How do you power your reef?

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by RichardS
Maybe it will be easier for you to answer the question I brought up earlier. Deforestation of tropical rainforests is pumping about 30% as much co2 into the atmosphere as fossil fuel use annually. It seems to me stopping that deforestation and actually regrowing cleared forests is an easier task than switching the world over to "green" alternative energy sources and would have a greater impact in a shorter amount of time.

Number one, it's only 30%. Number two, what gave you the idea that deforestation isn't recognized as being a GW factor? Saving the rain forests has been a major conservation group agenda for decades. But, I agree with you. Tropical deforestation is a major problem, not only from release of CO2, but for the reflective cloud cover rain forests generate. It's a double whammy, not to mention the loss in biodiversity (drug discovery if anything else).

Originally posted by RichardS
So why is it that stopping deforestation and regrowing cleared forest is not as high of a priority to you as me getting solar panels and fluorescent light bulbs? I suspect it is because deforestation is being committed by impoverished undeveloped nations and not people like myself who are "guilty" of having a decent life.

It is a priority, but like you said, it's only 30% of fossil fuels, and fossil fuel usage is increasing, forests are decreasing. It doesn't take a genius to extrapolate future impact.

Originally posted by RichardS
Wanting cleaner energy sources, a cleaner environment, I have no problem with that. The green crowd using GW as an excuse to dictate how people should live is what I have a problem with. Heck, Hippie already wants to raise my taxes to pay for it. Of course, he doesn't make enough to even pay taxes so it's easy for him to say that.

Oh, I know, it's soooooo easy. It's sooooooo easy for me. YOU try living on $8,000 a year, and then tell me how easy it is.

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by sayn3ver
Diesel power is underated and over looked in this whole scheme.

I read that in Europe diesel cars make up 40% of new car sales.

Originally posted by sayn3ver
People need to forget electric cars and hydrogen power. Too complicated and far fetched.The only thing electric cars may solve is that carbon emmisions may be reduced to only the power plants intsead of the mobile vehicles, which maybe then we can improve upon our air scrubbers to make buring fossil fuels alittle cleaner.

Lol, no. Electric cars are simple, simple, simple. The first electric car was built in 1888!

Originally posted by sayn3ver
I also don't get why the united states is so damn focused on ethenol production while creating biodiesel is much easier and less energy intensive(as in it may yield a net gain of energy), and we could use biotech to develope a better crop which could produce high oil yields, grows fast, insect and drought resistant, etc etc not to mention the co2 created when burned in the engines would be reused in theory by the plants that are being grown as fuel.

I'm not a huge ethanol fan either. The amount of fertilization required and the use of soybeans grown in former Brazilian rain forests sort of kills it for me. Now, if we only use U.S. corn, then that's a different story. Well, slightly different.

Originally posted by sayn3ver
And finally, life style/living changes should be made. Space is limited. Cities are more efficent than the suburbs, where one gets into their SUV getting 15mpg and has to drive 5 or 10 miles to get to a wawa or to a food store...to the post office. Cities offer high density meaning less distance to travel (bikes and walking and mass transit become more favorable). Logistically its easier for power grids and plumbing and delivery of goods, etc etc. I think the fedual style city planning may be what we should be considering with xtremely tall scapers and dense living areas surrounded by outlying rural area used to farm crops for food and fuel. A bit radical maybe, but w/e. You have to think radically when it comes to these sorts of things. Electricity, planes, physics, nuclear power, etc were all radical ideas for their times, but are now common place.

It's not radical at all. Europe has been doing this for a long time. Too bad China is emulating U.S. suburban sprawl.

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by virginiadiver69
Because there is no connection.
Despite the messes we do make, humans go to extraordinary lengths to preserve natural habitats the Mother Nature herself would destroy.

If nature destroys something, then the ecology is adapted to that destruction. It doesn't alter the overall picture like AGW will.

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by virginiadiver69
By the way..have you had a chance to see any of the Planet Earth special on the Discovery channel lately? After watching several episodes I am more convinced than ever that human beings have ZERO influence on any of Earths natural cycles.

LMAO! This sums up your thinking process.

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by virginiadiver69
I heard a stat today that maybe someone could clear up for me.
The Co2 produced by humans amounts to about 4% of all Co2 in the atmosphere. Is this true?

No, not true. It's more like a 4% increase every year. That may not sound like much, but it adds up quite quickly.

[wlagarde]

Originally posted by HippieSmell
No, not true. It's more like a 4% increase every year. That may not sound like much, but it adds up quite quickly.

So Hippie, Are you a student? At your salary rate I believe you must be an undergrad and at best a grad student. Certainly not a post-doc as the salary rate on a NRSA is at least 40K. Please enlighten us.

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by wlagarde
So Hippie, Are you a student? At your salary rate I believe you must be an undergrad and at best a grad student. Certainly not a post-doc as the salary rate on a NRSA is at least 40K. Please enlighten us.

No. What's the point?

[wlagarde]

Originally posted by HippieSmell
No. What's the point?

Your an Undergrad - The point is you are a green (pun intended), wet behind the ears, non-credible nobody.

[HippieSmell]

Originally posted by wlagarde
Your an Undergrad - The point is you are a green (pun intended), wet behind the ears, non-credible nobody.

LOL! Careful, you're going to hurt my feelings. I think you're just embarrassed that your arguments are getting beaten by a "green (pun intended), wet behind the ears, non-credible nobody".

[wlagarde]

Originally posted by HippieSmell
LOL! Careful, you're going to hurt my feelings. I think you're just embarrassed that your arguments are getting beaten by a "green (pun intended), wet behind the ears, non-credible nobody".

LOL - Now you really are a joke.

[Rosseau]

I don't think being youthful is a bad thing here.

The advantages of having studied more modern issues and findings in school are among the benefits of people like Hippie. Furthermore why should anyone be afraid the perspective of someone who is "green" and "wet behind the ears"? If the proper research and supporting facts are used in these arguments it shouldn't really matter how new to the system someone is.

Wake up, look at all of the information out there and leave the personal comments out of it.

[Rosseau]

-

[wlagarde]

Originally posted by Rosseau
-

Rosseau - My prior comments apply to you too.

[billsreef]

This one is done before I have to borrow Buster from BrianD.

[chimp]