CO2 emissions/pollution....cutting them etc...

[6SpeedTA95]

40.6% of CO2 emissions come from power generation
20.3% from transportation
18.2% from industry
12.6% residential
8.3% other...

We desperately need to work on solar, wind, nuclear, natural gas and clean coal technology. Really CLEANER coal technology than what we already have. Progress is rapidly being made on the coal front but we need to ween ourselves off of power generation from oil for sure.

By using natural gas, wind, solar and nuclear power we could cut the CO2 emissions from power generation down to almost nothing, especially with the latest round of high effeciency natural gas plants. Keep in mind these are world numbers, but power generation is a huge chunk of US CO2 emissions as is transportation.

We also need to put pressure on the auto mfg's to build more effecient automobiles.

Each one of us can cut our home emissions by simply switching to florescent bulbs. This alone can cut home CO2 emissions in half.


edit: btw those numbers are from the cover story on todays wall street journal

[Pro Street]

Why should we worry about CO2 emissions?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

Why should we worry about CO2 emissions?

Yeah, I thought man-made C02 helped trees breathe, why are you freaking out and going all enviro-nazi on us?

[Pro Street]

oh, and I agree 100%

fuck Greenpeace, they have no idea how safe nuclear power is today.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

Why should we worry about CO2 emissions?

because humans are causing global warming

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Yeah, I thought man-made C02 helped trees breathe, why are you freaking out and going all enviro-nazi on us?

Most conservatives will agree on cleaner energy only for economic reasons, and not environmental.. I remember a thread not to long ago where CO2 emissions were claimed to be the result of cow farts and nothing to worry about.

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by 7960

because humans are causing global warming

hook.
line.
sinker.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

Most conservatives will agree on cleaner energy only for economic reasons, and not environmental.. I remember a thread not to long ago where CO2 emissions were claimed to be the result of cow farts and nothing to worry about.

I think many conservatives wont clean energy for a clean environment and to not be wasteful.

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I think many conservatives wont clean energy for a clean environment and to not be wasteful.

Last I heard GW was a myth

[7960]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

hook.
line.
sinker.

fact: the earth is getting warmer
fact: we pump out shitloads of CO2
fact: we should be trying to reduce the amount of pollutants (including CO2) we emit

like I said, all of those are facts.

notice "because humans are causing global warming " is not up there

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by 7960

fact: the earth is getting warmer
fact: we pump out shitloads of CO2
fact: we should be trying to reduce the amount of pollutants (including CO2) we emit

like I said, all of those are facts.

notice "because humans are causing global warming " is not up there

I love this place. I love it.

we're doing all of that but not contributing to GW... well it's not helping the planet, and it's not doing nothing, so by process of elimination it's hurting it. The question remains to what degree.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

I love this place. I love it.

we're doing all of that but not contributing to GW... well it's not helping the planet, and it's not doing nothing, so by process of elimination it's hurting it. The question remains to what degree.

I think he agrees its not helpign the planet...


So what other things can we do to tame our CO2 emissions while not bringing the economy to a halt?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

I love this place. I love it.

we're doing all of that but not contributing to GW... well it's not helping the planet, and it's not doing nothing, so by process of elimination it's hurting it. The question remains to what degree.

It doesn't really impact the environment when I throw a piece of paper out my car window. Does that mean I should do it? Of course not. So, like I said (*again*) we should be trying to reduce the amount of pollutants (including CO2) we emit. Even scientists who don't believe humans are causing global warming back that... we pump too much shit in the air. Is it hurting? Maybe. Is it helping? Highly doubtful. So why not reduce it...

[nbiggershaft]

Originally Posted by 7960

fact: we should be trying to reduce the amount of pollutants (including CO2) we emit

like I said, all of those are facts.

This one is not a fact. It perhaps is a logical statement, but it needs qualifying facts. (aside from the grammatical in which should can't be a fact anyways)

[7960]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I think he agrees its not helpign the planet...


So what other things can we do to tame our CO2 emissions while not bringing the economy to a halt?

money, period

-tax incentives for people to reduce electric consumption (my sis got $ off her taxes when the electric company came to her house and replaced half her bulbs with flurescent and sprayed the equivalent of 4 cans of expanding foam insulation around her basement sills

-tax incentives for companies that "go green" (with a list of acceptable ways to "go green" and not just some nebulous "reduce/reuse/recycle" bullshit)

-tax incentives for companies that invest in "green" technology - I worked at a company that needed to overhaul the A/C. Instead of just putting more units on the top of the building they invested in a machine/system/technology that was buried next to the building. It basically made ice at night when the temps were cooler, below ground where it's cooler, at night when electricity is not in such high demand. The building was cooled using that ice throughout the next day using just recirculation fans. The company got a big tax break for that.


money............ if it doesn't involve money people won't do it.

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

This one is not a fact. It perhaps is a logical statement, but it needs qualifying facts. (aside from the grammatical in which should can't be a fact anyways)

tom-a-toe, tom-AHHHH-toe

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by 7960

money, period

-tax incentives for people to reduce electric consumption (my sis got $ off her taxes when the electric company came to her house and replaced half her bulbs with flurescent and sprayed the equivalent of 4 cans of expanding foam insulation around her basement sills

-tax incentives for companies that "go green" (with a list of acceptable ways to "go green" and not just some nebulous "reduce/reuse/recycle" bullshit)

-tax incentives for companies that invest in "green" technology - I worked at a company that needed to overhaul the A/C. Instead of just putting more units on the top of the building they invested in a machine/system/technology that was buried next to the building. It basically made ice at night when the temps were cooler, below ground where it's cooler, at night when electricity is not in such high demand. The building was cooled using that ice throughout the next day using just recirculation fans. The company got a big tax break for that.


money............ if it doesn't involve money people won't do it.



tom-a-toe, tom-AHHHH-toe

couldn't agree more

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by 7960

money............ if it doesn't involve money people won't do it.



tom-a-toe, tom-AHHHH-toe

I would say ease and availability more than money.

Example, there aren't many e85 stations, why would someone buy a car if it's never used?

[nbiggershaft]

Originally Posted by 7960

money, period

-tax incentives for people to reduce electric consumption (my sis got $ off her taxes when the electric company came to her house and replaced half her bulbs with flurescent and sprayed the equivalent of 4 cans of expanding foam insulation around her basement sills

I like.

Originally Posted by 7960

tom-a-toe, tom-AHHHH-toe

I could say tom-a-toe tom-AHHH-toe to you too for someone saying we should reduce CO2 emissions to combat global warming and negative climate effects and you saying we should reduce CO2 emissions because it could cause global warming and negative climate effects.

[nbiggershaft]

Originally Posted by Pro Street

I would say ease and availability more than money.

Example, there aren't many e85 stations, why would someone buy a car if it's never used?

Every station in my area has e85. Of course no ones car uses it, so meh.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

Every station in my area has e85. Of course no ones car uses it, so meh.

Most of GM's vehicles will do it.