A serious consideration; what if Climate Change believers got their way

[spacejamz]

What is going to happen in developing countries like China and India where their BILLIONS of citizens are now getting a taste of modern technology (cars, electronics, etc)? As they get more accustomed to these new luxuries that will require significant amounts of energy, they sure as hell won't let it go easily in the name of saving the planet, especially while we enjoy have been enjoying those luxuries here for decades...

Aren't Russia, China and India's oil consumption already going through the roof now and their projected use over the next 20 years just outright scary??

 

[zsdersw]

So my point is irrelevant because its true? How is explaining the drawbacks to an alternative energy solution you mentioned irrelevant? I think you need a vocabulary lesson. That and you are arguing just for the sake of arguing again.

It's irrelevant because, as I said, everything that's considered "alternative energy" has drawbacks and issues big and small that have to be overcome. Anyone who knows about these alternatives is also already well aware of these challenges. Bringing them up again is one of those Captain Obvious moments.

 

[davmat787]

Anyone else following what is being done at the National Ignition Facility? They have the worlds most powerful laser, and for a brief second, generate fusion. They do this by aiming something like 16 immensely powerful lasers at the fuel which consists of some simple elements I believe.

More than any other tech I have heard of, this holds the most promise. They can power a whole city for a year on a glass of seawater!

And if you haven't heard of this, you probably have seen it. The obliteration chamber of NIF was featured in the latest Star Trek movie as the Warp Drive.

 

[Jaskalas]

Anyone else following what is being done at the National Ignition Facility? They have the worlds most powerful laser, and for a brief second, generate fusion. They do this by aiming something like 16 immensely powerful lasers at the fuel which consists of some simple elements I believe.

More than any other tech I have heard of, this holds the most promise. They can power a whole city for a year on a glass of seawater!

And if you haven't heard of this, you probably have seen it. The obliteration chamber of NIF was featured in the latest Star Trek movie as the Warp Drive.

Can we burn fuel til that's ready in 100 years? The premise of this thread is that we've decided we can't wait that long.

 

[DominionSeraph]

 

[Paratus]

How long until the world population doubles?

It's very clear to me that at some point resources WILL be rationed. If we wish to reduce the resources currently used, amidst the backdrop of an ever growing population... rationing would have to begin immediately.

To stop large scale CO2 emissions, you WILL be telling the working class of Americans that they don't get the privilege of energy. Be it electricity or fuel for a vehicle / lawn mower, etc. Life as we know it would fundamentally be changed. The 1% will still live like Kings, the 99% will be wondering what a warm meal is.

Possibly never. Birth rates are slowing and there's a reasonable chance world population peaks bellow 10B before the end of the century.

I still think the US should be pushing for this by finding ways to sell natural gas turbines and advanced nuclear reactors to third world countries. Push up their standard of living, birth rates go down, CO2 production drops, climate eventually gets better and less people are starving. Plus we get to sell a bunch of stuff. Seams win-win to me.

 

[davmat787]

Can we burn fuel til that's ready in 100 years? The premise of this thread is that we've decided we can't wait that long.

Sorry if I didn't add anything germane to the thread, don't want to derail.

However, I don't think NIF commercial level success is 100 years off. Definitely 30-50, but what the hell do I know? 😛

 

[boomerang]

Climate change believers are fanatics. Members of a cult. As such, rational thinking takes a back seat to their beliefs. It's a form of religion to them. The OP brings up some absolutely fantastic points with valid arguments. These points, these arguments will be dismissed by CC fanatics. Negative consequences to what they want accomplished just don't register with them. They want something to be done, they want someone to pay for it.

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Intelligent people realize this. Cultists don't care.

In the seventies, Florida was predicted to be underwater by 2010. It didn't happen. How about we let the CC cultists tell us what steps were taken to avert that disaster? We can then model our future path on those changes. We should be guaranteed results. After all, whatever was done worked for Florida. Our nation and our economy survived too. This is truly the blueprint for dealing with climate change.

Charles Manson, Jim Jones, Adolf Hitler, David Koresh and L. Ron Hubbard are all easily recognized cult leaders. They operated at different levels but all attained notoriety. Al Gore could make that list if, with the help of our government, money is taken from those that can least afford it and is given to those that need it the least in the name of Climate Change. If we stand by and let it happen we deserve what we get.

 

[soulcougher73]

How long until the world population doubles?

It's very clear to me that at some point resources WILL be rationed. If we wish to reduce the resources currently used, amidst the backdrop of an ever growing population... rationing would have to begin immediately.

To stop large scale CO2 emissions, you WILL be telling the working class of Americans that they don't get the privilege of energy. Be it electricity or fuel for a vehicle / lawn mower, etc. Life as we know it would fundamentally be changed. The 1% will still live like Kings, the 99% will be wondering what a warm meal is.

According to this about 61 years.
http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/populationgrow.htm
We will either need to limit reproduction or have major wars killing mass amounts of "other" people.

 

[soulcougher73]

lol

 

[GaiaHunter]

It will be awesome for the billion or so it can be sustained.

The other 5 billion or so - f.... them.

 

[xBiffx]

It's irrelevant because, as I said, everything that's considered "alternative energy" has drawbacks and issues big and small that have to be overcome. Anyone who knows about these alternatives is also already well aware of these challenges. Bringing them up again is one of those Captain Obvious moments.

I wasn't talking about everything, neither were you. You specifically mentioned hydrogen fuel cells. You still need a lesson on the word irrelevant. What I said might be moot but its not irrelevant as it still applies to hydrogen fuel cells and the production of hydrogen.

And as for captain obvious, not everyone knows about fuel cells and not everyone who does knows the drawbacks to hydrogen production.

Get over yourself.

 

[K1052]

First, batteries need to get better. Second, we need a better way to get hydrogen. Currently the most prevalent way is still through reforming from non renewable fossil fuels. This process uses much more energy than what is produced from the hydrogen.

There has been a great deal of progress and this might prove to be the key in the future but we still have a long way to go.

The only real way to generate the volume of hydrogen that would be required is via catalyzed reactions which require a bunch of heat....most likely supplied new high temp reactors.

 

[glenn1]

The only real way to generate the volume of hydrogen that would be required is via catalyzed reactions which require a bunch of heat....most likely supplied new high temp reactors.

More simply, hydrogen is a storage medium rather than a power source in its own right with current and foreseeable technologies. You can replace petroleum feeder stocks with hydrogen for vehicles, power plants, etc. but you still have to obtain the hydrogen in the first place since it doesn't exist freely for extraction in the environment like petroleum.

Asking to convert to using hydogen rather than petroleum is akin to asking automobiles to be battery powered, without discussing how the batteries will get charged in the first place.

 

[K1052]

More simply, hydrogen is a storage medium rather than a power source in its own right with current and foreseeable technologies. You can replace petroleum feeder stocks with hydrogen for vehicles, power plants, etc. but you still have to obtain the hydrogen in the first place since it doesn't exist freely for extraction in the environment like petroleum.

Asking to convert to using hydogen rather than petroleum is akin to asking automobiles to be battery powered, without discussing how the batteries will get charged in the first place.

I believe I directly addressed the latter point. Hydrogen would be an energy carrier for nuclear power (fission now and fusion later). These technologies are not even close mature yet so I'm not pushing a hydrogen economy at present. Should the NG boom go bust in a big way it will be a conversation worth having again.