Tony Erikson Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 the strangest story i ever heard was about a planet full of people that existed only a few miles above a boiling ball of iron but still burned coal and oil to boil water, resulting in polluting the air that they breath they chopped down the forests that were given to them by nature to provide and clean the air they breath, and when the air ran out they blamed each other, went to war and killed each other, not to worry though, mother nature is a tough old bird and will be around to make repairs long after we are gone. I was thinking about something like this the other day. Not so much using the internal heat of the planet but why not build nuclear power stations deep under ground. Sure it would be more expensive but wouldn't it be safer? (Though I do think nuclear is pretty safe). It's the atmosphere we need to protect more than anything. Mess that up and we'll end up like Venus or Mars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fake Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 But havent we all got a part to play in that. Couldnt we all do more as an individual to reduce our carbon emissions. Walk where we can, holiday at home etc. I do most of that and more already and it would be very hard for me to reduce it further. We have a modern technological capitalist driven society where most people would not be prepared to give up their luxuries. On the one hand, new "must have" gadgets are constantly being pushed on us for profit and on the other hand energy and resources are needed to produce them. Ask people what they are prepared to give up and I think you will find that most would give up little. Sad I know but that's the reality of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 I was thinking about something like this the other day. Not so much using the internal heat of the planet but why not build nuclear power stations deep under ground. Sure it would be more expensive but wouldn't it be safer? (Though I do think nuclear is pretty safe). It's the atmosphere we need to protect more than anything. Mess that up and we'll end up like Venus or Mars. I'm no expert but I would have thought that nuclear power stations underground would potentially be more dangerous. Geothermal energy has been around for many years however. I'm not aware of the pros and cons but there must be a reason why we don't use it more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted May 15, 2011 Author Share Posted May 15, 2011 I do most of that and more already and it would be very hard for me to reduce it further. We have a modern technological capitalist driven society where most people would not be prepared to give up their luxuries. On the one hand, new "must have" gadgets are constantly being pushed on us for profit and on the other hand energy and resources are needed to produce them. Ask people what they are prepared to give up and I think you will find that most would give up little. Sad I know but that's the reality of it. I gave up ironing and it has been truly liberating! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 They are still ignoring the elephant in the room. Global population is now well on the way to 7 billion and continuing to expand at an ever increasing rate. There have been two great extinctions of species since life evolved on Earth and the third one is happening now. It has nothing to do with climate change. It is due to human over population and the pressures it is putting on habitats world wide. No amount of carbon emission legislation is going to stop that. Even if there were complete success in implementing carbon emission reduction measures globally, the fact is, such problems are caused by the sheer scale of demand, not just for energy, but for food, water, living space, waste disposal space, clothing, housing materials, furniture etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 An historic deal and an example of how the Liberal democrats are making a real difference. Why are we to thank the Libdems for this when Vince Cable opposed it? It looks to me like we should thank Cameron, and even then only for continuing to do what the Labour party had previously done.... accepting the recommendations of the environment committee. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/may/12/david-cameron-points-carbon-budget?intcmp=122 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 They are still ignoring the elephant in the room. Global population is now well on the way to 7 billion and continuing to expand at an ever increasing rate. The population growth rate is in decline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/14/historic-climate-change-deal-agreed-chris-huhne At last we have an agreement to do something about the state of our planet. An historic deal and an example of how the Liberal democrats are making a real difference. A government source told the Observer: "This is a victory for the cause of enlightenment over the dark forces at the Treasury." Another senior government figure said: "This country is now the world leader in cutting carbon emissions. We are the only nation with legally binding commitments past 2020." Meanwhile China continues to build 10 coal-fired power stations per week and is hardly likely to follow suit because it would undoubtedly harm their economic stance of being the world leaders. We can't compete economically with China so it sounds a little better to say we're greener ... a poor compensate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted May 15, 2011 Author Share Posted May 15, 2011 Why are we to thank the Libdems for this when Vince Cable opposed it? It looks to me like we should thank Cameron, and even then only for continuing to do what the Labour party had previously done.... accepting the recommendations of the environment committee. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/may/12/david-cameron-points-carbon-budget?intcmp=122 Ok so we shall thank Cameron and the Labour party then.The fact that Chris Huhne is the environment secretary is irrelevant:huh: Even more evidence as to why we should thank Cameron. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/may/12/david-cameron-points-carbon-budget Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsy Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 Is it legal to attach a wind turbine to a residential property, I don't mean one of the huge titans that they stick out at sea, the smaller versions like Castle College have? If it was then people could recycle car parts and make their own wind turbines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.