LoopStationZebra wrote:Yes, Em, but the things many suggest we do NOW are simply unattainable. They are pipe dreams, and you're smart enough to know that. Sorry, but whether a breakthrough happens now or in 100 years it'll be the scientists that do it. There's going to be a curve where, yeah, things are going to get painful. I've no doubt of that. But it's not moving the problem to another generation. It's starting now, and solving it in another generation. It's the only way.
While it's rather nice and quaint to take personal responsibility and drive a Prius or ride a bike or grow mellons, in the end that's just not going to do shit except make oneself feel better.
The solutions to energy, food, and global warming will be made with Big Moves. Huge advances in technology. The Manhattan Project x1000. It could be done. You know it could. Real solutions won't come about from photo op fuckery conferences like Copenhagen (which is collapsing, btw). Those are merely worthless distractions.
I cant really argue with a post like that, its all " what if's, hope, belief" It would be like arguing with a someone who believes in god. These are your hopes and dreams of what might happen, not what science and data is pointing towards.
We have entered peak oil, this mean that from now on the price of petrol,food,energy, will increase at an exponential rate until around 2020-2025, at which point it will be too expensive to pump out of the ground (takes more energy to recover than you actually get from it) That means we have roughly 12 years to build enough nuclear power stations to create the extra 85% of energy we need (if population doesn't increase which according to the UN it will massively) That means we have to start NOW to avoid a total collapse, not late next year but now. Best case scenario is that we start now, have 10 years of hell and then come out the other end and breath a sigh of relief. But once you include geopolitics into the equation you start to understand this will all be done as individual nations rather than as collective humanity. This means they each have to keep their populations from rising up, which means securing energy for their nations. which inevitably means war, which is the biggest waste of energy know to man (build things at huge cost to destroy them)
I notice you cant really find any science that will increase crop yields 300% (to account for the global population rise for the next century) or that means we no longer have to grow food in soil, but can grow it in space and have it feed off passing comets. Thats because there isn't any. Unless we start using people for food (population reduction anyway you look at it) Or perhaps we should directly eat the dead instead of letting them decay and enrich the soil naturally. That doesn't sounds like the kind of world i want to live in.
And for you information Hybrid cars are fucking bullshit, anyone who drives one of those should be made to sit and study energy consumption for the rest of their lives.
). As well as the obvious directly ocean related studies, it also included some meteorology and moe generally climatology as well. Typically oceanography, climatology and meterology tend to go very close together and there is a huge cross over between the three.
