Slashdot Mirror
Technology's Role In a Climate Solution (thebulletin.org)
Lasrick writes: If the world is to avoid severe, widespread, and irreversible impacts (PDF), carbon emissions must decrease quickly. Achieving such cuts, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, depends in part on the availability of "key technologies." But arguments abound against faith in technological solutions to the climate problem. Electricity grids may be ill equipped to accommodate renewable energy produced on a massive scale. Many technological innovations touted in the past have failed to achieve practical success. Even successful technologies will do little good if they mature too late to help avert climate disaster. In this debate in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, experts from India, the United States, and Bangladesh address the following questions: To what extent can the world depend on technological innovation to address climate change? And what promising technologies—in generating, storing, and saving energy, and in storing greenhouse gases or removing them from the atmosphere—show most potential to help the world come to terms with global warming?
>> Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, experts from India, the United States, and Bangladesh
No China? Well, then, enjoy your BS session.
Here is a quote direct from the "article":
"The United States and Canada must reduce their energy consumption by about 90 percent; Europe, Australasia, and Japan must do so by about 75 percent. Cities must shrink drastically and energy differentials between urban and rural areas must disappear. Localism must be prioritized and governance decentralized. Uniform risk and emissions standards must be implemented for everyone."
Is it any wonder no one sane takes you global warming nuts seriously at this point?
Use a super sophisticated algorithm to remove the "adjustments" that are introduced into satellite surface temperature datasets that artificially show exaggerated global warming..
Use it to troll the climatards for believing in the left's latest tired old tripe.
All of this is surprisingly achievable by expanding electrical grid and moving to all-nuclear energy generation. Unfortunately, opposition from the green movement to nuclear doomed us to pursuit of ineffective solar and wind solutions.
Seriously, people just have a huge appetite for consuming junk. We've created a whole economic/social/political system predicated on consuming more and more junk. It keeps people under control as they slave away doing pointless stuff to get other pointless stuff. I don't see how you can break that system right now without risking massive social stability issues.
They are building hundreds of nuclear power plants...will the world follow?
The AGW crowd is like my ex; always complaining about a problem but always rejecting the solutions.
Hint: Higher taxes and killing economies are not the solution.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
They are building hundreds of nuclear power plants...will the world follow?
They're also building coal plants just as fast as they can. They're just building plants, period. They don't give a shit what the outputs are like, as usual.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Future generations will marvel at the fact that we burned coal to illuminate empty highways at night. It will seem unconscionable that much of the power generated in the destruction of our environment allayed only the most trivial of concerns, if it served any useful purpose at all.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.