people currently online
cause of the warming. how do they get the 3.5 they use in their models? they use proxies that are only approximate and use algorythms to come up with the numbers. as long as the numbers 3.5 and co2 latency of 200 years is put in the computer models NOTHING else can have a chance of being the cause of the warming.
the point of all of this, is that global warming is nothing but a smoke screen. there is a lot of other things causing major trouble, like pollution killing the coral reefs, which could be taking care of, IF people were being lied to as to the causes.
many of the things they want to do for global warming will aid other pollution causes, but many of them will create worse pollution. we need to be focusing on the pollution, not the global warming.
^ You should have read further than the first post, or rather, you should have read further than the title and the first few lines.|
The point you are trying to make is exactly what this thread talks about.
"many of the things they want to do for global warming will aid other pollution causes, but many of them will create worse pollution. we need to be focusing on the pollution, not the global warming."
I don't understand this what you're claiming here. I have gone through many opportunities to reduce CO2 emissions and not a single one increases pollution directly. It does happen the other way around though. Solutions that reduce pollution may increase CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions.
A rare and radical solution may indirectly cause pollution, but those are never put in place anyway.
i know, im in agreement with the rest.|
"I don't understand this what you're claiming here"
electric cars need batteries which produce many toxic pollutants that are hard to get rid of.
Ah that's one example, EDIT: did some research on what they put in car batteries nowadays. Nickel-Cadmium and Lead-based batteries are not used anymore in new electric vehicles. Lithium-based or Metal-hydride based batteries are now used in most electric cars. These aren't nearly as toxic as older batteries. You also shift pollution from cities to power plants, which are generally less populated.|
Apart from that, what alarmists often want to do to fight climate change is to reduce consumption and resource use, which also reduces pollution. Unfortunately this rarely works in practice.
Reducing consumption will have an effect on the economy. This may also affect innovation aimed at reducing pollution.
But also other actions to reduce CO2 will reduce pollution. Shifting from coal to natural gas for example.
the problem with the newer batteries is the waste they produce is so deadly and doesnt easily break down to anything safe. the older batteries may have produced MORE pollution, but it was a safer pollution. They need to find a new way to produce batteries. Also, the batteries have to be recharged, meaning the pollution is simply moved from the tailpipe to the smokestack.|
there needs to be new ways to produce electricity too.
our local electric company had to switch to natural gas, but its more expensive. Its also a shining example of stupid governmental buracuacy. this area produceds a ton of natural gas, but we cant use it locally, due to federal regulation. we have to ship it out, then ship more in from the coast.
at the same time, we produce a lot of electricity from windmills, and have so much available, that most of them are actually feathered all the time, until a new power line can be brought in at taxpayer expense. again, we cant use it, because they were built to send power south to the coastal areas. IF they allowed us to use the windmill power here, and built natural gas plants to the south, it would mean less cost in shipping, less lost power in the lines, and cheaper electricity for everyone.
Theres a lot of innovation in batteries at the moment. I read an article about batteries based on molten salts. A quite promising technique for large-scale power storage like with windmills and solar farms, or with electric cars.|
No polluting compounds, just NaCl, your everyday salt.
unfortunately, those require a large amount of heat, which will limit them to large stationary spot.|
another promising storage for sites like that is hydrogen production and storage during periods when its not needed and burning when it is.
Ive even heard of both of these being considered in manufacturing sites, where they have excess heat as a way to make use of that heat. plants could buy the electricity when the demand was low, and have it for use or resell when the demand was high. this would lower the need for more polluting sources.