy from the capacitors to emit light during the night. We tested this on our Physics professor(don't ask why, he was the closest
) and he came up with the idea of impregnating all the components in concrete so we could do away with street lamps altogether. You could do walls and sidewalks with this stuff. I'm sure I'm not the only one to think of this idea, but I am going to pursue it this year and next(possibly longer I hope
).



A lot of really new houses have exterior lights built under their eves. Again, a huge waste to light it all night, but that type of back lighting DOES make thieves nervous.


Tell me about it. The least they could do is put up a few Florescent bulbs up there or something. Yeesh. That's also an interesting comment about them making them nervous. Why would it do that? I'm not a BnE artists so I wouldn't know.


[edit on 5-1-2007 by sardion2000]


apc

posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Because there is the risk of being seen. I think any studies are pretty useless... your average Joe Crackhead thief is going to avoid light and stay in the shadows where they cannot be seen. Someone who knows what they're doing though... it won't be a concern.

I think the issue of energy is at the base of all our problems. Everything we do that upsets the natural balance of the planet is directly tied to energy usage or production in one way or another. All waste is produced as a result of inefficient energy usage. All pollution is produced as a result of inefficient energy usage. If we can find a sustainable replacement for nearly every form of energy we use, all we'll have left to worry about is....... Paris Hilton.



posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc

I think the issue of energy is at the base of all our problems. Everything we do that upsets the natural balance of the planet is directly tied to energy usage or production in one way or another. All waste is produced as a result of inefficient energy usage. All pollution is produced as a result of inefficient energy usage. If we can find a sustainable replacement for nearly every form of energy we use, all we'll have left to worry about is....... Paris Hilton.



The energy issue may be the base of our problems - but the problems have mutated, evolved and taken on a myriad of different forms.

Now we have numerous other problems to deal with too. Not the least of which is the question of "where are we going to get our food? Now that weather patterns have changed and things do not grow where they once did."





posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000

Originally posted by soficrow
Anyone out there thinking beyond energy and the power grid?


Always. You know me sofi.
I'll just have to pull a couple of texts firsts is all. Have any suggestions? They are quite extensive.




How 'bout you just do a quick list and overview of all the related issues and problems, and economic and social implications?



Seriously tho - do what you can, and feel free to focus on your own pet points.



apc

posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Food supply also boils down to inefficient energy usage. Energy in the form of currently available cropland. If we made better use of what we currently have, in the form of high density crop plantation void of chemical fertilization that destroys the topsoil ecosystem, we could more than quadruple the food supply in just a few seasons.

But as the weather patterns change and existing crop lands undergo desertification, new crop lands will appear just as fast (still taking years and even decades to establish though). The problem is many of these new croplands are in prime realty space where it is more profitable to build homes and strip malls than it is to plant corn.

It's a closed system so as some places dry out, other places get wetter. But it's a race to see who claims the land first. Nature, man, or both?



posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
Food supply also boils down to inefficient energy usage. Energy in the form of currently available cropland.




True. But nitpicky.





If we made better use of what we currently have, in the form of high density crop plantation void of chemical fertilization that destroys the topsoil ecosystem, we could more than quadruple the food supply in just a few seasons.




Can you expand?





But as the weather patterns change and existing crop lands undergo desertification, new crop lands will appear just as fast (still taking years and even decades to establish though).




Sardion has a link to a great article about how dust from the Sahara "seeds" the Amazon rainforest - but that cycle is now disrupted.





The problem is many of these new croplands are in prime realty space where it is more profitable to build homes and strip malls than it is to plant corn.



I recall reading some years ago about how the "future" of crop farming lay in (presumably) giant greenhouses.

My brother the farmer had a good laugh when I told him about it. ...But I wonder.






It's a closed system so as some places dry out, other places get wetter.




I recall reading that the hydrological cycle has been disrupted - in such a way that water was being removed from the system entirely - not just redistributed.

Sardion???





But it's a race to see who claims the land first. Nature, man, or both?



I'm thinking man is properly part of nature - that the concept of "war" is alien, particularly when applied to man's relationship with his environment.





apc

posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 07:13 PM
link   
That's what I implied by "both".


And there's waaaaaay too many methods and systems of high density farming to go into here. Everything from going three-dimensional to abandoning the traditional row-style in favor of equidistant sowing. You run into problems like where are the tractor wheels supposed to go, but nothing a little geometry can't take care of.



posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc

... there's waaaaaay too many methods and systems of high density farming to go into here. Everything from going three-dimensional to abandoning the traditional row-style in favor of equidistant sowing.




Maybe a few links and pithy explanations for your fans?



apc

posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Oh come oooooon! Just google "high density farming", "grow biointensive" or something like that! Most of my info comes from those strange rectangular thingies full of paper so I don't exactly have a list of URLs to spit up!


>
okokok here's some stuffs


www.growbiointensive.org...
Most life in nature occurs at the interface of soil, water, air and sun. GROW BIOINTENSIVE soil preparation practices create growing beds with more surface area to maximize the effect of nature’s life processes. Double-dug beds, with soil loosened to a depth of 24 inches, aerate the soil, facilitate root growth, and improve water retention. The health and vigor of the soil are maintained through the use of compost. Close plant spacing is used to protect soil microorganisms, reduce water loss, and
maximize yields. Companion planting facilitates the optimal use of nutrients, light and water, encourages beneficial insects and creates a vibrant mini-ecosystem within the garden. A focus on the production of calories for the farmer and carbon for the soil ensures that both the farmer and the soil will be adequately fed and that the farm will be sustainable. The use of open-pollinated seeds helps to preserve genetic diversity
and enables gardeners to develop their own acclimatized cultivars. All of the components of this system must be used together for optimum effect and to avoid depleting the soil.



westernfarmpress.com...
California Olive Ranch's 300,000-tree olive orchard on 500 acres is trellised like grape vineyard; farmed like wine grapes and harvested with mechanical grape harvesters. This “super high density” olive planting is the largest in the world and has become the cornerstone of what many hope will be a new, commercial California crop to capitalize on the booming U.S. olive oil market.


yada yada yada... it basically boils down to duplicating what has been proven to work over millions and millions of years: nature. Wheels aren't found in nature, so plants don't naturally align themselves in neat rows and patterns. The plants themselves aren't designed to live that way. The soil isn't designed to support plants arranged that way.

[edit on 6-1-2007 by apc]







 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join