Slashdot Mirror
Blueprints For Taming the Climate Crisis
mdsolar sends this story from the NY Times:
Here's what your future will look like if we are to have a shot at preventing devastating climate change. Within about 15 years every new car sold in the United States will be electric. ... Up to 60 percent of power might come from nuclear sources. And coal's footprint will shrink drastically, perhaps even disappear from the power supply. This course, created by a team of energy experts, was unveiled on Tuesday in a report for the United Nations (PDF) that explores the technological paths available for the world's 15 main economies to both maintain reasonable rates of growth and cut their carbon emissions enough by 2050 to prevent climatic havoc. It offers a sobering conclusion: We might be able to pull it off. But it will take an overhaul of the way we use energy, and a huge investment in the development and deployment of new energy technologies. Significantly, it calls for an entirely different approach to international diplomacy on the issue of how to combat climate change.
I look forward to the enlightened, reasonable debate to follow. Please chain down your chairs and pop some popcorn.
Did you bother to note the rather important fact that none of our modern crop foods were alive during that time period. Adaptation of plant and animal life to major geologic changes doesn't happen in a century.
The problem we face isn't one of extinction of life on earth, but the inviability of meta-stable ecosystems we and our economies rely on.
Why does this guy have so many dedicated fans?
You're the guys who have this whole fictionalized "al gore obsession" where you pretend there's a cult of personality. You don't actually need to have one over Watt. He's just one shithead. Let it go.
Here's your Liar cite promised that a new examination was neutral and he'd base his views on that.
Immediately rejected it when it showed the scientific consensus. He's a liar. Established.
Shilling established
Now will you PLEASE stop defending this scum?
the longer we wait, the more expensive it becomes.
If energy complains and religious fundies where pushing a false debate with lies, we would have been making small changes for 20 years.
Switching to cleaner technologies will not bankrupt America, don't be stupid.
China and India are also putting money into clean energies.
IF America would stop listening to denier and start a big project, it would BOOST our economy, and drive new technologies developed by american companies.
Remember, big project do not literally burn money. Changing the grid to something 21st century? Yeah, that would cost a lot/. which goes to American workers, who then buy things and everyone pays taxes. The circle continues.
Spending money to develop small Solar furnace project, say 5MW, on farms mean workers making money cheaper at cleaner energy.
spending the billions on have a 10K sqr miles solar farm moves money through the economy, provides cleaner energy.
The idea the moving to cleaner energy will bankrupt America is complete nonsense.
If 8 years ago people actually starting being rational about the science and started actining, the burst bubble would have had a much SMALLER impact.
It's funny., developing a pipeline the will provide a 100 jobs for a short time is good for the economy, but switching to a clean energy that will create many thousands of long term jobs is some how bad for the economy.
And this doesn't even get into the fact that it means less dependence on other countries.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
that website has been debunked with scioence so many time, it's not even funny anymore. He doesn't even know what a 'log' is, mathematically speaking.
paid shill:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
The Heartland Institute published Watts' preliminary report on weather station data, titled Is the U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable?.[12] Watts has been featured as a speaker at Heartland Institute's International Conference on Climate Change, for which he acknowledges receiving payment.[55]
bottom line: His science is wrong, he misrepresents data so bad I don't think he really understand it. He never offers any data to show that the science behind AGW(which leads to GCC) is wrong.
IT's pretty simple science; which is why you never here anyone talk about actual science,. but create nonsense, ad homs and cherry pick.
You want to look at the industry that makes the most money from spreading denier lies? it would be the media.
The media makes a shit ton of money off this false debate.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on