Quantcast

Wild Ideas for Stopping Climate Change

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Newsbot

News-o-matic
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
If humanity wants to get serious about stopping human-caused climate change, it's going to...

More...
 

Woody's Workshop

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Messages
4,284
Reaction score
186
Location
Reed City, Michigan (Lower)
First thing that has to happen to change human influenced climate changes is REDUCE the human population.
This planet can not support the amount of humans currently inhabited on it.
 

ttabbal

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
1,082
Reaction score
22
First thing that has to happen to change human influenced climate changes is REDUCE the human population.
This planet can not support the amount of humans currently inhabited on it.
So.... Who are you planning to kill off, and are you personally willing to pull the trigger?

Climate change doesn't have to be related to population at all. It is due to inertia regarding energy sources and inefficient use of energy at the moment, but it doesn't have to be. There are also issues of sprawl and inefficient use of fresh water. All of which are solvable with current technology.
 

ttabbal

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
1,082
Reaction score
22
That would take too long.
Be realistic.
Try again.

I asked who you think should die and if you would be willing to do the deed yourself, not if that represents a practical method of eliminating sufficient people.

The corollary is, are you willing to be one of the dead? If not, how are you not a hypocrite? If overpopulation is the problem, YOU are part of the problem... just saying... :)

While it doesn't help with climate "change", nuclear winter certainly limits warming, and is an efficient method of people elimination...



Interesting thoughts. I haven't read up enough, but how do they propose to deal with the "jerk" problem? Ideal societies like that work on paper until some guy decides to be a jerk. Even communism has good points, until people come into the equation and realize they get the same benefits regardless of how hard they work and/or don't work. I'll watch their videos when I'm not at work though.
 

Incongruent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
1,735
Reaction score
5
Newsbot, do you want an infraction?

Can't you see where discussion of climate change has gotten us before?






(Answer: "Curiosity Rover Finds More Water on Mars

The curiosity rover has found another rock bearing the marks of water erosion. Analysis reveals...

More...)"
 

ttabbal

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
1,082
Reaction score
22
I like the CO2->Ethanol thing. That's a big deal if it can be scaled up enough. If nothing else, it would be a great energy storage medium for cyclic generation like Solar. And it's carbon neutral, the carbon it releases came from the air to begin with..

Like I said though, we can use existing tech to pull off a pivot from fossil fuels. Solar, wind, hydro, geothermal combined could handle the load, particularly when combined with some form of storage to help smooth things out. That could be batteries, capacitors, ethanol, pump water up and drain it back later, etc.. Water waste and agricultural pollution could be controlled a lot with greenhouses, not growing water intensive crops in the desert, etc.. There needs to be a desire to do it, and to pay for it. That's where the issues come up. It's made more difficult by the current crop of "investors" that insist on quarterly returns. Long term investment is what is needed here.

With current technology, Mars or other colonization is not happening. If getting funds to do things on Earth isn't happening, it's nearly impossible to put lots of humans anywhere else. It is orders of magnitude more expensive to do space-based colonies than it would be to stop screwing up the planet we're on. Maybe with much cheaper mass to orbit costs it could be done, but right now? No. That plan would also dump huge quantities of rocket exhaust into the atmosphere. That's not great either. The original link talks about geo-engineering, things like sun shades in space. That's a similar problem with mass to orbit and exhaust as well. With something like a space elevator, sure, we could go there. But with current technology? I just don't see it.

Global mass murder on an unheard of scale is a non-starter. Call it what you want, but killing a few billion people is mass murder. And there's nowhere else to put them that we can achieve in a reasonable way today, assuming you could talk them all into going. Unless you have a Stargate you haven't told us about?
 

Woody's Workshop

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Messages
4,284
Reaction score
186
Location
Reed City, Michigan (Lower)
There is many industries that rely on oil for manufacturing and transportation.
What do you think all them container ships use? BTW, anyone know the astronomical amount one uses in gallons per hour? It will scare you silly.
Also the use of coal, such as making steel. Aluminum is the only mass produced metal that uses electricity only.
The electrical side of it is the easy part, but it ain't enough.
We NEED an alternative energy source, a renewable fuel that works in industry.
Natural Gas is abundant, but for how long?
As we get closer to the end, we are tuning to things like fracking. Debatable, but it is causing damage to the Earths Crust.
The human race has totally set themselves up for failure here, and there is no easy fix.
There is no do overs, no reset, and were playing out...Fast.
And if money is the only thing stopping us from development, then that just shows what a poor race we really are.
 

Incongruent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
1,735
Reaction score
5
Hypocrisy will get you now where.
Try again.
*Hint* It has nothing to do with me personally.
Ditto except for the last part... funny how this sort of thing happens, eh?
Everyone is a hypocrite. (though of different magnitudes) Including myself.
And if the last thing you said were true, you wouldn't have said it because it wouldn't be necessary.
 
Last edited:

hobie1dog

Hi-Fi Nut
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
4,019
Reaction score
437
Location
Cornelius, NC
Interesting thoughts. I haven't read up enough, but how do they propose to deal with the "jerk" problem? Ideal societies like that work on paper until some guy decides to be a jerk. Even communism has good points, until people come into the equation and realize they get the same benefits regardless of how hard they work and/or don't work. I'll watch their videos when I'm not at work though.
Yep, answers are in the video.
 

Incongruent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
1,735
Reaction score
5
Physical pain like I have is NOT normal.
Poverty is my inability to work.
Do you know the response you get when you hobble into a place on a cane and ask for a employment?
I assume it's rejection, though if it's because you're disabled and you are qualified (I'm not suggesting otherwise, those are just the requirements) , then they can't:

https://www.eeoc.gov/facts/ada18.html
 

Lowpuller

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
2,230
Reaction score
12
Incongruent...........only in the perfect world.

Yes, the law is designed to protect, but it is very easy for an employer to work around.

I do however believe you have a higher success rate with government, state, fed or university types of jobs.....especially universities.

There is also a local firm in my area that does ADA surveys, they exclusively hire folks with a disability.
 

Incongruent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
1,735
Reaction score
5
Incongruent...........only in the perfect world.

Yes, the law is designed to protect, but it is very easy for an employer to work around.

I do however believe you have a higher success rate with government, state, fed or university types of jobs.....especially universities.

There is also a local firm in my area that does ADA surveys, they exclusively hire folks with a disability.
I can see how excuses could be easily made and discrimination could still happen.
Very unfortunate.

Thanks for clarifying and the extra information.
 

ThirstyBarbarian

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
8,626
Reaction score
1,224
Newsbot is not only violating forum rules by posting on topics that have resulted in members being banned in the past, but it is also posting absolute crap. The geoengineering ideas in the linked article are mostly garbage. Does it make more sense to cut back our CO2 emissions, or to try to create a sunshade for the entire earth in space --- a project the article says would require 270 delta launches every day for 50 years in order to get the material into space? Which makes more sense?

Is it possible to make an ad hominem attack against Newsbot? I don't think Newsbot is an actual hominem, so... Newsbot, you are a moron. Your ideas stink! When are you going to pull your head out of your News-butt? Beat it, bot! We don't like your kind around here! You are not the droid we're looking for!
 

Incongruent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
1,735
Reaction score
5
Newsbot is not only violating forum rules by posting on topics that have resulted in members being banned in the past, but it is also posting absolute crap. The geoengineering ideas in the linked article are mostly garbage. Does it make more sense to cut back our CO2 emissions, or to try to create a sunshade for the entire earth in space --- a project the article says would require 270 delta launches every day for 50 years in order to get the material into space? Which makes more sense?

Is it possible to make an ad hominem attack against Newsbot? I don't think Newsbot is an actual hominem, so... Newsbot, you are a moron. Your ideas stink! When are you going to pull your head out of your News-butt? Beat it, bot! We don't like your kind around here! You are not the droid we're looking for!
Ditto, the idea is trash, but that's at the fault of the article publisher. How does Newsbot know if it's valid or not, and why should it have a crap filter when there's supposed to be peer review and stuff?
 

ThirstyBarbarian

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
8,626
Reaction score
1,224
Ditto, the idea is trash, but that's at the fault of the article publisher. How does Newsbot know if it's valid or not, and why should it have a crap filter when there's supposed to be peer review and stuff?
I think Newsbot knows EXACTLY what it's doing! Should be called Trollbot. Newsbot just strolls in here, throws a firebomb through the window, and then just walks away whistling...
 
Last edited:

ThirstyBarbarian

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
8,626
Reaction score
1,224
I had already posted the fix but it was deleted from the 49ers thread (at least the mods kept my "hot bacon" post). In any case, here's the cure: https://energy.gov/articles/scientists-accidentally-turned-co2-ethanol.
This is an interesting technology, and it may have some very useful applications, but it isn't really a Global Warming "cure". This process uses electrical energy to turn CO2 and water into ethanol. If the source of electrical power is a power generator that runs on fossil fuel, then you are not getting ahead on either CO2 or energy. I can see three good uses for this, and they all depend on the electricity coming from a renewable source, such as solar or wind

First, you could use it to store energy from an intermittent renewable energy source. For example, use excess solar power during the day to create ethanol, and then burn the ethanol for power at night. That way you could avoid using fossil fuels when the sun isn't shining.

Second, you could use this to turn a renewable power source like solar into ethanol transportation fuel for cars, trucks, etc. That would provide a source of carbon-neutral fuels, which would be very beneficial.

And last, you could use it to turn sunshine into moonshine.
 
Last edited:

dixontj93060

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
13,083
Reaction score
21
If the source of electrical power is a power generator that runs on fossil fuel, then you are not getting ahead on either CO2 or energy.
You do not know if this is true or not. This depends on the efficiency of the transformation of CO2 to Ethanol in large scale, commercial applications.
 

ThirstyBarbarian

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Feb 11, 2013
Messages
8,626
Reaction score
1,224
You do not know if this is true or not. This depends on the efficiency of the transformation of CO2 to Ethanol in large scale, commercial applications.
It's true because of thermodynamics. You can't take one source of potential energy, like a fossil fuel, burn it, use the heat to run a generator and create electricity, then use the electricity to create another form of potential energy, and come out ahead. Each step is less than 100% efficient, so in the end, you have less energy available to use than you started with.
 

dixontj93060

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
13,083
Reaction score
21
It's true because of thermodynamics. You can't take one source of potential energy, like a fossil fuel, burn it, use the heat to run a generator and create electricity, then use the electricity to create another form of potential energy, and come out ahead. Each step is less than 100% efficient, so in the end, you have less energy available to use than you started with.
You have been led to believe there is a correlation between global temperature and CO2 levels in the atmosphere; there isn't. My only real point is that CO2 can be repurposed for something of value.

ImageUploadedByRocketry Forum1484211435.063180.jpg
 
Last edited:

Lowpuller

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
2,230
Reaction score
12
Dixon,

Where did you find the graph, I would like to use it for a work related project but I have to source it,
 

Incongruent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
1,735
Reaction score
5
Guys! I made an amazing scientific breakthrough!
Did you know that there are 'plug and play' solar devices that convert CO2 into sugar?
(plug into ground)

Amazing, huh? Yea, they're called "plants".
Not that efficient (if I remember correctly) but pretty much free after the initial cost and solves our problem better than the other way... Some places plant them around solar panels and use them to feed livestock.
Also, with the right brands, you can ferment it into Boo- I mean, Ethanol.

I don't know if this is correct, but I think so read that currently, the process used to create ethanol is only 50% efficient or so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top