Clare Hoard: There are a few good alternatives springing up. Algae is promising. Also I think the jojoba has some promise since it can be grown on marginal farms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jojoba_oilIt would be nice not putting trillions of dollars into OPEC and our enemies wallets.
Marcel Then: I agree with your idea! But, let me guess, even though there are 10,000 scientists that truly know and understand global warming, their panel will include ONE pro scientist, ONE con scientist, ONE religious insight person, and ONE gay person just to "balance" things out. Then the network will VOTE on who did the best job based on their "quip-y one liners". The night will end with the nice summary that "we can all agree to disagree". Meanwhile, FOX will hire the scientists from the coal, oil, and gas industries to tell us how their new technology will be CLEAN carbon dioxide and everyone will nod their heads and say "that's a great idea, lets give them tax breaks".! Sorry, ever since networks did away with their "news" departments and turned it over to "entertainment" I've given up on them ever doing anything constructive or educational due to their interest in "ratings" and "pleasing advertisers"....Show more
Judie Kise: problably not, but they might surprise you keep faith in humanity sista
Lulu Bukowiecki: there are several companies currently utilizing proprietary forms of certain algae, grown under controlled conditions as a source of oil for biodiesel, go to the 'Sunland Energy' website, they will give you their sales pitch. Actually, vegetable oil is an excellent alternative for diesel and Jet A fuel substitutes. The transesterification process of converting that oil to diesel substitute is relatively easy, and produces an excellent fuel that is renewable as long as the sun shines and it rains... Coal gasification to produce a coal based jet fuel is also an excellent means of producing fuel liquids. Your content! ion that the world would have to starve itself to use these fu! els is not correct, no matter what your biology teacher believes-your biology teacher's prejudice against that fuel may come from another agenda, for example he may be against converting so called 'rain forests' to productive Palmyra plantations-be aware, that is a philosophical difference of opinion on environmental issues, not a food production problem...you may also have decided that ethanol is not acceptable, perhaps your class bought into the argument that it takes more fossil fuels to produce than it yields in energy-that in fact is not correct, (see ethanol from brazil or hawaii) although if the conversion is done poorly, that can be the case-there is significant misinformation circulating on the web about these and other potential energy sources for the future-do not put yourself in the disingenuous position of believing that all of them are true...good luck, and do not take my word for it either, learn it on your own......Show more
Jon Bergmeier: Apparently I! srael is very interested in this technology which even feeds them smokestack emissions for a double global warming curtailing effect. "Founded in 1999 to develop and commercialize micro-algae-derived products for the nutraceutical and cosmeceutical industries, Algatech's 25-strong production facility based in Kibbutz Ketura will soon begin collaborating with Israeli-US start-up GreenFuel Technologies Corporation to work towards a common goal: developing cost effective, energy efficient fuel made from micro-algae feeding off of carbon dioxide emissions."http://www.israel21c.org/bin/en.jsp?enDispWho=Arti......Show more
Marielle Hedeiros: Bio fuels still must be mixed with gasoline, you can't use them by themselves to run the average car. In the case of ethanol, the final mix is about 5% ethanol and 95% gasoline, so you do get by with a bit less oil. But like electric cars, the whole idea is not practical due to cost. Biofuels use as much energy to produce as they giv! e, so there's no saving there.
Chastity Doderer: The notion of gl! obal warming has been put to rest.No one, outside of a few scrawny eggheads dependent on the funding and some short-time liberal politicians, is worried about it.
Toby Caswell: The DEBATE has already occured within the scientific community (via journals, evidence and research). If anyone wishes to debate the issue they can do so within the scientifc community and let their "work" prove their argument. Simple really.The general public should be reported the scientific evidence regarding climate change (influences and risks), including the uncertainities and possible scenarios.If new evidence comes to light that science agrees alters the influences and risks associated with climate change should be reported to the general public (media shouldn't jump on one paper alone, they should await for the paper to be properly circulated and reviewed within the scientific community before reporting it as fact)....Show more
Boris Hadsall: Many of us are aware of it. I have be! en trying to promote an ethanol plant for CO2 production to enrich the water the algae grown in to improve their production. Colorado State University has been working on the project for several years and National Energy Research Lab has been downplaying the idea for a long time. There are other viable sources of CO2 that could also be used. But not even the Global Warming nuts are getting on the band wagon. Sad All of our energy intimately is derived from the sun and photosynthesis which requires CO2 but it is supposed to be a ban thing....Show more
Scot Sepulbeda: climate change is not man made at all. Humans produce very little carbon compared to the natural environment around us. Volcano's alone produce an insane amount of CO2. Way more then thousands of humans could do in a lifetime. http://injimsopinion.blogspot.com/2009/12/global-w...
Hai Biggart: It's funny when there are 7 answers on my question at 1am (central time) on 8/17/2012 and there are 15 thumbs! up or down on one persons opinion. LET'S DO THIS!
Krystal Cordov! ano: Well, it's about much deeper - and more sinister - than just generating some more tax revenue. The AGW fraud is actually genocidal in intent; the purpose is to halt technological and economic development, so that Gordy's masters (e.g., the primarily Anglo-Dutch finance oligarchy) can return the world to feudalism. This evil goal requires that the world's population be reduced from the present level of some 6.7 billion people to well under 2 billion very rapidly - a genocide many times worse than that perpetrated by Adolph Hitler. This is the explicit policy of the British monarchy and the institutions they control (i.e., the so-called "Optimum Population Trust" and Prince Philip's World Wildlife Fund)....Show more
Sol Allphin: I actually agree that this is a good idea. More scientists coming forward showing the world that people like Monckton et al are complete charlatans. Of course, hopefully, before the debate occurs everything that the alternate side will use ! will be forwarded to the other side so they can premake their arguments. and only items will be put forward that are in the scientific literature or the scientific data. I agree completely. But this would purely be for the sake of the public as the science in the science community is fairly secure....Show more
Sheldon Lally: America's huge. We need to help out small countries like Japan. We can't just focus on ourselves because we would seem super self-centered. Other countries help us as we speak though. News just doesn’t focus on it because they're usually small impacts in the 51 states we do have but of course it all counts for something.
Mark Villifana: I misspelled major (mojor)! Sorry!I know we can do this fairly!
Idell Dufort: 2 hours of summations per side.
Lana Uliano: Yeah, lots of climate porn on TV telling kids that their puppy will drown because daddy drove to work, but "by their deeds shall ye know them". Gordon Brown will lecture us ! on what WE should do, whilst doing nothing about it. He pushed through ! a third runway at Heathrow over the objection of his ministers. He won't push through new nuclear power stations, even though we are going to run out of energy soon. He lives in a fairytale land where renewables will generate our energy. Maybe they will one day, but not for the next fifty years or so until the technology is there..And do you notice that whilst nothing is being done he is pushing like to mad for cap and trade which will make the traders in the City insanely wealthy? Like that will fix anything..His mistakes. His promises. We pay.....Show more
Rubi Romo: Yes, there seems to be some good potential there. The New York Times had an article on it last year:http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/us/02algae.html?...
Dexter Dingus: The science of global warming predates the politics by almost a century (Svante Arhenius 1893 - Margaret Thatcher 1980). Sadly many politicians have seized the opportunity to use it as an excuse to impose financial penalties thr! ough various Cap and Trade schemes and fines. Much of this money is being diverted into other government departments and not being used to finance environmental projects.At the end of the day governments will impose taxes regardless, if it weren't via global warming it would be through some other method so we'll all end up paying the same anyway. It would be much more preferable however if governments were more open and transparent.This current spell is now the coldest since Jan 1996 and the snowiest since Feb 1979. However, we're a long way short of the exceptionally cold winter of 62-63 and the intense snowfalls of 46-47. If your grandma is old enough she'll certainly remember these two winters.Notice anything unusual about these particularly harsh winters... they're at more or less regular intervals, approx 15-16 years apart. The last harsh winter was 95-96 so we were due for another cold one either this year or next. We may have to wait until approx 2025 before se! eing another winter like this one.We did have quite a bit of snow in Fe! b 09, this was the result of short term cooling caused by an event known as La Nina (cool ocean currents) which happens about once every 7 years.Have a word with your grandma and ask her if winters these days are any different from when she was a child - she'll tell you there used to be a lot more snow back then. The reason that snowy winters are now comparatively few and far between is because a gradually warming climate makes them less and less likely....Show more
Bud Espenshade: I don't think there's a right or wrong answer to this question. You will never know until it actually happens. To be honest, if America gives more than takes, we will get help.
Mildred Pombo: Yes, biofuel from algae oil is one of the most promising alternative fuel prospects, along with electric vehicles. I've started writing a wiki article on the subject, as a matter of fact. See the link below.
Vern Serratos: only you can prevent forest fires.But really why don't we just us! e fuel as fuel.
Rubi Romo: 4 hours of debate on 4 different days? Just a thought.
Dallas Bartolini: My job is working in a lab which gets very, very large amounts of money to research a variety of different aspects of algae oil, as well as various aspects of biodiesel production. I can speak from first hand experience that there is a very real problem with extraction of oil from raw algae. The yields tend to be very low, and a fairly large quantity of raw algae is required to get even a usable amount of oil. At the present, I'm able to recover about 1 gram of oil from 20 grams of dried algae. Even once the oil is recovered, it must be "upgraded" by cooking it under high temperature and pressure in the presence of a catalyst. While the use of algae oil as a fuel source does hold some promise, it has a long way to go before it's practical....Show more
Abraham Ladick: I think this would be a good idea for the whole world to see.What do you think?
Eli Tr! apeni: To answer this question, why don't you look at what internationa! l help was given to the USA after Hurricane Katrina? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_respons...By the way, I am Canadian so I'd appreciate it if you read the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_response_to_...
Lewis Ranft: 2 sides:A threat to our exhistance and a mojor inconvenience to man&Not a threat to man
Sherri Drakos: It won't happen as warmon 'scientists' wouldn't want to debate real scientists who have facts instead of hopelessly inadequate models and scare stories.
Janita Tetlow: Climate change is done by the sun and only the sun. When the sun has 110 or more sunspots on a daily average the planets warm up and become comfortable and productive. When the sunspot activity drops below 80 on a daily average the wolds cool off into colder and more disruptive climates with severe weather. Currently the sunspot numbers are below 30 a month not daily and real scientists are prepping for ice age conditions in 6 to 8 years if the! sun remains quiescent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galileihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_reviewhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_methodhttp://www.examiner.com/x-4648-Atlanta-Weather-Exa...http://docinthemachine.com/2007/02/15/flawedpeers/http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.htmlhttp://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message30...http://m.climaterealists.com/index.php?id=2516http://minnesotansforglobalwarming.com/m4gw/2009/0...http://swampie.wordpress.com/2009/01/11/what-the-v......Show more
Porfirio Gartland: Many countries would.
Vern Serratos: YES... open and honest debate is exactly the exposure this issue needs.But good luck getting any Warmists to debate, they won't because they get their butts kicked.. and bad.This is a GREAT debate to watch between Lord Monckton and a Warmist at The National Press Club.The audience is full of media types that are all Warmists and hostile to Lord Monckton (a skeptic) but at the end of the debate, ! since the Warmist argument was so weak, Monckton had won by a factor of! TEN to ONE !! Watch this and you will understand why Warmists REFUSE to debate.http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/inde...Lord Monckton has been trying to get Al Gore to debate him for years, Gore just runs and hideshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gRFh8KdgKg
May Stands: This is a well researched area, and now many small companies are getting onto developing this at commercial scales. Search the Internet for "photobioreactor" and you'll find that people are taking cyanobacteria (blue-green algae that's found in ponds). You bubble air through it in strong sunlight and... the CO2 in the air is converted into Oxygen, and the residue contails simple... oils!...Show more
Chris Rosenkranz: petition for change.org with my petition to acknowledge middle eastern green parties exist might help. it is to U.N. and world governments .signn and circulate please.same for u.s. green party.
Conrad Puleio: Many would help, yet there are many that wouldn't. The U.S! . helps many countries in need ,however, there are many countries in need that we don't help.
Verdie Wollen: if the united states had a huge disaster like earth quake of big floods or something big like what happened to japan do you think other countries will come help us like we help them. i kind of think that they wont and honestly that kind of scares me.
Shawnna Kusky: Look, I am really skeptical. I see all these cleverly made TV ads to do with climate change, and acting on CO2, but I don't really see any change, I mean, Britain has had more snow this winter and the previous 2 winters for something like 15-20 years. My grandma told me that the last snow we had worth talking about was 1981. So if this is the case, what is Mr. Brown on aboutV8 forever....Show more
Ervin Laeger: Yes, here's an article: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/earth/4213...
Karey Dunken: Outside of a few gesture donations I don;t believe any other country would help. ! But don;t worry about it, we have more than enough resources to handle ! most problems, it's more the management of those resources that would cause problems. If it was a disaster that overtook the whole nation, I would say it would probably overtake the whole world so we would all be on the same ship.
Rodolfo Merel: Well, well, well. We can see from minti that an honest debate is impossible. Minti is obviously hardline Marxist greenie. As Ehrich "We have already conferred and the debate is over. We have discussed this in detail among our top scientists, Gore, Hansen, Ehrlich and Mann. 99% of us agree. (Obviously, Al had a few dissenting hairs on his head BUT ve vill take care of that!) The rest of you peons do not understand our complex computations. Even we, the top scientists of the universe (Gore, Hansen, Ehrlich and Mann) have a tuff time understanding these complexities. Al even put out a movie and you dunderheads couldn't understand these such complexities. Even our computer model smoked after five minutes because these complexities! are so complex. Even our brains smoked (Al's smoke smelled like weed) because us top scientists (Gore, Hansen, Ehrlich and Mann) are so much superior, we finally prevailed. Al developed claustrophobia from these strained mental tasks and had to buy extra houses this task was so hard. Zo no debate is needed. Ve vill take care of you.) The honest debate will never happen as the real greenie agenda would be exposed. This debate could encompass how much money each side is getting for their support of their position and it is almost 1000 to 1 in favor of the greenies. One of the fathers of Germany’s modern green movement, Professor Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt, a social democrat and green activist, decided to author a climate science skeptical book together with geologist/paleontologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning. Vahrenholt’s skepticism started when he was asked to review an IPCC report on renewable energy. He found hundreds of errors. When he pointed them out, IPCC officials simply br! ushed them aside. Stunned, he asked himself, “Is this the way they ap! proached the climate assessment reports?â€If they aren't open to opposing views amongst themselves then they surly wouldn't be open to a fair debate with 'outsiders".We can right now see how the greenies view dissenters. Quote by Will Harper, Princeton University physicist, former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy: “I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism....I have spent a long research career studying physics that is closely related to the greenhouse effect....Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science. The earth's climate is changing now, as it always has. There is no evidence that the changes differ in any qualitative way from those of the past.â€Pat, I know you are sincere when you say, "I know we can do this fairly!" but you don't understand the greenies. They have more on the table than just a scientific opinion. They have wealth redistribution an! d changes of governments on their mind.Quote by Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister: “No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.â€Quote by Ottmar Edenhoffer, high level UN-IPCC official: "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy...Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization...One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."How much clearer can you get and I repeat part of the quote. "One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy." WHAT? It clearly is not a scientific issue but a political one.Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "The goal now is a! socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature's proper steward! and society's only hope."Quote by Richard Benedik, former U.S./UN bureaucrat: "A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.Quote by Gus Hall, former leader of the Communist Party USA: "Human society cannot basically stop the destruction of the environment under capitalism. Socialism is the only structure that makes it possible." You see the big guns who have a political or economic vested interest will not tolerate the possibility of exposure. Just on this site you will see that the greenies conspire and use sock puppet accounts to stifle true scientist's answers. (Particularly Maxx's and mine.) If they do that to a petty site like this what do you think they would do to a full out debate?This is a major, major issue and there are groups who have been setting this up for years and they will not allow an honest debate to disrupt their agenda....Show more
No comments:
Post a Comment