Hydrogen fuel cell car! HAHA!

heh- yea no doubt, I feel like I am giving blood when I fuel up.

 

Carbon is doing nothing to the planet. Humans are the ones making the impact.

 

Powerman are you sure you want to have this discussion? It is a little bit off the O/P's topic, but in line with his reasoning.

 

please, lets not touch this one guys...

 

What, so you can tell me how carbon is screwing up the world? Please. The Earth has been much hotter with much more carbon un locked than there is now. Mother Earth will be just fine. Man on the other hand is a different story. We will continue to use what ever resources are available until they are gone. We will continue to sustain un sustainable populations and we will create more waste than can be naturally processed. ... the end result will be our population will dramatically be decreased.

As far as finding a different fuel source than carbon... I personally don't care. Economically viable oil will indeed run out. The choice will be made for us at some point. But a resource will continue to be used until it is gone. I would love to cut oil consumption in the US for other reasons... but oil consumption in the world will continue till it's gone by somebody looking to achieve the same level of living as we have made off the back of carbon.

As far as the environment... sorry.. don't care. Shoot me. If it is not carbon, it will be some other waste. If we find another source, then we increase the population. Man is already living in a an unsustainable manner and it has nothing to do with CO2. At some point we will be put in our place. Another mass extinction of life on Earth will happen. Mother Earth will roll merrily along... then it will start all over again. Been happening for a long time now.

 

More? really- what, from volcanoe's and such? Might be true, but Man was not here then, and for good reason- life as we know it was not sustainable in that time frame of OUR planet. As to the rest of your statement- these are choices. Then mankind comes along, for the first time in Earth's history the inhabitants have a choice. Mother earth has evolved- or, have you missed that part of the equation?

And there in lies the problem, and, it's very cure. We, mankind, we have a choice, yes it will cost money, but what of our childern, and their children and so on, do you propose to leave our ineptitudes to our children when we know what MUST be done to solve this problem? One of which WE can solve TODAY? And thus, there by preventing another Mesozoic period, one that is not of Mother Earth's choice.

Just when did I personally make mention to CO2? I did not make such mention. However, Carbon based fuel sources DO in fact create such CO2, and I can prove this to you. Not since the Mesozoic period has the Earth experienced such levels of CO2 in the atmosphere- when the Earth was new, and forming into what we have now- the ONLY stable planet in our solar system- perhaps the only one in the universe. But now via mankinds pollution, it reverts back to the Mesozoic period - so to speak. This is not not Mother Earth's creation, it is mankind's creation of pollution, of which, allow's for a CHOICE. This is provable, be it fact, who knows- mankind was not able to take a mesurement at the actual Mesozoic period to compare to modern day. But we can use science to surmise what was, what is, and, what will be.

We do not need to be "put in our place" IF we decide to do what is best for our planet, and there fore mankind.

Or, would you prefer as you said "mass extinction of life on Earth", if this be your idea of what should be, then we are fighting the wrong war.

Difference is- we have the ability to make a choice - and so do you.

 

No... you have a choice... we don't. Mass populations consume resources till they are gone, or they pollute to the point of death. Herds traveled, Locusts moved on... we have gone global. We are already past the point of decision. How exactly do you plan on reducing global populations and manage resources and wastes at a a sustainable level? Individuals and herds are two totally different things.

And what of all the little grand children when Yellowstone blows again? What of all the kids today that live off technology when the next Solar storm happens? They all die. Life goes on.

The choice has already been made. It was made in the industrial revolution. We chose back then to rely on technology instead of the resources in front of us. Technology is what sustains this population, and energy fuels it. We no longer are tied to crops and water right in front of us. We have disconnected from sustainable populations long ago. Mankind will not make that choice to go back. Mother Nature will make it for us.

The moment you said carbon based fuels are killing this planet. Oh.. so you meant the actual carbon based fuels... not the CO2 byproduct they produce and everyone is saying is killing the planet. OK... my bad.

It isn't my idea... it is the truth and will happen again by our hands or by mother nature. We can talk all day of philosophical debates... philosophical debates afforded us by all our free time that we are not tilling the land and hunting for food brought to you and me by that wonderful atom carbon... but I like to be more practical. What people say and what people do are two different thing. You typing on your computer, so you can post to a server, so hundreds of people can read it on their computer... guess what... half of that is done by burning carbon.

If you are so concerned about your grand children, disconnect from the grid. Millions of people on this planet do not have electricity. They do not have computers, and are more worried about where their next meal is going to come from instead of this fascinating debate we are having in cyber land. They do not burn a quarter of a tank of gas driving around the city. But they would if the could... cause they want to be just like us. So keep using resources for luxury. Keep using more energy per capita than any other country on this planet. And we can keep talking about this wonderful choice mankind has to change the world. And I'll keep going to work and converting that energy in carbon to electricity.

 

I disagree, for the first time in modern history we have a President that is trying to do just what I am speaking of- this takes time and cooperation, which for obvious reasons isnt happening- but it will, because soon we will not have a choice. The world can easily sustain the present population and then some- GREED is the problem here, not the ability to FEED.

On the contrary, it is the population that sustains the technologies availble to us- not the contrary. It is a very differnet thing. And, lest we start on "what if this and what if that" presumptions that serve no purpose- but science CAN prove what is presently true, or, not true- anything is possible! Would you prefer it be a metorite killing our planet? Doom and gloom- no light at the end of the proverbial tunnel?

Presumptions serve nothing but to incite alienation of the truth- and this is a FACT.

However, as you and I are both of the mind set of "what could be" as proven from our conversation- wouldn't you prefer to choose the side that is possitive- and there by, and if need be, forceablly make a difference in this area rather then the obvious outcome as you have presented it? Again a choice- one you can make.

Denote the above in bold- it is an important starting point, one I will not refrain from. As for the "grid" you keep getting past your own point- and that point is- "we are doomed if we continue", and that is my very point- again a choice of what energy source we choose to use, we just need to implement this into mainstream society- what prevents this GREED! Open your eyes!!!! Cyberland?? Would you prefer it in person- no problem here. Say the word. Let's go to Congress and make our case known- I have vacation time- I am up for it.

No offense but you seem to have a defeatist prose to your writing- I refuse to be/ or/ allow such. Last I checked- we the people still make the decisions in our country (USA)- you just need to have a voice. The Louder the voice- the more readily it will be listened to.

 

Right because legislation has been so successful at changing Man's behaviors.

The ability to feed is directly proportional to how much fuel we burn and how much fertilizer we use. The worlds population would not survive without it. Greed is exactly what I have been talking about. Americans use the most energy per capita of any country. We have just burned another pound of coal having this conversation.

I like positivity... I just don't actually see it practiced... even by those championing it the most. There is idealism, then there is reality.

You say this while you use carbon for luxury purposes. Heck... an aquarium is using carbon for luxury purposes to keep living things artificially alive in a box outside it's natural habitat. There is idealism... then there is reality.

I'm not a defeatist, I'm practical. You seem to have a idealistic prose to your writing. That makes you an idealist. Now that we have thrown out some labels.... the world rolls merrily along. Neither of us seem to be effective at changing the world right now. We have just consumed another pound of coal.... funny how we both make our living off carbon, yet consuming carbon is not our primary function. The only difference it seems is I don't talk about how bad it is while actively consuming it and growing richer from it. That's being practical.

 

Heh, your entire post was about practicalities. tell me what is practicle?

You seem to be able to determine what is practicle for most persons- are you comfortable with this ability? Do you not yet understand the failings of such an attitude?

Rome was not built in a day, but it fell in short order- over a few days.

This is the world we now live in, did you choose this? I didn't. Are you in the USA- you are, so you say we have no choice? If that be true, then the rest of the world is correct about us- how does that settle with you- be it true?

If there are no choices left to be made by common folk such as you and I well then you are very well correct- but then that goes back to what I said- defeatist point of view- or deliberate ignorance, feel free to choose.

You wont even put up a fight- even when you know what is wrong?

Wow- ok then. BUT as you state: "There is idealism... then there is reality." seems there is only two sides then- the right, and the wrong- which do you choose?