What I’d like to propose: variant “B” for actions against global warming.

[rotschnjak.livejournal.com]

The scientists are sure that we can stop global warming by restriction of greenhouse gas emissions. I have very intensive doubts in this aspect. Even if they are right, we cannot stop our economy, which is based on consumption of fossil fuel today. If they are not right, we try to stop the economy and begin to die because of starvation and abject poverty… and this price gives us nothing for the save.
I suppose we need to prepare our nations, our infrastructures for live in reality of globally changed climate, and don’t try to stop global warming by taxes and restrictions. All quotes, new eco-taxes and restrictions can be harmful for mankind survive, both if the scientists are right (but it’s too late) or they are not right (this is possible too). I don’t believe that politicians can stop global climatic changes by their laws.
It’s my variant “B”. It is the way for adaptation, and not the way of prevention by political declarations.If you prohibit hurricanes by laws of the state, hurricanes will be appeared anyway.

Comments

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

Nobody is seriously advocating a complete elimination of fossil fuel consumption in a way that we cannot adapt to it, this whole assumption that climate scientists want people to starve and live in poverty is completely unfounded and anyone that does want it is an idiot. Measures to adapt to climate change are already being done, the effort to live with climate change involves both adaption and prevention. And, no, making a change to our western, suburban lifestyle is not the same thing as living in poverty, people should think through what is really important here.

Hurricanes are a force of nature, the aspects of global warming that are caused by humans can be fixed by humans.

This is all only a problem if you think in extremes, the problems we are facing need to be faced with rational thinking not black and white thinking. I keep saying that word, but adapt, adapt, adapt! Fossil fuels aren't so essential, we have lived without them before, we have survived millennia without them! With our ever advancement in technology there is no doubt in my mind that we can live without them again, or at least live without the need to burn them for energy. Lets find alternative ways to generate electricity and save the rest of the oil for things like plastics.

Stay focused! Stay frosty

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

Lets find alternative ways to generate electricity and save the rest of the oil for things like plastics.

That sums up much of my thoughts on it.


Stay frosty

That's not a DLR reference, is it?

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

Nah, that's that Alien reference that people use all the time XD

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Aliens.

Come on!

[unnamed525.livejournal.com]

We should grow industrial hemp; use it for fuel, food, clothing, medicine. :D

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

I'm all for that! It'll grow nicely here in Florida.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

And jet fuel; that's one of the biggies with no replacement on the horizon (unless there's something new I'm not aware of).

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

If I recall, there *was* a solar plane made, it was able to stay suspended in the air indefinitely.

And in addition to that there's space flight, if we can get the vehicles into orbit we can cut flight times that way. I mean, what's stopping Amazon.com from building their own space station, with a warehouse, and dropping the goods down into reentry? Think about it, they could restock it quarterly and the thing will stay up there without any need for fossil fuels (no friction, minimal gravity, plenty of solar energy).

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

Need a space elevator for that; at the moment it costs about $10K/kg to get stuff into space. That's gonna bump up the price of the complete Trollop quite a bit.

The problem with the solar plane is that it's huge and only carries about 100kg and travels at 50km/h. That'll obviously get much better, but it's still a long, long, LONG way from replacing the 747. Airships would be a more likely replacement, but then we're back to taking a few days NY->London.

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

I have a feeling that once the private space flight starts advancing it would become more efficient.

Another method of transportation that's being looked at is vacuum tubes.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't imagine it would reduce too much. I'm not convinced that the private sector would do things cheaper than NASA, but even if they did, there's only so much "waste" that quite possibly the most efficient government department in the USA would be able to do away with. You still need a metric fucktonne of rocket fuel. That virgin galactic thing is still twice as far from the ISS as it is to Earth.

I haven't heard of the vacuum tubes thing. Sounds like the world's biggest amp :P

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

It's pretty much the same concept of those pneumatic tubes you might see in the drive through section of a bank

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

We don't have those here (the pneumatic tubes or drive through banks). People in my country are still able to perambulate :P Although jokes aside, drive through banking sounds pretty cool... Until I realise that I've used a banking service that isn't online or an ATM twice in the last decade :P (really, who gives people cheques? This isn't 1956).

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

Point is, is that it's technology that works and has been used for cargo around the turn of the century, it just wasn't popular and somehow didn't catch on in the wake of planes, trains and automobiles.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

I would imagine that it'd take some serious pressure to move heavier items. I wonder if they could tap into the vacuum of space...

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

The pressure comes from creating a vacuum

If push really did came to shove though we could also bring back sails for our ships, those have been proven to work since the dawn of civilization and they are 100% free of fossil fuel use.

[mindstalk.livejournal.com]

Big sailing ships were labor intensive, one reason steamships caught on. But there's work on automating that.

By vacuum tubes do you mean Elon Musk's hyperloop? That's problematic. But plain old rail is a lot more energy efficient than cars and trucks, and can be decoupled from fossil fuels. Trains, trolleybuses, elevators, and aerial tramways are all proven and clean, given clean electricity.

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

Well, the ships don't have to be made out of wood obviously and we have a lot more automation then in the 1800's. What I'm curious about is if someone can not imagine a sailing ship as an old fashioned frigate but as a modern, efficiently constructed vehicle.

And of course pneumatic tubes will have their challenges, there wasn't a single form of transportation that didn't have problems. But one of the things it has going for it, along with the sails, is that they have been used before, so we know they work. The trick is to update them with current technology.

[mindstalk.livejournal.com]

As I said.

Pneumatic tubes work for passage delivery in buildings and cities. Passenger transport is another matter. It could probably be made to work for some value to work, but I fail to see why it'd be advantageous over rail. There's a theoretical advantage in sheer speed in a near vacuum tube, but lots of problems with failure modes and switching and comfort. Musk claimed a cost advantage but he got that by ignoring the expensive parts of the project, connecting to SF and LA downtowns.

Sailing ships solve the problem of ocean transport without fossil fuels, where solar doesn't work because it's not intense enough and nuclear doesn't work because it's really expensive plus we'd be nervous about many loosely regulated power plants. What problem is pneumatic tube transport an answer to?

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

I was suggesting pneumatic tube transport for freight not passenger transport though. I think they might have some potential if used in combination with trains. It would take money of course to build the initial grid, but what if an underground network connecting to warehouses and industrial parks at intervals could reduce the amount of time big rigs and delivery trucks spend on the road?

[mindstalk.livejournal.com]

Cheaper than NASA *and* Russia *and the ESA *and* China and the private firms that have been making rockets for years already...

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

Well if there's anyone that would figure out how to do it, my bets would be on China, I've seen how efficient they are.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

lol.

Hope you're joking.

My old man set up a major international brewer in China; efficient is not the word to describe the Chinese labour force.

[ironhawke.livejournal.com]

"Well, I don't normally fly on the Hindenburg 2.0."

"Hello, airplanes? Yeah, it's blimps. You win!"