Global Warming to Cost TRILLIONS$$

[VioxxLawyers]

The sun would be the best long-term alternative. I vote for solar technology investments.

Gas (hydrogen, natural gas...) is really dangerous, and water is in short supply on Earth. Burning the world's forests for fuel is not possible. Wind power potential is not significant, and encounters strong resistance from local populations. Nuclear technology can only help during a transition, it has no future, it smells like Death. Vegetable fuel? We need the land for food and housing, plus intensive cultures destroy soils. Also global warming hurts agricultural production.

SUN=ELECTRICITY=ENERGY

We need effective solar technology.

 

[Ed30]

Artic ice sheet expanding not melting - we're not all going to drown within 10 years afterall!

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N45/C2.jsp

 

[Domagon]

Many speaking of "alternatives" neglect the discussion of "energy density".

Solar, wind, oceans, etc have relatively little energy density compared to "fossil fuels", nuclear, hydro, etc and thus, barring some major development, have little practical use on any large scale.

Personally, I feel nuclear energy is the best way to go with its very high energy densities compared to most of the widely touted "alternatives".

Speaking of solar panels ... surely all those solar collectors have an impact on the environment - not just their manufacture, but also the use of them ... absorbing large amounts of sunlight likely alters the illumination / temparature of the locale they are placed in.

Ron

 

[H2FC]

Electricity is stored in hydrogen. Hydrogen is the most abundant element on the planet. In other words, nature has provided us with an abundant supply of electricity without burning fossil fuels to create it.

The problem is simple; separate pure hydrogen from water (remove the H2 from H2O) by using power other than that created by burning oil or coal. This can be done by using wind, solar, hydro, biofuels, or even controlled nuclear to a certain extent. The hydrogen can then be run through fuel cells which uses the H2 electrons to produce our electric energy without any pollution at all. Hydrogen can be compressed and stored without ever losing any of its electrical power like batteries do.

Billions of $$ are being spent on this modern technology. It's referred to as the Hydrogen Economy and we will begin seeing more and more of it soon mainly because of the global warming threat. Now that the Dems have control of the house and the senate they will push this new tech much more than the Reps. ever did.

 

[Domagon]

The "Hydrogen Economy" is a fiction for so many reasons ...

Requires considerable energy to split hydrogen out from water.

Many hydrogen energy proposals call for using "fossil fuels" to split out the hydrogen.

Worse, doing so likely requires more net energy than if the "fossil fuels" were burned directly due to losses during conversion.

Delivery / use of hydrogen comes with numerous hazards / technical hurdles that will likely add much cost and complexicity to any large-scale implementation.

Ron

 

[H2FC]

The "Hydrogen Economy" is a fiction for so many reasons ...

Requires considerable energy to split hydrogen out from water.

Many hydrogen energy proposals call for using "fossil fuels" to split out the hydrogen.

Worse, doing so likely requires more net energy than if the "fossil fuels" were burned directly due to losses during conversion.

Delivery / use of hydrogen comes with numerous hazards / technical hurdles that will likely add much cost and complexicity to any large-scale implementation.

Ron

Ron, you are certainly welcome to your opinion but I'm glad everybody hasn't always thought like you because if they had we would still be riding around in horse buggys and using the pony express to relay our messages...Bill