Quantcast
What do you think should be done about climate change?

Forums - General Discussion - What do you think should be done about climate change?

CuCabeludo said:
super_etecoon said:
We could make it a mission to plant as many trees as possible. This is actually fun, brings more beauty to communities and country sides, and is really inexpensive, especially when you coordinate with volunteer groups, churches, schools, etc. Trees are one of the greatest consumers of CO2 and also exhale that wonderful O2 we all crave. It's so easy to set a workable goal around this concept and it would give the current and future generations a bit of pride in making the world a better place. No technology here, just good old fashion agriculture.

Certainly solar is making a lot of impact in many areas of the country and world. Let's continue down that path with more and more ambitious goals. I really think we should be pushing for more solar cells on just about everything we use. The technology is there and even if it just gives us miniscule results, it would help offset a large amount of energy on a global scale.

Encourage community gardens and local farmers markets. This is a win-win in so many ways. Communities taht garden together can share the abundance of their resources. They'll also spend less time purchasing produce packed in plastics, which is a sad trend that is occurring right in front of our eyes (why two tomatoes need a protective platic barrier around them is beyond me).

You're wrong, plants produce as much CO2 as us because they also need to break the sugar they produce through photosystesis by respiration to produce energy. The biggest procuders of O2 are the microscopic algae that live in the oceans.

The O2 output by Amazon forest, for example, is null, because it is also consumed by both plants and animals because they both breath. Only people that never studied even basic biology believe in the falacy that Amazon is the lungs of the world.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-18/plant-respiration-co2-findings-anu-canberra/9163858

Check your facts before you call people wrong.

That last sentence in your response is pure gold. Here's a link to basc biology:

https://www.rookieparenting.com/do-plants-breathe-science-experiment/

"During daytime, photosynthesis produces oxygen and glucose faster than respiration consumes it. Photosynthesis also uses carbon dioxide faster than respiration produces it. Oxygen surplus is released into the air and unused glucose stored in the plant for later use."



Gameplay > Graphics

Substance > Style

Art Direction > Realism

Around the Network

You heard about the melting ice? I did some research and plotted this graph of the ice area since the beginning of the data set in 2006 for the Northern Hemisphere. There is a huge amount of seasonal variation but no trend.

https://nsidc.org/data/G02186/versions/1

ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02186/masie_1km_allyears_extent_sqkm.csv



The people that don't take this climate crisis seriously should have their opinions disregarded because obviously they're living in a fantasy world where there are no consequences for the haphazard unsustainable way we've been living and treating our planet.



 

We need to not just reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and logging, but we also need to adapt to climate change.

More of us should develop floating homes as sea levels rise, and we as a society need to aid in the re-population of endangered species.



Some days I just blow up.

numberwang said:

You heard about the melting ice? I did some research and plotted this graph of the ice area since the beginning of the data set in 2006 for the Northern Hemisphere. There is a huge amount of seasonal variation but no trend.

https://nsidc.org/data/G02186/versions/1

ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02186/masie_1km_allyears_extent_sqkm.csv

>You heard about the melting ice? I did some research and plotted this graph of the ice area since the beginning of the data set in 2006 for the Northern Hemisphere. There is a huge amount of seasonal variation but no trend.

"No trend", and you're basing that off of what?  There's literally a whole entire subject dedicated to studying how you can get facts out of a mess of data, and you're seemingly dismissing the possibility of any trend.  

A simple analysis shows: 

2016 Ice loss: 410,815 km^2.  

2017 Ice gain: 270,621 km^2

2018 Ice loss: 202,676 km^2

This is simply comparing the average change of a particular day in one year to the same day in the next year. That doesn't necessarily give the actual values, because there are other considerations such as leap years.

That isn't a lot of data, but even that shows there was an average of 300,000 km^2 less ice on any given day when comparing 2018 and 2015.  That difference of ice isn't going to be very apparent when simply looking at a graph, that tends to have similar peaks and lows, even if the actual trends in between are very different.  

>Ice free Arctic.

Firstly I want to mention what this means.  They are specifically talking about during the summer months.  

Secondly most predictions of when that will happen aren't predicting it until 2030-2050.  Al Gore's prediction was even more extreme than even the most extreme predictions that were put out by scientists.  

Anyone can throw out an idiotic prediction.

Even genuine predictions being wrong doesn't mean anything about whether the analysis is correct or not.  



Around the Network

Just two off the top of my head:
- Actively punish anybody who invests in coal mines, new oil wells or fossil fuels in general
- Remove the fuel excise from fossil fuel companies, redirect the billions that go to mining companies every year into R&D into, and rapid implementation of, renewable energy sources (In Australia, our tax money pays for the fuel mining companies use, obviously corrupt and immoral)



I acknowledge that the Earth's climate is changing. I am not convinced that it's a problem though, and I am nearly certain it is not an urgent matter. Since at least the 1970s there have been constant warnings about imminent disaster. Thus far, 100% of them were either completely false, or have had wildly exaggerated timelines.

If we stipulate that something needs to be done, the very low hanging fruit is to stop discouraging the development of nuclear power. That's certainly where Americans should start. Europeans should stop discouraging the use of GMOs, as that just exacerbates the climate impact of agriculture. I don't know enough about the other regions to know what stupid things they should stop doing. But, certainly nuclear power and GMOs are beneficial in combating pollution in general, and should be used everywhere possible.



Move to a place with a better climate. Living next to a rising sea can be filed under living next to an active vulcano, flood zone, tornado alley, Florida, etc. Oh no the river flooded again, so many dead, so much destruction, lets rebuild in the same place...

For now it's no use. Summers get hotter, turn up the AC, use more power. Winters get colder, turn up the heat, use more fossil fuels. Steady as she goes.



JRPGfan said:

Im talking about apples, and your mentioning oranges.

Takeing steps to limit polution doesnt mean going back to a "dark age" without industry or technology.
Please dont quote me anymore (with this topic), your clearly trolling in this thread, so lets just nip this in the bud.

Nearly all of them involve cutting down on production/consumption in some way so exactly what 'steps' are you talking about here ? 

Answer this very carefully ... 



fatslob-:O said:

Nearly all of them involve cutting down on production/consumption in some way so exactly what 'steps' are you talking about here ? 

Answer this very carefully ... 

How about developing technologies to 1.) absorb CO2, 2.) create energy without coal/oil production, 3.) convert transportation to cleaner energy

Among other things.