Global warming - what are your solutions while maintaining the status quo?

[Deja Q]

A problem growing worse, global warming could be the end of society as we know it, but the projections show the worst won't be upon us for 30 years.

Most of this is caused by burning fossil fuels for transportation, energy production, and food harvesting.

Biodeisel is not a viable solution because of the amount of land needed to grow (and then harvest) the stuff. Earth is only so large, and Jupiter isn't quite habitable right now... but that's more of an energy problem, I mean to be talking about global warming - a condition brought about by increasing the median temperature of the planet due to our industrial rather than agricultural world economy.

What are your solutions for global warming, keeping in mind that it is our "need" for energy that keeps skyrocketing? Just where would you draw the line? At what point would you be unable to make hard choices?

Can a solution be found/made/utilized that would prevent the loss of even ONE life?

Either way, global economy is headed for a big-ass crash so it's inevitable that our usage will decline. But if people really are "pro-life", why haven't we seen solutions that encourage less usage of energy? Or steps to suggest that, when the crash comes, people won't be agonizingly starving to death?

We don't need to travel 80 miles round trip per day to work.

We don't need stereos or TVs. That's what live entertainment is for. Add in how just about ALL of our entertainment is recycled (and seemingly recycled from a large, recently used, toilet bowl), going to local shows may provide some refreshingly original entertainment that's devoid of the filth on television.

Do we really need computers? Over the last 40 years, their greater use has only led to more problems (though mostly nit-picky ones pertaining to finances and other things thanks to "human error" when it's not "microsoft logic".)

We lived without cell phones for thousands of years, why are they so important now?

I dare say we can cut our own energy needs and live a life that's more natural.

The trouble is; is our "society" too self-centered and rigid? Does it want everything at the expense of everyone else? At what point does society and all the lives within get some meaning?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

1. You can't maintain the status quo.

[Deja Q]

17. And now that we are in utter agreement, who do you decide gets to live?

And who dies?

You make the choices.

[opihimoimoi]

2. This is the 64 Billion Dollar question...are we ready for this??? NO

i don think so...perhaps in 6 to 12 months as more peeps realize the warnings were REAL after all.....

[Karenina]

7. HT thinks there's a 30 year "grace period" here...

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x157374

[Deja Q]

15. That's from what I'd read...

I was looking for a reasoned debate, particularly from a multitude of sources.

Not a baseless smear.

So go back to your sandbox and lick your lolly.

[Karenina]

22. Oh dear, Sweetiekins

Didn't think you'd get riled at that quip. No "smear" intended, just poking fun. Did you read the link?

The status quo is crumbling daily before our noses. Politically, economically and environmentally. We've collectively done WAY TOO LITTLE to address the problems our burgeoning population and technology have created. Current conditions are threatening our major pipelines, water, food and energy. That 30 year window of opportunity was available when I was a kid, however, that was decades ago and it has long-since closed...

[LARED]

3. There is no ideal solution

Solutions will always have an upside and a downside.

For example

Can a solution be found/made/utilized that would prevent the loss of even ONE life?

In reality really should read

"Can a solution be found/made/utilized that would prevent or not create the loss of even ONE life?

I wish I could be more optimistic

[Callalily]

4. There can be no

solutions without changes. Standards should have been implemented long before this, now we are in crisis mode.

LARED, I'm confused as to what you mean by "loss of life". I was assuming we're talking about solutions to conserve energy, in all forms.

[LARED]

11. History is replete with examples

of implemented solutions that were supposed to save lives, but in the end was costly to life.

My main point is that there is a great tendency in people seeking solutions to put blinders on to the downside of those solutions, and there is nearly always a downside.

[MADem]

5. Solar power, wind power, cost effective recycling

I do not believe in the "sacrifice" mentality--everyone says they will, no one actually does it...that's where clowns like Cheney get away with "well, it may be a PERSONAL VIRTUE" argument. We certainly can do better on public transportation, hybrid vehicles, and smaller, CHEAPER vehicles, but if they are not super-convenient, clean and cute, people will not go for them. They just won't.

Look, when I was a kid, we didn't have TV. When we got it, we were thrilled. It was a huge wooden box that took up a massive amount of the den. It was grainy, it was black and white, sometimes you had to have one kid stand off to the side with the antennae, and hell, there was no remote--but it was the greatest thing since sliced bread to us. If you think I'd go back to that TV, it just ain't happening. I like my remote, I like my color, and I like my many channels. I like air conditioning on a hot day. On cold days, I have no problem putting on a sweater in my house to take the chill off, but I don't like the idea of freezing in my own home.

If we apply ourselves, we can make solar power, wind power, even wave power, and recycling do the trick. We CAN have it all, if we just use our brainpower and pull together. Fossil fuels are the lazy way--no investment in time, in trial and error, in creating the machines to harness natural forces.

We used to be the "can do" nation--now we seem to be the "make excuses" bunch.

[DrRang]

12. Damn! That's a great last sentence, MADem! The whole macho thing of

equating how much energy you waste with how big a honcho you are has always hindered efforts at energy efficiency--the "My cock is as big as my Hummer" bunch. But "We used to be the "can do" nation--now we seem to be the "make excuses" bunch" turns that around to make energy wasting sign of clueless incompetence. We need to frame the issue that way every time we get a chance.

BTW--we use a solar oven to cook every thing that takes longer than a quick stir fry. Just an insulated box with a shiny reflector collar cooks at temps from 250 to 350. Foods like soups and stews and beans and roasts tastes great. My husband made the ones we use, but you can buy them online for about $200, or the real cheap but slower ones that are just folded shiny cardboard for about $20.

[all.of.me]

18. you took the words right out of my mouth beautifully

[Dogmudgeon]

6. Electronic components

They draw very little energy. The big energy-users aren't even in domestic energy (energy for households). Private automobiles are the biggest draw.

"Alternative" energy could easily meet home energy needs, but our society depends on huge amounts of energy just to stay alive. Any time yearly energy use has dropped below 2.5% or so, recession and depression have resulted. Even though overall, our efficiency in using energy has increased a hundred fold since the 1920s. Without that economic movement, the economy crashes. Which doesn't just mean that the big, bad Fatcats get hurt -- people get thrown out of their homes, don't have food, don't have medical care, and the infrastructure crumbles.

I also disagree strongly that computers have led to more problems. They may have led to more excuses, but having worked in medicine during both sides of the computer revolution, I can tell you that information technology has allowed huge advances in medical practice. Computerization has advanced nearly every field of study or endeavor tremendously. The problems within medicine right now are the results of insurance company greed, not computerization. The internet will even allow people to work at home -- if only the middle-level managers can be persuaded to loosen their grips!

Strong incentives to develop more-efficient energy technologies is the way to go in the short run.

I also fear that a quicker, more lasting "quick fix" will be tried -- microorganisms that will cause the loss of 90% or more of the population of the world. When times get desperate, someone is likely to try it.

--p!

[MadHound]

8. With changes in how we live, and technological solutions, we can survive

There are many green friendly solutions, some that you and I can even implement ourselves. In the short term, conservation is in order. I myself have cut down my gas consumption by a factor of three, since I bought a scoorter that gets 100mpg(and cranks out a 55mph).

But we can switch over to wind, solar, biomass, biodiesel and other such renewables. You are quite frankly wrong about their not being enough room for biodiesel, since we don't neccessarily need land based crops for biodiesel. There are enough algaes out there that you can get plently of biodiesel from, and they can be grown in large stacked tanks of water. In addition, pair up biodiesel with hybrid technology and you've got a solution for the daily commute.

But all of this is going to take a massive change in public policy, which I just don't see happening. What will hopefully happen is that consumers will drive the solutions as energy prices go through the roof. But sadly, this scenario has a good chance of failure, and even if it does succeed, market based solutioons have a way of causing a great deal of pain to society along the way.

[jmowreader]

9. Heat is a huge user of energy, and here there are options

If you live in a house it has a roof on it. Were you to cover the entire southern exposure of your house with solar collectors, pipe the heat collected into a bed of rocks, then use that heat to warm your house, you'll cut down on your need for energy by a bunch. This is an active system, requiring power to run the pumps, but nothing says those pumps can't be 12v pumps powered by a truck battery which is charged via a solar array.

There's also geothermal energy. If one were able to supplement solar with geothermal, or use only geothermal, one could heat his house without any coal, oil or gas being burned. (Geothermal also works well in electric generation.)

Take heating out of the equation and you've saved a lot of energy that can be redirected to transportation.

DUers who are hard scientists, is it possible to extract the chemicals we now get from oil from coal? If we could, we could direct all of the coal to the petrochemical industry instead of burning it, plus the oil freed up could go to transportation.

[greekspeak]

10. I would like to see viable public transportation in more places

I was 22 when I got my first car. I only got that because my grandfather left it to me at his death.

Before that I did not go many places. I lived by the college where I went to school, and where I also worked. Once a week, in one trip, my father would come over, take me to the laundry and grocery, and that was that.

That kind of lifestyle is still possible, but it seems the state of affairs is against it. I do not have anyone to take me to do laundry or shopping any more. Rent by the school where I study and work is awe-inspiring.

I think that if there were viable public transportation--not just a bus every once in a while--that it would be easier. Clintmax and I went to Rome last year, and the only car we rode in was to and from the airport. The rest of the time we took public transportation and walked, and we went all over. And the public transport in Rome is poor by European standards.

My goal would be a car-less society insofar as this is possible. Also, less polluting forms of energy. Less sprawl would be excellent. Less waste in the dumps through recycling.

[brokensymmetry]

13. Given your parameters, there is no solution.

Keep in mind the Green Revolution, circa the early 1950's. It requires the use of artificial fertilizers, pesticides, and mechanized agriculture, along with specialized cultivars. The global population was 2.5 billion back then.

Note the points: mechanized agriculture and artificial fertilizers.

Keep in mind that mechanized agriculture means large farms are needed to make efficient use of the expensive machines. Which implies transportation of food over long distances. People consume about 10 calories worth of petroleum with every one calorie of food value they eat.

So...even if we get rid of the cars, get rid of the computers and cell phones...we must use lots of energy to support the present level of population. That's 6.5 billion people.

Thus, we have overshoot to the tune of 4 billion people.

Things will come back into balance. I do not look forward to the events that will occur as balance is restored.

[samplegirl]

14. Fast lane getting faster

Technology has put us all at the push of a button
of self gratification syndrome.

[OneBlueSky]

16. first and foremost -- and the hardest sell -- is drastically changing . .

the American way of life . . . 5% of the world's population simply can NOT continue to consume 25% of the available resources . . . given the realities of Peak Oil, the only solution is to reduce demand, and there's only one logical place for that to happen -- right here in the good ole U.S. of A., where demand is greatest and most out of whack with the percentage of the Earth's population we represent . . .

any politician articulating this reality, of course, is dead meat . . . therefore is has to come from our non-elected thinkers -- the Truth Tellers . . . people like RFK, Jr., Bill Moyers, Gary Hart, Jimmy Carter, Robert Redford -- and preferably in unison . . . people who Americans respect and will at least listen to, even when the message is one they don't want to hear . . .

simultaneously, we have to mercilessly ridicule those who insist that the "American Way of Life" must be preserved as the corrupt lying asses they are . . .

the new American ethos for the 21st Century must be simple living, i.e. living simply, so that others may simply live . . .

[entanglement]

21. Excellent post n/t

[MADem]

24. And if we started using our brains and the available resources we have

we will not HAVE to give up the American way of life. Get that power from the sun, from the wind, from the waves...we are used to having it all, and damn it, we still have a few smart folks around who have the willingness to work the issues, they just need the funding to go from idea to reality.

That is where we need to invest, and we still can enjoy a fine standard of living without great pain. And then, we can sell our technology around the world, to the benefit of us all.

[Ice4Clark]

19. I've read where the acceleration of the ice loss is now partly due

to less ice mass, ocean has more exposure to the sun (now warms the water), so what's left now melts even faster. I know this may sound dumb, but can we tow some huge floating devices up there, to cover some of the water surface now exposed so it will draw some of the heat away from the water? just thinking out loud.

[Toots]

20. Last months issue of Popular Science had a really neat idea

There is a company right now that has put together an idea for giant windmills in the sky. I am talking about very large platforms with rotor blades similar to a helicopter. They send these enormous platforms up into the jet stream at forty thousand feet and winds remain fairly constant around two hundred MPH. The blades are computer controlled so the pitch can be adjusted constantly to maintain altitude and generation. These are high enough to avoid birds or other wildlife yet still close enough to be actually tethered to the earth via a four inch transmission cable. There is some new material that has enormous tensile strength yet very small in size. I don't have the article in front of me but it is the very forward thinking that I like.

[pitohui]

23. yr solutions don't sound like solutions to me

what we did before cell phones was if i had an emergency i flagged down a stranger on the street & he drove me some place i could make a call & then we drove back to the scene of the emergency & yadda yadda we all went round in circles

getting rid of communications, cell phone, computer, etc. will require us to use more energy not less

getting rid of yr tv & going out every night for "live" entertainment, again, that's more drunk driving, more gas used, more life lost -- & the evening out is not special because it's what you do every night

unfortunately the single most important solution is to control birth rate, which ppl are unwilling to do, when i saw a program on bbc bitching that italy & hong kong were suffering from a fall birthrate, i knew there was no hope

ppl will breed, & unless you are willing to impose fascism & slavery, then those ppl will want jobs, cars, houses, not shacks and "natural" walking to some job in a damn field or coal mine

therefore ppl seem destined to outbreed the food production of the planet

few ppl are aware of how much fuel is required to produce food

let me give you one small example of a change that could be made today but won't be -- imagine a law making infertility treatment illegal worldwide, which would result in an immediate drop in pop. of the class that has the most $$$$ & uses a disproportionate % of the world's remaining resources compared to the rest of us who can't afford to spend $50K just to pop out one baby & that's before it has even taken the first bite of food

now ask yrself, do you seriously think such a law would be passed

it won't

the rich are going to eat everything anyway, we might as well live while we can

i'm not sacrificing a damn thing so a millionaire's grandchild can have another day of life in 2060

they don't care abt us

so i don't care abt them